It is great that the county courts are expanding the options they'll provide, and I say that as someone who attends a lot of AA meetings. The saying around those rooms is, "AA works if you work it," and there is a lot of emphasis on the "if." Contrary to Richard S's impression, AA's traditions explicitly reject an insistence on participation in religion or (or being institutionalized within a court system), and I've certainly never experienced such insistence.
A lot of people are offended when confronted by the "G-O-D" word, and if that is a barrier for Richard S in finding his sobriety, I'm pleased that the county is working with him to find an alternative. I hope the zealotry of skeptics who doubt that he'll find an effective alternative doesn't cast a negative impression on AA as a whole.
I'm mostly just surprised that this story made the front page. And I wish Richard S well and the best of luck.
Unfortunately AA is populated largely by zealous ranters, like "don't get me started". So is scientology.
First of all, if Richard S. ever went to any 12 Step meetings and paid attention or read any 12 Step literature he would know that everything practiced in a 12 Step Program is "suggested" not "insisted" and/or has never been "shoved down anyone's throat" and more importantly, it is not now nor ever has been a "religious" program. AA is not allied with any sect, denomination, politics, organization or institution. There are thousands, if not millions, of atheist's and agnostic's who have stayed clean and sober for the rest of their lives using the 12 Step programs. Richard S. would also know that in all 12 Step Programs; the only requirement is the "desire" to quite drinking or using drugs; that it's primary purpose is to carry the its message to the alcoholic/addict that still suffers (that would obviously be Richard S.); that A.A. has no opinion on outside issues; hence the A.A. name ought never be drawn into public controversy and that our public relations are based on attraction rather than promotion; and most importantly that "Anonymity" is our "Spiritual" foundation ever reminding us to place principals before personalities!
So, I think it pretty safe to say that Richard S. if full of B.S. You might want to bring back to his attention and everyone else's that he was, in fact, "arrested" for a DUI! He is just an angry addict that got caught, was given a "choice" of jail or a "chance to get clean and sober". He chose what he thought was the easy way out and didn't like that choice either! And this is his selfish, self centered way of complaining about how unfair life is; just like any good little addict would. It's always about me, poor pitiful me. Yeah! I'm sheddin some tears for ya Richard S.
Well, here are a few more choice facts:
As of January 2012 there are over 2,133,842 members of Alcoholics Anonymous world wide and over 38,1664 in correctional institutions.
In 2010, 10,228 people died in drunk driving crashes — one every 52 minutes — and 345,000 were injured in drunk driving crashes.
In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 (62%) were riding with the drunk driver.
About one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted of driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence of alcohol are repeat offenders.
As of January 2012 there are an estimated 2,133,842 killed by people driving while intoxicated!
2 of those people injured were my younger brother and sister, both suffered severe, irreversible brain injuries and one was also paralyzed on the right side…for the rest of his life!
Are you ready to take responsibility for your actions Richard S? You won't get a choice next time.
So, I'll be looking for Richard S. in the news and counting the days to see how "powerful" he is over his addictions and look forward to hearing how he is staying clean and sober. Hope that's workin for ya Richard S.
Oh! and one question…what make, model, and color of car do he drive? I want to make sure to tell all my friends and family stay clear of it while they are driving or walking the streets of Sonoma County.
The statement that, "all references to 12 Step have been removed," is incorrect. The newly revised Participant's Guide to Drug Court says, "regular attendance at group self-help meetings such as a12 Step program or other alternative programs." Alternatives are not listed anywhere in County literature and are not mentioned specifically in this document. 12 Step
"Guillén likens the choices in Sonoma County to a cafeteria menu, where defendants are encouraged to choose their mode of self-help." There are zero options listed anywhere in county literature.
I can't believe the manhattan project was conceived there...I wonder how many Monsanto execs go there.
Mr. Wade says, "...claims that a canal would "remove so much water" are just that---claims. Operational limits of a proposed canal have yet to be finalized yet draft elements of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan..." But that's exactly the point. There are very long lists of important questions that remain unanswered about how this massively expensive plumbing system would work, it's impact on the ecosystem, and of course how it will be paid for and who pays, that have NOT been answered.
It is not unreasonable to put science and policy BEFORE building this thing. But those who want it don't care about answering the questions. They want what they want and that's all that matters.
Salmon Water Now asks Governor Brown 7 questions that taxpayers and ratepayers would like to have answered. Maybe Mr. Wade has some answers. You can see the short video and the questions here:
Those who are pushing for the canal to be built ought to stop and think about what it would mean. The march to approval and building needs to be slowed down. Take a look at another video that also helps put this debate in perspective:
Stop and Think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnV6MCvXK38…
Those who oppose the Peripheral Canal fail to include all of the facts in their arguments because the facts do not support their position. Claims that a canal would "remove so much water" are just that---claims. Operational limits of a proposed canal have yet to be finalized yet draft elements of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) already include limits on exports when natural river flows are lower.
There are a myriad of factors impacting salmon (and other fish) populations including water quality, invasive species, predatory fish, and ocean conditions. A recent report by the National Research Council stated that improving ecological conditions in the Delta will fail if they don't target multiple stressors, contrary to the constant drum beat calling for a reduced water supply for farms, homes and businesses.
The Sacramento River fall Chinook escapement, ocean harvest and river harvest index clearly shows population (and harvest) peaks in 1988, 1995, and 2002 with corresponding dips in the intervening years. It is normal to expect a rise in salmon numbers now and in the next few years and that's exactly what we're seeing.
Blaming the pumps or deliveries of water that flow through the Delta as the primary cause of reduced salmon populations is simply an exercise in hiding the facts.
California Farm Water Coalition
U.S. NAVY’S TWELVE 5-YEAR WARFARE TESTING PROGRAMS &
THE INCREASING & ONGOING THREAT TO THE GULF OF MEXICO,
A CALL TO TAKE ACTION
U.S. Navy PUBLIC COMMENT DUE BY JULY 10, 2012
ATLANTIC & PACIFIC OCEANS
HELP SAVE 11.7 Million MARINE MAMMALS & THEIR OCEAN HABITAT TODAY!
In a letter to NOAA, dated June 19, 2009, several U.S. Senators, including U.S. Senator Feinstein and U.S. Congressman Henry Waxman, stated: “...In many regions, the Navy plans to increase the number of its exercises or expand the areas in which they may occur, and virtually every coastal state will be affected. Some exercises may occur in the nation's most biologically sensitive marine habitats, including National Marine Sanctuaries and breeding habitat for the endangered North Atlantic right whale. In all, the Navy anticipates more than 2.3 million takes (significant disruptions in marine mammal foraging, breeding, and other essential behaviors) per year, or 11.7 million takes over the course of a five-year permit..."
Help Protect 11.7 Million Marine Mammals Today by contacting your elected officials and adding your voice by making a public comment today before the July 10, 2012 deadline:
(The Public Comment period for the new U.S. Navy Atlantic/Gulf of Mexico 5-Year Warfare Testing Range that will use bomb blasts and Sonar is from May 11, 2012 through July 10, 2012). U.S. Navy Website: http://aftteis.com/Home.aspx
(The Public Comment period for the new U.S. Navy Pacific 5-Year Warfare Testing Range that will use bomb blasts and Sonar is from May 11, 2012 through July 10, 2012). U.S. Navy Website: http://hstteis.com/Home.aspx
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
The NOAA Definition of “Take”: “Defined under the MMPA (Marine Mammal Protection Act), as "harass, hunt, capture, kill or collect, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, kill or collect." Defined under the ESA (Endangered Species Act) as "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct…”
U.S. Navy is Using the Earth & Inhabitants as Test Subjects
Our oceans and land areas, in the Pacific, Atlantic, and the Gulf of Mexico along with all inhabitants, are being used as warfare test guinea pigs without public consent, debate, U.S. Congressional hearings or any public oversight.
Marine Mammal Mitigation Measures – Effective Only 9% of the Time
Mitigation measures, to protect marine mammals from sonar, are effective only 9% of the time according to NOAA & the U.S. Navy (See U.S. Congressman Mike Thompson's Letter regarding this subject-California 2009).
Fish, birds, ocean habitats, feeding and breeding grounds, biologically sensitive areas, and human health, are not protected by any government agency in most areas of the Gulf of Mexico, and in the Atlantic & Pacific Oceans, from military weapons testing. The U.S. Navy is using toxic chemicals, sonar, missile exercises, bomb blasts and other types of new weapons testing which threaten national marine sanctuaries, marine reserves, and biologically sensitive areas which ar e not protected in many regions from this type of activity.
You may read the U.S. Navy Environmental Impact Statements online or visit this website for more information and documents on this subject:
No U.S. Congressional Hearing Held on this Issue & None Planned in the Future (WHY?)
Our U.S. Senators and members of the U.S. House have refused, so far, to postpone these disastrous “takings” or hold U.S. Congressional Hearings while pretending to be ocean environment friendly in their re-election speeches. In addition to refusing to be interviewed by the press with regard to this issue (only a few exceptions), all of our elected officials have steadfastly refused to hold U.S. Congressional hearings in order to protect our marine mammals, fish, birds, endangered species, and human health.
Expanding and initiating new warfare testing in more areas of the Pacific, the Atlantic, and the Gulf of Mexico, will also spell disaster for millions of marine mammals, and fish, and their habitats. We do not elect to be the guinea pigs for these experiments or to have our oceans used for massive warfare testing. Say “no” today…Ask for U.S. Congressional Hearings to protect human health and our marine mammals. (Call Your Elected Officials in Washington, D.C. Toll Free: (1866) 220-0044)
The U.S. Navy should be protecting our oceans and natural resources...not destroying them in the name of war practice.
Agriculture Defense Coalition
Redwood Valley, California 95470
Leilani Clark, you are probably right. Corporations and the government would never do anything to hurt us. We should all just go back to sleep and not question this Agenda 21 thing. They call it an 'agenda' themselves, but we should not let that worry us. I'm sure that these corporations have only our best interests in mind. Personally, I'll try to forget about the fact that, in the 20th century, global governments outright murdered an estimated 260,000,000 people. That could never happen here. We're so much better than everybody else. I won't worry about it.
Shredded tires are added to the road base, and are destroying the air quality according to neighbors..How did you miss this, please?...b
Warehouse Demo Service Lost the civil suite!!!! They work supervisors over hours. I worked several 24 hour days!!!
These people are terribly ignorant of how much methane is being produces and how much damage this incredibly powerful greenhouse gas is doing to the environment. Cows are the problem, ranches (that replaced forests) are the problem. Read (or google) Livestock's Long Shadow for a full report.
And shame on you for pushing animal production facilities as being 'green.'
agreed, voting for a man who has already sold us out before would be not only foolish, but simply dangerous. I will surely NOT be voting for Carillo, no doubt about that. We need folks who put the environment first, not second or third, first. Carillo seems to have dollar signs in his eyes like so many modern citizens, when he should have trees. Also, what is wrong with a little experience, how much has really changed in 16 years? Our cell phones dont make us any smarter, just one more bill on this list and one more product to buy on credit cards. Not that much has changed, and if anything, preserving the environment is even *more* important than ever before. Vote smart, not shiny new.
My sister is one of the crickets. I warn you. The songs get into your head...
Want to learn more about 3d printers and open source technologies? Join our Sonoma County 3D Printer group and come to one of our meet-ups! http://www.facebook.com/groups/14505467562…
Great article and very informative. As another Eldercare professional, It's highly recommended that families avoid privately hired caregivers as they are often NOT less expensive and expose families to extraordinary risk. I would also suggest interviewing caregiver agencies thoroughly, ask tough questions and for references, and make sure the agency is bonded and insured. Since there is no licensing for Non-medical Homecare in California, it's best for the agency to have a Licensed Clinical Social Worker on staff, that they contract with local government agencies and have a strong trusted reputation in the Senior Care community--one that is much MORE than positive branding, like Visiting Angels for example!
Albert DeSilver, Co-Director of Visiting Angels Senior Homecare for Sonoma and Napa County.
He has been asked about Preservation ranch. He will vote for development in all cases. He doesn't seem to care about the future of Sonoma County and the folks who will be here in the future.
I’d like to remind voters that an election is NOT a popularity contest or a game to be won. Someone may be young, socially adept, charming and truly kind but that does not automatically make him the best candidate for the position. You have to look beneath the surface for the truth.
I like to look at actual actions taken by the candidate for the common good and then make my choice.
I find Efren Carillo’s environmental voting record to be disturbing. He has not kept his word to MANY of us as far as so many things he said he was going to do.
For instance, he said something like…”No more gravel mining in the Russian River period,” then he voted to increase Syar’s gravel mining contract from 5 to 15 years! He told many of us personally that he would not vote for the Dutra asphalt plant on the Petaluma River. We all know the outcome of that one!
As far as town hall meetings/community visioning etc, what good are they if the person with the vote negates the agreed upon project when it comes time to vote? I’m referring to the Sebastopol Rd project that the community worked so hard on. Mr Carillo also promised to work on changing the laws regarding the impound of the vehicles of unlicensed drivers when speaking at a rally of the local UFW. Did he follow through? No.
He voted for a 45’ tall winery and vineyards to be built along the scenic corridor of Hwy 116 in a residential neighborhood, against the ardent pleas and protests of the community and neighbors.
We have lost more land to vineyards, including along the coast. General plan amendments are granted regularly to accommodate developers.
If you care about the children (and their future), then wouldn’t you work a lot harder to preserve the natural resources of Sonoma County? Our children and grandchildren need clean air and water, scenic vistas and wholesome places to recreate, not more vineyards, traffic, greenhouse gases, pollution and industrial plants. I fear that our county is going to be another Contra Costa County very soon unless this dangerous trend is STOPPED.
If you care about the elders, then PLEASE respect all the work they have done on the General Plan to guide us through this difficult growth process. Many elders with foresight and a vision for the future worked very hard to create a blueprint for development so that Sonoma County would remain the wonderful place to live that it once was! So respect your elders by not granting amendments to accommodate development. If an amendment is necessary, then the project is probably not appropriate. The current business model, based on endless growth is to the informed person, highly unsustainable! We need to develop new, perhaps creative ways to maintain a viable economy other than “development” and new construction/destruction. Otherwise, what will remain?
I am very alarmed, to say the least, at the trend of the decisions of this current board of supervisors. This can only have tragic results.
So I say….Respect Your Elders. Love the Children. Care for the Earth. Not just with words, but with your actions.
This is why I’m NOT voting for Efren Carillo, even though I like him.
I’m voting for Ernie Carpenter, because I know he is not running for his own personal ambitions, but to be of service to the citizens of Sonoma County.
Yes and they didn't invite Efren Carillo back because he didn't keep his word on changing/adjustin the vehicle impound laws as he promised thousands of attendees the previous year.
The logic of this editorial escapes me. Environmental preservation is paramount. But vote for the incumbent who has proven he puts economic development above environmental preservation. And not for the veteran who showed his bona fides in office, because he's "out of touch". (i.e. Old) And oh yeah, if the incumbent follows the path he's demonstrated he's already on, then, in four years, don't support him... Can anyone explain the rationale here? Gabe?
2013 Metro Newspapers. All rights reserved.
Website powered by Foundation