Posted by KatieTeague on December 31, 2008 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Time to get rid of this guy!

Posted by CaptainAmerica on December 31, 2008 at 8:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I think the real question is did the Strickland's order this goon to go out and assualt people? If so, then this would seem to be a criminal conspiracy lead by the Strickland's and I believe it would become a felony. Hopefully they will fully investigate this case from top to bottom!

Posted by KatieTeague on December 31, 2008 at 9:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

By not distancing themselves, the Stricklands are endorsing/supporting this type of behavior. Remember we (the taxpayer) pays Angeles salary, is this the type of guy we want in office? I sure don't.

If our DA is going to endorse anyone, he should be sure he doesn't support criminal behavior. The Stricklands should not expose him like this.

Posted by NowHearThis on December 31, 2008 at 11:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

KatieTeague says, "Time to get rid of this guy!"

Puhlease, come on. Liberals are historic at rabble rousing. Whenever a conservative speaks on a college campus, leftist-liberal agitators work overtime to squelch that conservative's free speech.

Any time a GOP member speaks, you'll see tens, or hundreds of liberal protesters ranting and raving. Rarely do you see Republicans disrupt a Democrat's right to speak.

And you don't think the liberal Democrat crowd in Westlake would tell the truth about what really went on do you?

In the end, it is an overzealous Democratic Attorney General's office that is trying to trump up charges on a Republican supporter. It's political hackery folks.

Posted by MakingWaves on December 31, 2008 at 11:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

NowHearThis, you have absolutely no basis for your comments. The actions were committed in full view of several members of the media.

In addition, the individual whose civil rights were allegedly violated is a registered Republican from Simi Valley. That sort of blows your liberal conspiracy theory out of the water.

Spout first, fact check later is the byword of the Star's story comments section.

Posted by rebel123 on December 31, 2008 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I guess knocking someone to the ground is considered ok with nowhearthis.

Posted by mgibson on December 31, 2008 at 12:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What's that you say, "Now Hear This," Attorney General, Jerry Brown, is motivated by politics? How could that be?

Isn't this the same guy who vowed to defend the results of the Proposition 8 vote, regardless of how it turned out? Oh, wait. Never mind...

Posted by For1776 on December 31, 2008 at 1:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Spout first, fact check later once again.

The charges were filed by deputy attorney general Nancy James after interviewing multiple witnesses. And, I said before, a Star photographer and reporter were also present.

The denials by the rampant hyperpartisans are so predictable here.

Posted by KatieTeague on December 31, 2008 at 1:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am a lifelong Republican and have attended many rallies - some very heated/controversal. There is no excuse for the actions of Mr. Angeles - he should have been fired the same day. Efforts to defend him are laughable. Efforts by the Stricklands to protect him are worrisome. Time to clean house - too many people's reputations are at stake.

Posted by sparks240 on December 31, 2008 at 1:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"The day after the incident, Angeles told a reporter he was attempting only to negotiate with protesters so that a buffer zone could be maintained between them and a crowd of counterprotesters." I'm throwing the BS flag. Maintaining a buffer zone is a job for the police. If Angeles got in a scuffle, he should man up and not come up with a lame excuse.

Posted by mgibson on December 31, 2008 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)

A_Bystander (Marie),

What's predictable here is the response from the State Attorney General's Office. You say, Deputy Attorney General, Nancy James, filed the charges after interviewing multiple witnesses.

But, the fact remains that she works for a Democratic Attorney General, Jerry Brown, who is well known for playing politics with high profile events to further his political ambitions (i.e., his expected run for governor next year).

Talk about hyperpartisan!

Posted by MakingWaves on December 31, 2008 at 2:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mike Gibson (banned from Star blogs for posting inappropriate comments to blog moderators),

I think we all appreciate Ms. James' thoroughness in this matter. I am content to let the courts do their work.

Posted by mgibson on December 31, 2008 at 3:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Marie,

Not sure where you're getting your bogus information. I was never banned from any Star blogs. I post on Brian Dennert's and Helen Conly's on a regular basis. Sorry that I haven't been posting on yours' lately though. The decline in your readership reflects this clearly. I found your one-sided presentations of issues a little off-putting, however.

I am quite content to let the courts do their work in this matter as well, now that it's been placed in an objective arena. I'm sure you'll agree that this is a politically and emotionally-charged case and I am certain the courts will take this into account as it moves forward to trial.

Sorry if we differ on your presumed objectivity of the AG's Office. You must admit though you're being a tad bit naive here, yes?

Posted by MakingWaves on December 31, 2008 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You were banned by the Star from posting on my blog for inappropriate comments directed at me and you are fully aware of the circumstances. My blog traffic is fine. Comments are actually up.

Blogs are opinion pieces, much like letters to the editors are. Brian, Helen and I are all encouraged to post our own thoughts.

My advice to both you and Joel Angeles is from one of my favorite Bible passages: Galatians 6:7. For whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Posted by CaptainAmerica on December 31, 2008 at 4:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nowhear This must work for the Strickland's! The GOP has tried to burn the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the GOP should be labled a criminal organization and the RICO laws should be used against them, just like the mafia! This thug beats up on a vietnam vet trying to exercise his freedom of speech and Audra and Tony probably gave the guy a big bonus check at taxpayer expense! Time to recall the Strickland's!

Posted by mgibson on December 31, 2008 at 5:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Correction. I was banned only from your blog based upon your direct request to the Star. The issue was significant differences of opinion regarding various actions of the Ventura City Council, which you couldn't seem to handle given your undying support of virtually every action they take as elected officials.

The problem, apparently, is that I like to speak my mind and express my opinion without reservation, which you seem to have an issue with. That is why your blog is of little interest to me (and many others) any longer. A mutual separation to be sure.

Posted by MakingWaves on December 31, 2008 at 6:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OK. You are now admitting it but before you said it was "bogus"?

You were banned for posting that you and I need to "get a room quick," and for threatening another blogger (I think you offered to twist his nose until it turned red), among many other nefarious comments. I am sure if you posted the room comment toward Brian Dennert he would react even worse.

I have numerous bloggers who share your viewpoint on issues. I welcome dissenting points of view. I have zero tolerance for smarmy comments directed at me personally.

You could of course apologize.

Happy New Year Mike!

Posted by mgibson on December 31, 2008 at 6:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Marie,

I am sorry that you find my sometimes offbeat sense of humor so offensive, but any comments that seemed "smarmy" to you were simply that -- my (obviously unsuccessful) attempts at humor. And for that, I do apologize.

The same is true of the "nose-twisting" comment. As I recall, this was directed at "Skip," as he and I have had ongoing back-and-forth jabs at one another. I meant no offense by it, of course, and I think he realized this.

Anyway, folks are probably getting bored with our ongoing debate here, so I will sign off now and wish you a very Happy New Year as well!

Again, my sincerest apologies for the off color comments.

Posted by gonzo on January 1, 2009 at 12:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So you want to call the GOP a criminal organization?

This is the kind of thing Hitler did to consolidate power in the 1930's. I think the left wing of the dem party doesnt believe in democracy.

Unfortunantly world expierience shows there is no alternative. I say everyone vote for whomever you want and let the chips fall where they fall.

I always vote republican regardless of these petty distractions such a fist fights with some dem agitator. I dont care.

Dems believe in free speech until they disagree with you. This flawed thinking was probably what led to this scuffle.

Gonzo

Posted by KatieTeague on January 1, 2009 at 4:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Gonzo - using the logic of your last sentence, women probably ask to be raped.

The GOP is not a criminal organization but what Angeles did was criminal. Don't defend his actions. Or if you do, at least use a real name.

Only the kool-aid drinkers will get behind him.

Posted by gonzo on January 1, 2009 at 6:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ms Katie

Whats a Kool aid drinker ? Are you referring to Jonestown. Disgusting parable.

No I wont use my real name Katie because I dont want you ranting and raving at my right to free speech or keying my car.

BTW this is a misdemeanor we are talking about not felony rape. Again your trying to define me unevenly.

Angelides broke the law then he has to deal with it. Hollywood has to deal with paparazzi in the same fashion. Its legal to shout someone down and dems are good at it better than republicans but I think its unethical to not let some one speak. I also think its unethical to shove a camera in someones face on a public sidewalk but its legal

I disagree and you hate me with a passion dont you? So I will remain anonymous.

I dont hate you.

Good day

Posted by Twslv05 on January 1, 2009 at 8:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is absolute BS and I am very disappointed reading Katie's post on this subject.

Why is the State of California's Attorney General's office handling this?
Why wasn't police there to control the situation?

This should be in the hands of either LA or Ventura counties DA office not at the state level and it is obvious that Jerry Brown is using this for political hay.

I have attended many political functions and have seen what can happen if the two sides are not isolated from each other and the police should have been responsible and kept the peace.

If the Democrats and Jerry Brown want to show consistency then they need to arrest the hundreds if not thousands of thugs sent out by the" NO on Prop 8" who bullied people at every rally they attended.

Hypocrisy on the left is alive and well!!!

Posted by moondoggie on January 1, 2009 at 9:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

TW is in the deadhead league. The Ventura County Sheriff requested that the District Attorney file criminal charges against Jose Angeles. The D.A. recused his office and sent the case to the Attorney General. More than twenty witnesses, two photographers and a reporter all were interviewed. It is amazing to realize that a homeless man stealing a candy bar should go to prison according to the law and order folks, but Angeles should get away with knocking to the ground men, women and children. Fortunately for society, TW will not have his wish granted. Angeles will pay for his crimes.

Posted by MakingWaves on January 1, 2009 at 9:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

A state deputy attorney general is handling it because our county DA had to recuse himself and pass the case up to the state. He was campaigning for Tony Strickland and this case involved a Strickland employee.

If a No on 8 protester knocked a 67-year-old Espicopalian minister down and caused him to have shoulder surgery, then that protester should be answerable to the law as well.

I believe sheriff's deputies were notified before the protest and they failed to appear.

I have friends who had things thrown at them while holding No on 8 signs in Simi Valley, so the thugs went both ways on that issue.

Posted by mgibson on January 1, 2009 at 10:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This case is certainly not as cut and dried as some are proclaiming here. I was actually at the Strickland event at the Hyatt Westlake when this incident occurred and didn't witness it firsthand, but I did speak to several people who did afterwards and I'm told there was plenty of provocation from the Strickland protesters who were advancing like an angry mob towards the area where Joel was standing.

That being the case, he would have had every right to defend himself, or at least hold his ground. In all the chaos and confusion, an elderly gentleman lost his balance and fell to the ground. I just don't see the big capital offense that is being alleged here. But, again, I wasn't there.

But, I'm thankful that it will be going to court where the facts will all come out and this thing will finally be settled once and for all. Unfortunately, the charges are being brought by the State Attorney General (and future Democratic gubernatorial candidate) Jerry Brown's office, which stinks to high heaven, but we shall see.

Posted by Twslv05 on January 1, 2009 at 11:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

moondoggie,
I know how Attorney General Moonbeam ended up with the case I read the article.
The fact that it ended up in with such a political hack in Jerry Browns office for such a minor incident is just as big of a conflict as if Greg Totten's office handled it.

We'll see what Moonbeam's office does Moondoggie!!
Hey sounds like you two are related?

Posted by josh729 on January 2, 2009 at 12:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

And mgibson who wasn't there knows all about it and can somehow contradict 20 witnesses including newspaper photographers and reporters? It doesn't seem so difficult for me to believe to believe that this guy would go postal. He's one scary dude.

Posted by moondoggie on January 2, 2009 at 8:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I've given Gibson the benefit of doubt at times, but with the most recent post he lives up to his reputation. Gibson heard from several people who stated that the mob was approaching Angeles and he defended himself. Let's see the make up of this mob. A 67 year old priest. A 58 year old man with his 8 year old God Daughter in hand. An 18 year old girl on her way to college. Wow! What a mob. The "mob" was composed of 82% women. Angeles must have really been scared to defend himself to the degree he did. But wait a minute. The first man knocked down called 911. Angeles didn't call 911. The second call to 911 was from an 18 year old victim. Angeles didn't call 911. In fact, and in spite of the mob, Angeles never called 911. What Angeles did do is stink of booze, run up and down the sidewalk like a madman, and knock down to the ground three individuals. But then again, I'm sure Gibson knows what went on outside the fundraiser. After all, he heard about it. Go Gibson. You are one for the record book.

Posted by it_engineer on January 2, 2009 at 8:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Joel Angeles is a goon.

Posted by gonzo on January 2, 2009 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Good post Mr Itengineer. you really swayed me overthanks for your thoughtful post.

This story is a big fat "so what". Im a republican and I vote republican regardless of the battling on the front lines with a bunch of dems on a sidewalk.

Joel can take his legal lumps if hes guilty. No big deal.

Note that it was a republican event being invaded by a dem mob. This story never occurs the other way around.

Reminds of Bob Doles visit to Fillmore. Dems are proud of that sad peice of Ventura county history.

Posted by it_engineer on January 2, 2009 at 9:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

My intent is not to sway you Mr. gonzo. I am merely exercising my freedom to say what I want.

You consider this story a big fat "so what"? Apparently not.

Posted by josh729 on January 2, 2009 at 9:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This Angeles has been doing the Strickland dirty work for years. Here he is bribing candidates to stay out of races:
http://articles.latimes.com/2002/sep/...

A long line of dirty deeds done on the taxpayers' dime.

Mgibson - Mike is it? It sounds like you are yet another Strickland sycophant. You apparently also like to harass women in your spare time judging by the earlier exchange on this thread.

Posted by MakingWaves on January 2, 2009 at 11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

gonzo and all:

I have lots of photos that I took at the protest. I've posted a few on my blog:

http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/ml...

Please go look at the people in the photos and tell me who looks angry other than Angeles. There were small children there!

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 2, 2009 at 1:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Funny I was never contacted by the Ventura County Sheriff's office since I interviewed some of the victims immediately after the alleged assault and took many more photos than have appeared in the VC Star.

Oh Well! Both sides know where to find me.

There are many more photos here: http://flapsblog.com/?s=Joel+angeles&...

A warning to Katie Teague: Joel Angeles is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 2, 2009 at 2:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OOPS forget the link to my Flickr Set of all of the photos:

Here it is: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fullosse...

Posted by moondoggie on January 2, 2009 at 2:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Looks like Flap has lots of pretty photos, just no photos that show the southeast corner; scene of the alleged crimes. Perhaps Flap was either inside the building or at the northeast intersection or had some photo downtime. Not much evidentiary value to photos taken at the wrong place and time. Perhaps that is why the investigators didn't have any interest in contacting Flap.

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 2, 2009 at 4:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nope Moondoggie,

I was all along the area and if you click through enough posts you will see the different perspectives. And, I was there immediately after the altercation but did not witness it directly.

I don't know why the Sheriff's office did not contact me but I am available to both sides to provide sworn testimony if it comes to that.

Probably won't though.

But, the photos might identify other witnesses who saw the event directly or who can be questioned further. It seems the Sheriff's Department did an inadequate job of investigation here.

I, also have a digtial audio interview with one of the complainants. She complains about the scratches on her arms from the bushes. They did not look very profound since I brushed against the same bushes lightly and scratched my own arm.

Again, either side can contact me or simply download the photos.

Posted by KatieTeague on January 2, 2009 at 4:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Flap is a hyperpartisan so of course he is going to support Angeles's behavior.

I say that Angeles is tainted meat and he should have been fired. The damage is done and the actual verdict is immaterial. He should have known better than to even be there much less be captured on film carrying a sign against the Strickland opponent.

Wonder if Mitt Romney knows? I'm sure it will go over like a lead balloon.

Keep the thread alive Flap - that's what you a good at!!!

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 2, 2009 at 5:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh Katie you call Flap a hyperpartisan and I support Joel's behavior.

Say what?

I am no more partisan than you except I was elected and appointed to public office in Ventura County a few more times than you were. But, then again I did not form a political sham organization to front for an attack on the GOP.

Joel Angeles is entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. Yet, you say he is tainted meat because he carried a campaign sign on his day off from work.

And, an actual verdict in a trial is immaterial?

Say what, again?

Sounds like a Kangaroo Court to me.

Don't be surprised Katie, if you are named in a libel action. Better lawyer up.

Posted by KatieTeague on January 2, 2009 at 5:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

pffft - you are hyperpartisan and your posts show it.

Yep, an actual verdict is immaterial - Angeles is paid with taxpayer money as are the Stricklands. He didn't keep his nose clean but I guess he has a history of that. I loved the 2002 LA Times article when he tried to bribe a candidate not to run. And of course, the LA Times and the Ventura County Star mentioned him when they ran articles on the financial back and forth between Audra and Tony's campaign funds.

So go on record supporting Angeles's behavior. I will repeatedly go on record being appalled by it.

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 2, 2009 at 5:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Katie Pffft back at you.

You are good at putting words in Flap's mouth.

Joel Angeles is entitled to a fair trial and if convicted is subject to the penalties as determined by a judge. However, until he is convicted of ANYTHING in a court of law all of your comments are speculation, innuendo and hot air.

My posts show I am a hyperpartsian? How about my entire political life?

I am proud to be a Republican and an activist at that.

But, with that said, Joel Angeles is still entitled to a fair trial.

By the way, why does the VC Star harp on the idea of Angeles not appearing at his arraignment?

According to California law, misdemeanor charges do NOT require the presence of the defendant but an attorney can represent you in cout instead. The Star makes it like he is a fugitive from justice or is unconcerned about the charges.

The VC Star in their haste to slime Angeles carefully omit these facts. Shame on them.

Posted by mgibson on January 2, 2009 at 5:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Flap is right. This is trial by blog and, worse yet, trial by the media. Katie seemingly has her mind made up because of her long held animosity toward the Stricklands. This goes way back, folks. There is plenty of history there.

Joel Angeles will be tried in a court of law, as he should be, and the results of this case will be decided by a jury of his peers. That is where all the facts will be presented and both sides of the story will be told. Not just the one-sided version of events you're getting on this thread and on Marie Lakin's blog (Making Waves).

Posted by mgibson on January 2, 2009 at 5:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And to tag on to "fullosseousflap's" last comment, it's not surprising to me at all that the Star portrayed Angeles's no-show in court as the act of a fugitive. After all, the Star's editorial board endorsed Hannah-Beth Jackson in this election.

Posted by KatieTeague on January 2, 2009 at 6:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Pom-pom waving in unison? Where is Mike Spence and Stephen Frank?

There is a reason why Republicans are losing ground in California and it is evidenced by the tacit and even overt approval of Angeles's behavior. Notice that very, very few Republicans are supporting him?

Instead of being keyboard jockeys, maybe you can register some voters and turn this county red again.

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 2, 2009 at 6:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Katie,

I have registered more GOP voters in this County than most, including you.

There is no overt approval of ANYTHING except Joel Angeles is entitled to a fair trial in a court of law. Of course, you have already pledged Angeles guilty because of some petty and pathetic vendetta against the Stricklands.

A keyboard jockey, huh?

And, how many years have you ever served in public office?

Posted by newshound on January 2, 2009 at 9:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This man should get a fair trial. If he violated civil rights, he should be harshly punished. I've thought that Strickland had major character issues for quite some time. Ventura County elected a man who fluffed up a bogus claim that he is an alternate energy executive. Strickland is a dark character in my opinion. I proudly voted for Hannah Beth Jackson.

Posted by MakingWaves on January 2, 2009 at 9:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I stand 100 percent behind what I posted on my blog about the incident. I WAS there when the incident occurred. My blog corresponds completely with my witness statement, which goes into much greater detail. Don't forget that I am sworn to tell the truth under penalty of perjury.

But I don't want to try this by media, either, and didn't write very much about what I saw for that reason.

I agree with Katie that Angeles should not have been out in a group of protesters. It's just bad form.

BTW, Mike, I do appreciate and accept your apology above. As I told you once before, I believe in civility.

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 2, 2009 at 10:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Waves,

Why don't you post your witness statement?

But, if you don't, I guess we will have to wait to hear what you say in court.

However, what you have written is so prejudicial I bet the State AG doesn't call you as a witness.

Posted by MakingWaves on January 3, 2009 at 12:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I very clearly stated I did not want to try this in the media. I don't plan to say anything beyond what I've already said.

There were many, many others who were there, including neutral members of the press.

Posted by moondoggie on January 3, 2009 at 8:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Funny how the same people who previously posted that Angeles would never have charges filed against him are now the champions of a jury trial. If Angeles is dumb enough to go before a jury with this case, then he doesn't deserve to be Strickland's chief-of-staff. A jury will eat him up. Sure Angeles is innocent of any crime at this point in time; who ever said otherwise. What witnesses to the event have said is that they saw Angeles knock to the ground three people. Only in a Courtroom will a judge or jury define that behavior as a criminal.

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 3, 2009 at 10:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This will turn out to be an interesting case, especially with the Ventura County Star's involvement with sponsored bloggers and their own reporters giving evidence against a state employee of a politician in which they clearly have an unfavorable political bias.

My bet is that should there not be a plea deal beyond a slap on the wrist to Angeles there will result a lengthy political show trial involving the VC Star itself and its role in the protest organization, the Ventura County Democrat Party and complainants.

Political theater in its best. I hope I can be off so I can cover the trial.

Marie, have you been deposed yet? Have any of the complainants?

Posted by Ventura22 on January 3, 2009 at 10:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

No surprise. Vote them out next time.

Posted by MakingWaves on January 3, 2009 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I think the Star's coverage of this event and the entire campaign was extremely fair. If anything, they buried all the followup stories on the Hyatt incident.

Posted by MakingWaves on January 3, 2009 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Further: Let's make this clear for Greg "Flap" Cole: the protest was organized by a Republican from Simi Valley.

The Star has no role in the protest organization, the Democratic Party, etc.

Star-sponsored bloggers Brian Dennert, Helen Conly and I operate completely independently from the news operation. We were all out there. So were you and somebody else from another political blog.

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 3, 2009 at 10:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What a shocker. Marie, a sponsored VC Star blogger says the Star's coverage is extremely fair.

I look forward to the examination of VC Star's reporters and bloggers on the stand at Angeles' trial. Will they clam up about their souces to hide their complicity in setting up the protest?

Bet they will.

Will the VC Star editors want their dirty political linen exposed to their readership?

An interesting question.

Posted by MakingWaves on January 4, 2009 at 12:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What dirty linen? That independent bloggers, all registered Democrats, who maintain blogs on the Star's site supported Hannah-Beth Jackson and don't favor contributions from the tobacco industry?

That's earth-shattering news, alright.

Posted by fullosseousflap on January 5, 2009 at 5:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeah it is a shocker that the VC Star provides a built-in acitvism mechanism for the Ventura County Democrat Party - NOT.

So much for an independent press.

What a joke.

Posted by MakingWaves on January 6, 2009 at 10:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I suspect, Mr. Cole, that you are unhappy that the Star is not sponsoring your blog. I do know they had your "twitters" up for awhile.

What you do is mostly reprint the work of others and you run a rightwing cartoon strip that is often not family friendly.

Daniel Goldberg provides center right commentary through his Star-sponsored blog and I believe a new conservative blogger is onboard and will appear shortly.

Don't despair.