Sun 9/21/2008 3:52 AM:
Comment: It's time for a change!
Answer: Thank you, Anonymous. I have plenty of things to say in answer to your mail, Anonymous, but little if any time to do it right now with the Fair starting tomorrow. I will get to it as soon as I have time, which will probably be a day or two after the Fair ends. This topic was discussed at the Russellville Meet The Candidates "debate" last night. If you want more on an incident where two officers with AED's were not allowed to help someone who was having a heart attack, ask for a copy of the 911 tapes of September 22, 2004, under the Ohio Open Records law, dealing with this incident. Officers Greg Caudill and Anthony Grierson from Aberdeen PD were on patrol within a mile of the victim, and could have been there within minutes, but were allegedly told to stand down, according to what the two officers related to me about the incident. By the time the deputy arrived, the victim was deceased.
Last night I brought this topic of a blanket mutual aid agreement up in one of my answers. I think Mr. Wenninger said that we already have a mutual aid agreement with all local departments, but they have to get permission from the SO before they can roll. My view of a blanket mutual aid agreement is to let the closest unit available, whether a deputy or municipal officer, respond to the scene to get there as soon as possible, and then, if the deputy is late getting there, at least someone is doing something to alleviate the problem or situation, and can turn it over to the deputy upon his/her arrival. The kind of response in this case should have never happened.
Mon 9/22/2008 10:44 PM:
Comment: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! I AM
TIRED OF IT!!!!
Answer: Thank you for your mail, Jeff. My view of a "blanket" mutual aid agreement is that in situations where an officer is needed as soon as possible on the scene in a life-or-death situation, the closest officer should be dispatched to it, whether a local or deputy, by 911. Object here is to save lives, not build kingdoms. I don't think Mr. Wenninger really understood the concept of "liability," at the time of our conversation after he invited me to come over to his office to see him. Listen here. No matter what anyone does, there may be some liability involved. Officers are trained to respond to emergency situations. That's what they are serving for every day on duty. You know, that "protect and serve" function everyone always recites when talking about a police officer's task.
I have a recording of Mr. Wenninger's answer to this blanket mutual aid agreement matter from the "debate" the other night. I don't have time to post it this week because the Fair is taking up a lot of time. I'll try to catch up next week. They are upgrading my website server tomorrow, and I might not have time to get back on the site this week at all again.
Wed 9/24/2008 1:24 AM:
Comment/Question: Dear Sir, I am a
police officer in this county. I wanted you to know you have my support.
I am in favor of the mutual aid agreement you speak of. The agreement is
much needed; one of the big issues I see in this county is the lack of
cooperation and team effort between departments. I believe the Sheriff's
office is the key in this success because they are the leading authority
in the county (The Role Model, The Big Brother) which I believe the
current sheriff’s office lacks. How can you lead a team if you are only
working 8 hours a month? I know a lot of deputies and they are good
deputies however they need a leader and the county needs a full-time
Sheriff. Just think the number of crimes that could have been solved, if
working together, but it starts at the top.
Answer: Thank your for the mail, Anonymous.
The mutual aid agreement came up at the Russellville Meet The Candidates Debate last Saturday night. The Thursday, September 25, 2008, edition of The News Democrat quoted Mr. Wenninger as saying, "The mutual aid agreement has been in effect for 20 years. . . . It is the deputy's decision whether or not to ask for assistance when it's out of (a village's) jurisdiction. That's the way it's setup. . . We will help all agencies." Again, Mr. Wenninger fails to see what a mutual aid agreement is all about. It is not about getting permission to go to a life and death situation from a deputy. The agreement should be fashioned so that the closest officer to an incident or emergency should automatically be dispatched to the scene without having to get permission. That permission is what should be granted within the blanket mutual aid agreement. If you listen to that meeting requested by Mr. Wenninger over again, you will see that he does not have a very good grasp of what the word "liability" entails. It is a two-way street. If someone is having a heart attack, and there are two officers within a couple of minutes or so of the location, they should be immediately dispatched to the scene, without having to get permission from any deputy or anyone else - it's covered under the mutual aid agreement. The object here is to save lives in the county when necessary, not wasting precious time trying to get permission from a deputy to do so. Not allowing the closest officer to respond just might attach liability to the Sheriff's Department for not allowing him/them to respond to the scene for whatever reason they may proffer after the death of someone who could most likely have been saved with a timely response.
Tight budgets mandate cooperation from all entities
involved in the same mission - "protect and serve." All officers,
whether in a Sheriff's Department or in a municipal corporation have the
same basic training. There are some municipal officers that have
better training than deputies. So, what's the difference when it
comes to a life-saving incident between which officer should respond?
If the Sheriff denies the response of local municipality officers to a
heart attack victim, which officers could be on the scene in a matter of
a couple of minutes or so, doesn't the Sheriff stand the possibility of
facing some "legal liability" for not allowing them to possibly save a
heart attack victim??? If the local officers are allowed to
respond to the scene to try and save the victim, of course, if they
operate in a manner that exposes them to liability, outside of their
training, the Sheriff's department would also be "liable" too. The
object here is to be able to provide the victim with the best
opportunity available for survival. If the individuals responding
are not trained enough to save someone, that is a training deficiency,
not a mutual aid agreement problem. If one is afraid of being sued
over some "liability" issue when responding to an emergency situation,
then such person should not be in public service at all.
That's my opinion!
When I was in the prosecutor's office we always got the one-to-eight pill user felony offenders to indict. The major drug dealers were never indicted, even in light of many local officers and the public knowing just who the major drug dealers are in the community. It is like they are "untouchable" for some unknown reason or another. I never gave any drug activity information to anyone but federal or state law enforcement officials, frankly, because I haven't the slightest clue who might be involved in the activity. I know my wife is not involved, but does anyone solidly know who is clean and who is not? That's the problem.
Without integrity and honesty as the first most important characteristic of ANY officer, agent, or official, does anyone really know who MIGHT be involved in illegal drug activity??? When I was in the Navy during Nam, four or five officers were the individuals who were supplying our ship with drugs. This was not known until after the busts. The USS Barb SSN-596, a fast-attack submarine was allegedly busted for drug use from the Captain of the boat on down to the last crew member. Imagine this! A fast-attack nuclear submarine under the water and everyone is "high" from smoking dope. How do I know this? Because one of the guys in my Nuclear Power School Class was stationed on the Barb. I met him in Pearl Harbor in the EM Club on base when we were passing through on our way to my second WestPac off the coast of Vietnam. He told me the story about what happened to his boat. It was tied up at a pier in Pearl Harbor during our stop in Pearl Harbor, and was still there when we returned from Nam, for a total of about 11 months, while it was being outfitted with a new crew.
So, the question is, who is clean, and who is not? You can't trust the fact that someone in a high position is automatically "clean." Fact of the matter is, many of us are fooled by many who are involved in "the trade." There are two sides of the fence in this stuff, just like any other criminal endeavor. A person is on one side or the other. Trying to determine who is on what side is the task at hand. Which side of the law is a person on? Good luck in trying to determine that! It takes investigation and cooperation from the public that sees what is going on. And, that cooperation of the public depends on whether or not they can trust the law enforcement officials with the information they can provide. Basically, the "war" on drugs is very simple, as long as people can trust who they can confide in with their information.
I'm all for "team work," but those on the team have to be "clean." That's why integrity and honesty are the foremost factors in a person's eligibility to be a law enforcement individual, from my perspective. If you are going to be serving the public, then one has to at least refrain from from all activity that even "appears" to be improper, at least while one is in public service - completely. If he/she wants to cross the fence, then get out of law enforcement altogether. Don't perpetuate the fraud on the public that has placed trust in you to preserve the peace for them. This is really a VERY SIMPLE CONCEPT when you think about it. I'm all for "teams" to fight what needs to be fought to preserve the peace.
Wed 9/24/2008 11:39 AM:
Question: DENNIS, HOW ABOUT AN ENDORSMENT [sic] FOR EVERY RACE IN THE COUNTY, WE LIKE HEARING WHAT YOU THINK & WHY. Annon
Answer: Thank you for your question, Annon. Your question reads somewhat with a "sarcastic" tint by me at the time I am reading it now - like you really don't care what I think one way or another. I could be wrong, however, because written words do not convey the inflection and tone of one's intent. Nevertheless, there are only two races that I am directly interested in, and that is the prosecutor's race and the State Senate race. I am concerned about the prosecutor's race because I don't think we have the money available to "train" a prosecutor to do a job that our county needs done immediately upon the swearing in of the new officer. I am interested in the Ohio Senate race because of what Mr. Niehaus has said to me over three meetings on the same subject, in chronological order, going from knowledge of the subject to none whatsoever over a few short months.
I have delineated that the only reason why I have endorsed Jessica Little (R) for prosecuting attorney is because of the experience level of both candidates for prosecutor. I worked in the prosecutor's office the whole time from the hiring of Mr. Bob Rickey (D) to the time he quit the office. As far as I can remember, he only did Municipal Court cases. I am not sure if he did any jury trials, but if he did, I feel quite certain that they were only a handful at best as a prosecutor. You will have to ask Mr. Rickey how many trials he did as a prosecutor. It wasn't in the thousands. Bob was only in our office less than a year at most. Ask him how long he was there, or go to the Auditor's office and find out how many paychecks he received from when to when. Prior to that I believe I heard that he was a labor law attorney for five years. Bob is a nice guy, very intelligent, shakes hands like a politician very well, but in my opinion has way less experience in doing the job of prosecuting attorney than Jessica Little. It's my opinion he will have to hire people to do the job for him. Where is that money going to come from? I've heard the rumor traveling around that Mr. Rickey is going to hire Mr. Grennan so Grennan can get the retirement he had wanted with four more years, which is why Mr. Grennan is supposedly backing Mr. Rickey for prosecutor. I find that hard to believe. Mr. Grennan is a Democrat, but Mr. Rickey is being backed by a divided number of Republicans who are not backing Jessica little (R). Jessica is endorsed by the Republican Party. Go Figure!.
That's the way I see it from my perspective. I guess the only way to find our for yourself who is the most qualified in terms of experience is to get Mr. Rickey to tell you directly how many trials he performed as prosecutor, and how many total months he was employed by Mr. Grennan in the prosecutor's office. Someone with some "time" to research this information could get it done by requesting it from the Auditor's Office.
I have interviewed Mrs. Little four or five times, asking her what, and how she views things in general about the jail. arresting people, drug activity perspective, etc. Her answers provided me with the information necessary to make my decision to back her in the race she is involved in at this time. I am sorry that I have caused her so much flak to fall on her from those Wenninger/Rickey-backers in her party, as several "grapevine sources have told me directly from the top of the Republican Party. You see, there are many Republicans that are "fed up" with the course their party has taken over the last eight years or so. They too want a change, because the majority of Republicans want the same thing from our elected officials, as do the majority of Democrats. They all want what is best for our county. The only thing holding it all back is the "good old boys" network of those who do not want to lose any power they have over things right now. Independents throw a "monkey wrench" into typical party politics, which is why I will be attacked from here on out by the "party machine." Watch it happen in the press. It's coming, I'm sure! And, most likely from those who are directly responsible for the problems our county has faced over the last 7.5+ years. Mark my words!
Thu 9/25/2008 8:45 AM:
After last night's "breaking news" on our economy I just had to email
you because I find it so ironic that you were personally being attacked
for telling people how bad our economy is becoming. Now we have the
President of the United States telling people, in not so many words,
that we are on the verge of an economic catastrophe. Am I mistaken or
have you not been warning us of this for a while now? So, now we have
confirmation that our country is headed for a breakdown, because Bush's'
plan is a band aide for the financial institutions, not the people of
this country, so I don't see how it's going to work. People didn't
believe you because they didn't see the problem. Is this the same with
everything said about Wenninger? Should people now start opening their
mind to the corrupt activities going on at our sheriff's office? Just
because you can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.
My view of a blanket mutual aid agreement is as follows: The agreement should specify what incidents, situations, and conditions, are covered by the mutual aid agreement. Once this is delineated in the agreement, that is what provides the "permission" for county-wide officers to be immediately dispatched to the scene by 911. Every second counts when responding to an emergency situation. Having to wait for "permission," which should be automatically granted by the agreement, just wastes precious time that should not be interjected or tacked onto the front end of an emergency response. My view is that the closest officer to a 911 call covered by the agreement responds immediately, if not sooner, to the scene to get things under control. Once under control, said officer remains there to turn it over to the deputy upon his arrival.
Every officer is trained in the basics necessary to get control of a scene, or do basic life support. The way to "protect and serve" our whole county is to effectively and efficiently use all the resources available within our county. This is going to become more important as our country heads toward the upcoming depression-like economic climate, where funding for peace keeping will dwindle. Whether Mr. Wenninger realizes it or not, every person involved in law enforcement peace keeping within our county is on "the same team." I view the Sheriff's Office responsibility as that of supporting and working with all local municipal police department needs and requests. In turn, I would hope that all departments help us out when needed in return. This would also include assisting adjacent county needs, like a request for a canine unit to help search for a person that was shooting at one of their deputies. The safety of our county citizens comes first! Frankly, my view is, "to hell" with this territorial kingdom and king stuff, and the stroking or puffing up of ego just to prove a point or look "good" before the public and press. The duty is that those in peace keeping are there to "protect and serve." Such duty is based upon the people's trust in those involved in providing this service. It has to be a "TEAM" effort from everyone involved, including the public, helping out by supplying the information that will assist our sheriff's department in getting the job done.
Thu 9/25/2008 10:38 PM:
I hope you don't get tired of seeing my name pop up. Every time Deputy
Hubbard steps one foot on our property, without a search warrant or
valid reason to be there, I will be logging and recording. I just hope
all of the voters are logging into your site and reading the bulletins
and investigating on their own, and finding out how all of us Varnau
supporters are being treated.
I have published your letters mainly to make a point about the way I would handle situations like this, if I were sheriff. As the top administrator, I believe one of my duties would be to field complaints from the public about myself, my department, and those working in my department. If complaints are not made, corrective action cannot be taken. The first step is always to identify a "problem" area. If those responsible for the daily operations are not made aware of potential problems, there is no way any corrective action can be taken. Your son did stop by my booth at the Fair, and I was able to talk to him a little about it. From our discussion it was clear to me that there was enough information potentially available for someone to check out and follow up on to substantiate one side or another in the ongoing situation. So, if it were I who was in charge, I or my Chief Deputy would personally look into the allegations or complaints in order to determine if something was amiss. I would suggest that at the very least you take your complaint to the Sheriff, or the Prosecutor's Office for some satisfaction or resolution.
My view on things like that which you have alleged is this. Peace officers should be as apolitical and as personally unconnected as possible, not being vindictive, etc., in any way toward the public just because they have the power to easily intimidate people for wrong personal reasons. They are professionals in the most honorable profession there is in society, in my opinion. The public has to not only have the perception, but also the realization, that they can trust to be dealt with fairly and safely by an officer when they come under an officer's official and unofficial realm for any reason.
Fri 9/26/2008 1:10 PM:
First off let me say thanks for the website. I wish the people of this
county would pull their head out of the sand, look around and then ask
some hard-hitting questions instead of pretending life is good... but
that's not why I am writing.
Fri 9/26/08 1:00 PM: DOWN
AT THE BROWN COUNTY JR. FAIR AUCTION
My wife, Judith, and I think that 4-H is one of the best things for our youth to help teach them solid values, like responsibility, etc. We wholeheartedly support the Junior Fair.
Sat 9/27/2008 4:25 AM:
After hearing Mr. Wenninger blame the budget cut causing his agency the
lack of road patrol at meet the candidates night in Russellville, what
are we in for if he is re-elected? If we thought these first eight years
were bad we have not seen anything yet.
Answer: Thanks again for the mail, Scott. I served many subpoenas that were not served by the Sheriff's Department while working as an investigator in the prosecutor's office. It seemed like the Sheriff's Office could not serve grand jury subpoenas very well at all. Our office had to do it many times at the last minute.
The one subpoena I remember most was one to be served over in Panhandle. I tried serving it in the evening and there were at least three people home, as I could hear them talking, etc. They would not answer the door. I had an Adams County deputy try and help me get them to the door, but to no avail. Well, the system is setup to work as it does, and people deliberately acting in a way that costs the taxpayers more, just because they will not open the door and receive the paperwork, kind of makes me more determined to get the job done. I came home, went to bed, got up at 0300 hrs, headed back to the same house, waited there until 0600 hrs for someone to come out to get in their car to go to work. Got it served, and the person showed up for court at 0900 as they were scheduled to do by the subpoena. Had they not showed up, I would have impressed upon the court the story of what had transpired the night before and early morning hours just to get that piece of paper delivered, hoping the judge would have issued a bench arrest warrant for the individual. Serving subpoenas is part of the job that HAS to be done for the system to work properly. When people resist the process they just cost the taxpayers more money to get the job done. It all adds up. We already individually spend enough on taxes without having others unnecessarily add to our tax bills because of their reluctance to cooperate with the system of justice their representatives in government have enacted.
The "Big Dig" trial starts tomorrow. I remember the day the prosecutor and I went to the location to see what was going on. What struck me most was the lack of what I refer to as "common sense" involved in the operation. I'm not a geologist, but anyone who has ever held a shovel in his hand, that had to dig a hole, knows that if you are digging through undisturbed homogenous clay, chances are you are not going to find any recent artifacts underneath the clay. Now, try digging down about 22 feet in undisturbed homogenous clay, looking for evidence of a crime that took place in 1996. One would more likely find some prehistoric bones and other artifacts than something supposedly buried there in 1996. I remember seeing the cadaver dog searching down around the bottom of the 22-foot clay hole, and watching what appeared to be a dog "hitting" on things as it sniffed around. Oh, well!
Sat 9/27/08 11:00 AM:
DOWN AT THE BROWN COUNTY JR. FAIR AUCTION
Sat 9/27/2008 4:36 PM:
While @ the fair last night I noticed several people wearing black ball
caps supporting your campaign for Sheriff.
Sun 9/28/2008 7:51 PM:
Comment/Question: I think by now people know the story with Dwayne. I'm not supporting him. But at some point don't you think you should put it aside and run on what you stand for and see if people want you as sheriff or just Dwayne out. Don't you want to win by peoples choice not just forfeiture. Just curious. Dale
Answer: Thank you for your mail, Dale. I had a booth at the County Fair all week long. I was surprised at how many people still had not heard about Mr. Wenninger's ineligibility back in 2001, and those who thought they knew about the story, realizing that they did not understand what they had thought they knew. Nevertheless, at the same time I have been trying to explain what the facts are at this time, with respect to Mr. Wenninger's legal status being that of a civilian, I have been thoroughly explaining my stand on dozens of issues related to the job of sheriff. I believe that I have answered enough questions on this website alone to give most people a pretty clear understanding of what I believe and how I would handle things.
Forfeiture is exactly what Mr. Wenninger did himself when he physically assumed the position back in 2001. You see, it was he who did not meet the statutory requirements necessary to be a valid candidate, whereas everyone else who has run against him since 2001, has played by the rules of the game. They obtained, through their own personal efforts and perseverance, all the necessary requirements to be valid candidates for the office. Mr. Wenninger never took the steps to rectify the disqualification he had with respect to his educational credentials. He forfeited the seat upon his initial assumption of the office back in 2001. That forfeiture started a break in his service of his peace officer certificate under the Ohio Peace Officers' Training Commission administrative laws. Four years later his peace officer certificate completely expired. He became a civilian on January 1, 2005, two days before he assumed his second term seat. That's what is going on right now. I am trying to uphold the laws that have been broken and not enforced by anyone for over 7.5 years. I have been fighting the deprivation of my constitutional rights under the present election laws, in an attempt to have the Ohio Revised Code properly enforced to all individuals who have run for the office, and for those in the future who will be running for the same position. If the laws are not enforced equally across the board to everyone, no matter what status in life one has, then all we essentially have is mob rule.
Mr. Wenninger forfeited any right to hold the office all the way back in 2001. He is essentially "the 'sheriff' that never was," is what my court case is all about. If your concern for equal treatment under the laws is minimal to non-existent, I would have to disagree with you wholeheartedly. If the laws only apply to those not in power, then you too are at risk of being unfairly dealt with in a criminal justice system that recognizes "some animals are more equal than others."
Please take a look at Mr. Wenninger's record of court cases alone, where he has incurred hundreds of thousands in financial liability for the county through settlements over lawsuits that should never have sprung up in the first place. Another big case of potential liability starts tomorrow in Cincinnati. Stay tuned to that case. The sheriff should know the law so that he does not break it himself. He should be able to read the statutes and have some conditional understanding of such simple criminal concepts like: receiving stolen property, obstructing justice, compounding a crime, dereliction of duty, intimidation of an elector, etc. I believe that I have posted much more information about myself than has Mr. Wenninger in this race. I do understand, however, that there will be people come election day, who will arrive at the voting booths with no information on many of the candidates. There will be many who will not even recognize the names on the ballots, but they will be voting uninformed one way or another. No matter how much I make myself available to the voting public, there always seems to be someone who is asking what I stand for, etc.
At least you don't seem to fit into any of the categories above, since you have taken the time to ask your own questions. I would ask you to please read what I have posted on this website, the letters I have put in the papers over the last few months in response to letters to the editor, and my campaign literature. Please tell me one or more reasons why you would vote for my opponent rather than me?
I was asked at the Fair why a person with so many credentials as I possess wanted to run for sheriff instead of working as an attorney. Valid question. Every question is a valid one as far as I am concerned. I have done just about everything I ever wanted to do in life. I could "retire" and do nothing at this point in my life, but since my wife and I are not moving anymore, and since we are part of this community from here on out, I decided to donate four years of my life to my county to try and correct the things I saw completely wrong while working in the prosecutor's office as an investigator. One lady supposedly said that I wanted to become sheriff so that I could corrupt the county. I haven't the slightest clue what prompted her to make that statement, but I can assure you that my intent is to do exactly just the opposite.
I will carry on with my campaign exactly the way Sheriff Telb of Toledo, Ohio, suggested I proceed. He told me to stick with the facts whether they were pro or con with respect to my opponent, because I'd be blamed one way or another for whatever happened, whether it was my "fault" or not. My court case could very well carry on past the election November 4th. If it does, you will still be hearing about Mr. Wenninger's ineligibility at that time too. Sorry I have no control over the facts surrounding this race. I just publish them as they exist from my perspective. I have not seen any rebuttal of what I have printed thus far, only silence in return. If it were I on the other side of the table, I'd be standing up for the truth, presenting the facts that would dispel what I have written thus far. It's all an "open book" to be read, studied, and comprehended, by anyone with the interest to find out the truth. I thank you for your participation in your civic duties as an elector.
Tue 9/30/08 8:00 AM:
ABSENTEE BALLOT FOR THE MOST QUALIFIED CANDIDATES FOR
STATE SENATOR, PROSECUTOR AND SHERIFF
Wed 10/1/2008 5:45 PM:
Answer: Thanks, Marie, for your letter. I want to thank you for your support too. Since I do not accept any contributions, so that I can maintain my complete independence from having to "owe" anyone anything after the election, all I ask is for my supporters to spread the word about the website and my credentials. There are still people out there saying, "Who is this Varnau anyway," as if they have not seen one ad over the last two years in the newspapers, or taken the time to even try to find out anything about me, what I believe, or will do as sheriff. We'll never reach all of those that have to be "spoon-fed" information before they vote.
Mrs. Herdman talks about "right and wrong," as if she is the epitome of "justice." All I can say is that either Senator Niehaus is lying, or Bill Herdman is lying about just who was involved in arranging for that amendment to be passed in the Ohio legislature solely for Mr. Wenninger's benefit. Don't we all wish Senator Niehaus would pass a special bill to help each and every one of us, so that each of us could get paid a stipend out of taxpayer money that we would only have to work eight hours a month for to supplement our other job income. All I can say is that everyone should listen to what Senator Niehaus has to say about it, and then they should be asking the Senator their own questions about it. Then they should be voting to remove him from office permanently. Everything that has been done by the Brown County Republican Party for the last 7.5 years, regarding Mr. Wenninger, has cost us county taxpayers through the nose, like a nosebleed that you can't stop even with silver nitrate sticks.
I heard today that the "Big Dig" trial down in Cincinnati has dismissed all defendants except for "Sheriff" Wenninger and Sheriff Rodenberg of Clermont County. That means us taxpayers will save some money in this one since the county appears to have been dismissed as a defendant. Wait and see what happens if the plaintiff attorneys find out Mr. Wenninger is a civilian instead of a genuine Sheriff. Wonder how that possibly could affect his trial and liability. That trial concerns the violation of the Spangler's civil rights, very similar to the UDF incident where the "Sheriff" intimidated a lady on June 25th by threatening to press charges against her son if she did not remove my bumper sticker and yard sign, depriving her of her civil rights under 42 USC 1983, which is also a potential fourth degree felony under Ohio's election laws.
Bev Herdman is more prone to eliminate or stifle my constitutional rights rather than remove a counterfeit "sheriff" from our midst. What does that tell you up front, without even having to think about it longer than the time it takes to read what she said?
Here's my letter in response to hers in The News Democrat:
What Varnau Thinks . . . [The News Democrat changed my submitted title to: "Varnau responds to letter writer." The News Democrat has a habit of changing the words in the originals as sent to them. The Brown County Press has not changed the text in anything I have sent to them.]
To the editor:
Bev Herdman’s letter to the editor in last week’s newspaper DEFINITELY is one for the political history books! The exercise of my political, free-speech rights would naturally be objectionable and offensive to those who thoroughly despise truth. Exposing “dirty politics,” practiced for years in Brown County, now threatens those involved in its practice, as evidenced by Bev’s letter.
If you want to know what Dennis John Varnau thinks, and want to read about Brown County “dirty politics,” go to my website at www.varnauforsheriff.org. On that site you will find that Mr. Bill Herdman, Bev’s husband, and current member of the Board of Elections, was directly involved in the machinations underlying the unconstitutional amendment engineered by, now Senator, Tom Niehaus, back in 2003. That law reduced the educational credentials required for individuals to qualify as a valid candidate for sheriff.
From March 12th through September 15th, anyone traveling south on Route 68 could infer that the billboard at the corner of Delhi-Arnheim and Route 68 was “MY” billboard. Anything on that billboard is approved by me, as in: “I approved this message.” Jessica Little had nothing to do whatsoever with me deciding to back her, other than she factually possesses WAY more experience as a prosecutor than Mr. Bob Rickey - her opponent.
My support for Jessica Little does not automatically dictate a reciprocal relationship. I am exercising my constitutional right as a qualified elector to back her candidacy. What is “sneaky” and “unprincipled” to Mrs. Herdman exposes truths the Herdmans and Senator Niehaus would like to keep “secret.” For the complete story, you will have to access the comprehensive information posted on my website.
Our county and its insurer will probably end up paying in excess of a million dollars in settlements as a result of all the lawsuits against the current “sheriff.” That’s our tax money being unnecessarily wasted for absolutely nothing in return. “Justice” will be served when those who are responsible, for perpetuating the fraud of concealing an unqualified candidate in office, are legally forced to reimburse the losses realized by our county as a result of "their" unqualified “sheriff’s” decisions.
I sure hope, for the sake and safety of our county, that Jessica Little is elected as prosecuting attorney. After interviewing her four times, I know that she can “hit the road running.” She will not require an extended apprenticeship to learn how to do the whole job, as would her opponent, in my opinion.
Dennis John Varnau
Thu 10/2/08 4:00 PM:
FIRST RETURNS ON ABSENTEE BALLOT MAILINGS
Sat 10/4/2008 2:56 AM:
I heard from someone tonight that if you are elected, you will not need
$58,000 to do the job. How much money would you want for your salary?
What will you do with the difference? I think that is a point that needs
to be really publicized.
Answer: Thank you for the mail, Anonymous. When I worked at the prosecutor's office I worked there for very little salary because I liked my job almost completely. Since my wife and I do not have any offspring, and since she works pretty hard for a good salary herself, we really don't need much more piled on top of what we already have to work with. I plan on using/donating some, not all, of my salary for things needed by the department. This is not a "selling" point, as many people donate to many charities, etc., all year long. Nothing different here.
I'd be willing to participate in an actual debate with my opponent, as I agree with you that it would be good to hash out many issues before the public in real-time. I also agree that what happens in an organization depends on how management administrates its leadership goals, etc., to get the job done as a team.
Sat 10/4/2008 4:14 PM:
In response to the race for prosecutor I am inclined to agree with you.
I know Mr. Rickey personally as he has handled some legal issues for me.
I feel That Bob is a good attorney and I would trust him to handle any
Trial that would come my way. The experience factor that you speak about
with him compared to His opponent is in my opinion justified, to me if
Bob would lose the election then people who need a good lawyer for any
criminal charge that they may face would be served well by Mr. Rickey.
It would not bother me @ all to keep Bob retained as my personal
Answer: Thank you for your letter, Jeff. The facts are crystal clear with respect to the experience levels between Mr. Rickey and Ms. Little when it comes to knowledge about being a "full-service" prosecutor. That's all I've been pointing out, up until NOW.
I attended the Democrat Fall Dinner this last Friday. People presently in office were given the opportunity to address those attending. My ex-boss, Mr. Grennan, walked over to the microphone at the podium to address the crowd. He gave a passionate plea for everyone to vote a straight Democratic ticket to specifically get Mr. Rickey in as well as others. Mr. Rickey was one of the first to rise up to give Tom an enthusiastic standing ovation.
Now, putting this into perspective, I have recently been hearing the rumor going around that Mr. Rickey is going to hire Mr. Grennan as his senior advisor/assistant prosecutor. I did not give this much credence because I know exactly what Mr. Grennan has said about Bob, not only when Bob left the prosecutor's office, but also when Bob ran against Tom, and after Bob won the primary. There was no love lost - I can assure you. I also know other things that have been said with respect to Mr. Grennan's plans prior to the election, and what he was considering after he lost the election, that is, after he blamed me and a couple of others for his loss in the primary.
This rumor makes prefect sense, however, when you stop to think about it for a few minutes. There is not going to be much money available to get these government jobs done daily in light of the diminishing dollar, and since Mr. Rickey does not know how to completely run a prosecutor's office, or handle all the different areas alone, legally speaking, without having to learn on-the-job, being taught by someone how to do it, Bob is going to have to hire someone he can literally afford salary-wise to help him out to keep things going. What better solution than to have Grennan fill in for lesser pay with enough experience to keep the office working. After all, it was one of Tom's main goals to get "four more years" in on his retirement package. I can see a potential trade off of salary for extra time toward retirement as a positive cost/benefit decision in Grennan's mind, being totally acceptable to him. All that would have to be accomplished through Grennan's passionate plea is to get Mr. Rickey in office to realize the goal of having four more years of Grennan as the de facto prosecutor of Brown County.
A past supporter asked why I had not contacted Bob to find out what his answer would be to this rumor before publishing it. First of all, as I point out, it was the rumor floating around the courthouse. I checked with someone I completely trust, and that person also said the same had already been heard too. I did not start the rumor myself. I had heard, while still working at at the prosecutor's office, and after I quit, many other rumors about how Bob would run the prosecutor's office and who he would supposedly fire after taking office if he won. Bob is a great attorney, in that you cannot read him at all, and hard to get a direct answer out of him, from my experience at the office during the short time he worked there in Municipal Court only. He did not do any felony common pleas court cases that I can remember, and surely no felony jury trials as a prosecutor. So, even if Bob denies now that he would not hire Mr. Grennan if he wins the election, that is now. By the time January rolls around, things will change, particularly with respect to the funding that will be available to hire a seasoned/experienced attorney who can handle felony cases in common pleas court and grand jury. It is a no-brainer to me that Mr. Grennan will be the best bang for Bob's minimal bucks at that time to hire Mr. Grennan at a lower salary, as a quid pro quo for Mr. Grennan to get his last four years in for his retirement. I can see that happening practically, as a matter of fact, no matter what Bob says at this time in the "game." All that would be available to the citizens of Brown County after that would be a recall movement. Time is too precious to waste, in my opinion, at this time playing these political games. We need the most experienced persons in each office that is available to take and do the jobs for the right reasons. It is still my opinion, that if you compare the experience levels of both candidates for prosecuting attorney, it is a common sense decision once presented with the facts. Jessica Little has the most experience to do the job without having to obtain any training to hit the office running. Her biggest headache will be trying to get things organized from the condition they were in when I worked there.
During his passionate plea, Mr. Grennan also mentioned that he has served with "integrity" for his three terms in office. Well, I worked for Grennan for 3.5 years in the prosecutor's office as an investigator, and filling in on minimal attorney tasks, like plea and bond hearings, etc., when needed in juvenile, municipal, and common pleas courts. I worked for him for a pittance because I loved my job, and because I was doing it for our county citizens, him, and our office. I even know how I was told by him that I could not be replaced, etc., when I finally decided to leave back in September 2007. And what did I get in return? I got trashed by him in front of the Chiefs at a Chiefs' Meeting, blamed for losing his primary election, and now that I look back, probably just being "used," as others would regularly tell me during the time I worked there. I didn't care about being "used" or not, because I loved my job and chose to keep doing it even if being "used" as my work was helping people out. I'd do it all over again while being "used" because I genuinely looked forward to going to work every day, something I did not really appreciate in previous jobs over my lifetime.
Nevertheless, the comment about "serving with integrity" almost made me instantly regurgitate my dinner. I remember being told that "if I have a confession, I have a good case." It's funny that if a confession was obtained from a person who was "connected" in one way or another, how that confession turned out to be not "good" enough to prosecute, but rather dismiss, even after the "more equal animal" involved also said, "I guess I'm on the wrong side of the law on this one, huh?"
When I look back on my 3.5 years in the prosecutor's office, I actually now see lady justice appears to have had her blindfold completely removed in certain cases, particularly those where Brady allegedly may not have been followed. And it doesn't end there. This website, like I said earlier, has been the biggest "stick" to hit the "information piñata" jackpot on what is behind dirty politics in Brown County, and why those in office cannot take steps to do their job as they swore to do when assuming the position. I have found out what it is that has stopped suits against individuals who have prima facie slandered a "hamstrung" official, and why certain individuals have not had their cases taken to grand jury, etc. Facts are a hard thing to dispute. Irrefutable facts are absolutely damning.
If the rumor is true, I say this county cannot afford four more years of a "Tom Grennan" being involved in the prosecutor's office in any way shape or form. If Grennan is back in office as the de facto prosecutor, our county will be in the exact same position it has been over the last three terms, "hamstrung." The question is, can our county afford to have that happen for four more years? [Stealing a Bev Herdman quote.] "I think not!"
Tue 10/7/2008 2:38 PM:
I WAS PONDERING THE IDEA OF WENNINGER STATING HE ONLY HAS TO SPEND 8
HOURS A MONTH IN HIS OFFICE THE OTHER DAY AND THOUGHT I'D DO SOME MATH.
Answer: Thanks for the mail, Anonymous. Was sitting here on the computer when your mail came in, so I got it right up there on the web for you.
I plan on doing at least 40 hr/wk minimum. Plus plan on donating some of it to the department as needed to accomplish what needs to be done. Best deal money-wise or not, I think that what we need more than anything else is a full-time administrator that is physically on site to handle and plan what needs to be done to keep the department running as smoothly as possible.
Fri 10/10/2008 2:45 PM:
Comment: I recently listened to a recording of a conversation that took place at the Brown County Sheriff's office. The Sheriff, Dwayne Wenninger and his chief deputy, called Dennis Varnau in for a meeting. It was clear that the current sheriff was attempting to bully his opposition during the meeting. In the meeting the Sheriff completely lost his cool and used despicable language in talking to his opposition in the upcoming election. After hearing the calm manner in which Mr. Varnau conducted himself while the current sheriff showed no ability to control himself there is no doubt who I would want responding to an emergency call. It is quite obvious that the work of Mr. Varnau to question the legality of Mr. Wenninger's holding of the office of sheriff has so angered Wenninger that he is not capable of conducting himself in a manner that upholds the dignity of the office. I would encourage all voters in Brown county to be very aware of the personal attack and threat in the message that Wenninger delivered in a foul mouthed manner to a man who served this country in Vietnam and during the cold war.
Answer: Thank you for your input, Anonymous. Here are the two related recordings you refer to in your mail. The first one was the invitation to come over to the Sheriff's Office, the second one is the specific one to which you refer. Both recordings were made back on September 7, 2006. I believe that I already had started my campaign for Sheriff by that time.
Fri 10/10/2008 3:37 PM:
I hear a good deal about your website and the big political battle
brewing in Brown County over the Sheriffs race. I took some time to read
through your website and many of the submissions to such.
Answer: Thanks for sending your views, Bob. Yes, the website is becoming more and more popular as the days go by. Senator Niehaus' letter to the editor in Thursday's edition of The News Democrat caused a bump in traffic. I've posted a compilation of all that pertains to "The Senator Niehaus Affair" on the front page to make it easier for everyone to read and decide for themselves what the truth is regarding that matter.
I do not, however, share your view about the "intelligence" level of Brown County citizens. I had a booth at the Fair. I did not meet one "dumb" person while manning that booth. I never met one "dumb" person while serving as an investigator at the prosecutor's office. There are people in our county who have not had the same opportunity as others to get the "system's" piece of paper to pin up on their wall, but they invariably end up displaying more common sense than most who do have degrees hanging on their walls.
I have never intentionally treated anyone in a condescending manner. Your attempt to paint me with that brush is just another unfounded attempt to smear my character. I've found through this process of "campaigning" and running for office, that there are individuals who desire to control everything that is done in the campaign. If I decide not to go in their direction, I automatically become the "arrogant," "rude," etc., condescending individual. When I disclose cold, hard facts about my opponent's background, I am labeled with "trying to win by default." Others thoroughly involved in my campaign end up telling me, "see, I told you so," as the "mole" ends up surfacing with gusto, verifying what the collective thoughts of most pinned down earlier themselves. If I disagree, I am the one who is automatically "wrong." If I exercise my right to back someone's candidacy, and such is at odds with another person's views, I become anathema. Funny thing about all of this is that we supposedly live in a free country, and our right to choose whomever we think will do the best job is our personal choice to make. It's the same pervasive attitude that prompted George Bush's statement, "If you are not with us, you are against us." Oh, well! I find it extremely difficult to follow or hang around with individuals who have no tolerance for the choices others make for themselves. It's the "control freaks" that can't live with, and have no tolerance for what others decide for themselves. They want to control everything others do, and that characteristic usually sticks out like a sore thumb in how they treat their own spouse, etc.
As far as Mr. Wenninger getting a stipend of about $58,000.00, to add to his income, and not having to work at least a regular 40 hour week for that salary, I ask, what makes him the "King" entitled to receive the taxpayers' money essentially gratis??? I know of many other families who could use this "extra" money for their children's' education, medical care, etc.
I will never have the experience other officers have accumulated over 10, 15 or 20 years of service as peace officers. Never claimed to have more experience, and never will have. Nevertheless, if you were the Meth-head that needed arrest, I sure would not shy away from doing my job. You may beat me up doing so, but there will be plenty more coming after me who will end up subduing you. That's my view of those kind of situations. I've never shied away from doing what is needed, when needed. Never claimed to be the "tough" guy on the street. There will always be someone tougher that will come along sooner or later. Age has a way of reducing one's capability to accomplish physical things as time presses on and the body deteriorates. It's the integrity, character, mind ,and the common sense contained therein that is more important in all those who possess such, like the many good people you refer to as being "dumb" in your letter.
Fri 10/10/2008 8:22 PM:
Comment/Question: It is obvious that Senator Niehaus is quite worried about something or he would not be writing editorials about you in the newspaper. Is he trying to distance himself from someone? Judy
Answer: Thanks for your mail, Judy. I agree with you. He seems to be trying to distance himself from anything to do with Mr. Wenninger at this time. I think he is already "stuck" too tightly to get free from the facts.
Sat 10/11/2008 5:51 AM:
Bob stated "All these donated hours you’re going to be working what will
you be doing exactly? Patrolling? If so exactly how many hours do you
have in working on road patrol by yourself? How many subjects have you
had to forcibly arrest?"
Someone should have responded to that scene to record the damage and try and investigate what happened. It takes time to investigate crimes, but if no investigation is done, then why even have a police or sheriff's department in the first place? I agree that things need to change. We need to get back to the basics n law enforcement in our county.
Sat 10/11/2008 10:46 AM:
This comment is for Bob. Does Bob think it is ok to steal from Brown
County residents if someone has children? I have never heard anything so
insulting. Bob obviously knows nothing about what is going on. With
exception of causing this county to be sued can anyone name a D.W.
accomplishment? Mr. Wenninger does not perform law enforcement duties
unless Deb Dixon is there to catch it on camera. As to the 200lb. Meth
head, the blanket mutual aid agreement would give any policeman a better
chance against someone like that.
Sat 10/11/2008 5:45 PM:
My brother in law was at a meeting at the lake today. He told me the
sheriff has been working busting drug dealers at night. I find this hard
to believe that our sheriff has been doing anything but cashing his
paycheck. If it is true he will have to be in court. This will probably
be the first time in years he will be sitting on the plaintiff side of
the court room.
Answer: Thanks for your input, Bob B. Yes, as a matter of fact, Mr. Wenninger said that he is even buying drugs off the street himself. Challenged us listening to find out how many other sheriffs in the State do the same as he - buying drugs from dealers on the streets at night. You can listen to what he said today here: Wenninger at Lake Waynoka, October 11, 2008.
Your brother-in-law is telling the truth about what Mr. Wenninger said. This statement raises a lot of legitimate questions. First, how long has he been doing this? Second, if my protest material is correct, Mr. Wenninger is a "civilian" buying drugs on the street from dealers. If he has been doing it for quite some time, there should already be a lot of cases in the criminal justice pipeline for prosecution, and Mr. Wenninger will definitely be a witness in those cases where he has made those buys. Furthermore, I would think that defense attorneys will be very interested in finding out whether their client/defendants sold any drugs to Mr. Wenninger within the last four years. If he has bought drugs, and there are no cases, where are the drugs now that he has been buying at night from these dealers?
I think your calculations are correct. I believe that Mr. Wenninger has been a defendant in courts many more times than he has ever testified for the prosecution in court. This statement also tells me that most drug dealers haven't the slightest clue who the sheriff is, if they are selling him drugs on the street. Why, if I were a drug dealer, I'd surely take a look at his website to make sure I was familiar with all the faces thereon before I sold drugs to any known deputies or sheriff. This is the reason why undercover buys are normally done by individuals brought in from outside the county, or others who volunteer to do the buying. I find it very hard to believe that Mr. Wenninger is actually personally buying drugs directly from dealers on the street nightly. If he is, he should have been in court many times over the last four years, for sure!
One more thing. Those paychecks he is cashing. If my protest material is correct, in that his legal status has been that of a "civilian" for the last four years, then he is not legally the sheriff, and the amount of money given to him over the last four years should be recoverable by the county. Mr. Wenninger will have been impersonating an officer for the last four years, buying drugs, and thus not entitled to the paychecks he has cashed over the last four years.
Tue 10/14/2008 2:07 AM:
Dear Mr. Varnau,
My wife did not want any children because she said she had raised her brothers and sisters and did not want another family. I accumulated 1.7 REM lifetime dose of gamma radiation from working in the nuclear plant, sitting on the hot filter systems while doing the valve leak-rate checks on both nuke plants on the USS Truxtun DLG(N)-35 in 1973, prior to the Truxtun going for refueling up in Bremerton, Washington. So, since she did not want any children, I could take them or leave them, because mine would have "glowed" in the dark anyway most likely.
From there we were headed to graduation and I was trying to get into law school, and she in medical school, because as a maternity nurse she did not like the way male OB/GYNs handled pregnant ladies - too eager to cut the baby out so they would not have to get up in the middle of the night, whereas she will sit with a woman until she can deliver naturally, as intended, if possible in the end. We had a mutual agreement that we'd go either way the "cards" fell. She got accepted into medical school first, so my law school plans were scrubbed. We got tied up in a law suit over a "buyer beware" real estate deal in Amesville, Ohio, where we lost $18,500.00 - all of our combined savings - two years after we were married, after moving to the Athens, Ohio, area for her to attend OUCOM. The $15K we put down on our house on land contract was put on the seller's own home unaware to us, and three months later we were being evicted. We had to pay $3,500.00 to attorney Donovan Lowe in McConnellsville, Ohio, to take our case, and he got disbarred for five years, three weeks after we paid him, for commingling funds. We lost it all.
Anyway, at this point in our lives, we have no children, well, she doesn't, but I'm not positively sure, since I was a sailor in the Navy during Nam, and hit many ports in Asia, particularly Bangkok, Thailand, where I almost jumped ship, as part of the three West Pac tours of duty I made on the Truxtun. A young, lost, sheltered kid from Moeller High School in Kenwood, Ohio, that learned everything about anything in the Navy from 18 years old to 24 years old.
Some may again call all of this RANT, but I want you to know where I am coming from with respect to the substance of your questions. My Navy buddies can attest to my words here, because they read this too, and after four years and two months together on the same ship, they know me! I send it all to them every time I post new material.
There was another person named "Bob" above who said he'd like to have a wife that could support him too. Well, Judi and I have worked as a team for almost 32 years now, and whether I like it or not, I will never make as good a salary as she does in her profession. She deserves every bit of what she earns, and I think those she works with daily would confirm what I am saying about her. Please check on that, if you must. Actually, I have had the pleasure of being able to work with some pretty intelligent women in the different jobs I have had throughout life, the MCP [Male Chauvinist Pig] in me is reluctant to say it, but it is true, most were a lot more intelligent than me - but I still have the "xy" chromosomes and they don't - if you get my drift. Ha!
Judi's salary is public knowledge as it is published information by Health Source under federal laws. We both paid, filing as a married couple, over $100K in federal and state taxes this year. That's not to say we are "rich," not by a long shot. I got my old Air Force Intel buddy's son and his partner up in Dayton, Ohio, both anesthesiologists, to invest $300K into my brother's machine shop, and verbally guaranteed their principal in case it went "belly up." Well, it did go "belly up" this year, and we are paying them back slowly but surely.
I guess we look at life more realistically than others, because I expect that in less than 30 years I will punch out into eternity, and what good is money going to do us after that??? There is more to life than money, but it is nice to be able to pay bills on time without worry. So, I plan on donating some of my salary, one way or another, to help OUR community, not to be any kind of a "hero," but for practical purposes. I'll buy my own vehicle that I will use for four years and donate it to the county for a tax write-off. That's our plan. It's not my intention to be a "hero," but someone has to step up and straighten out this mess. Nobody seems too interested in doing so, even those who have been living here 10-15 years already.
I'll tell you who the heroes are right now in our county. They are the good, honest, high integrity officers that are working daily for a pittance, to protect and serve our citizens. Would you do what they do for the amount of money they get paid??? I'd bet not. To be spit on, beat on, shot at, etc., for less wages than what most make in other jobs flipping burgers. They are OUR heroes. The managers are not heroes, they facilitate the "heroes." The CEO's getting millions of dollars, are they "heroes?" They are opportunists! "I think not," as Bev Herdman would say. Since Judi is dedicating her services to "our" county now too, I will do the same. We are not moving any more after moving literally around the world for about 28 years together. I'm done moving. I'm over half-dead now already, but enjoying every day, except for this political BS that is designed to destroy instead of build up our local community.
2.) Correct! My wife, Judi, and I moved to Brown County on December 4, 2003. We were born and raised in Ohio, she on Catawba Island, [Port Clinton] Ohio, and I in Kenwood/Montgomery, Ohio. We both spent a lot of time outside of Ohio in the military, around the world, living in Japan for four years, and Germany for three.
I guess the way I perceive things, I look at people as being the same around the world. The country people in China are actually the same as those of us over here, with just different language, customs, religions, and traditions. They expect to be treated with respect the same we expect. I see no difference in the way people should be treated no matter where they grew up, live, or reside, etc. When it comes to law enforcement, I actually see more benefits to being an "outsider" than an "insider," as long as one is honest and has high integrity. I am not part of a "good old boys" network. I view everyone under the same laws, equally enforced to keep the peace for all citizens. I would not have any favorites, but administer the law equally across the board. I should be held to the highest standard under the law of anyone else in the county. My officers should be held to the next lower standard, along with all other peace officers in the county. My friends and family will be held to the next lower standard, because they know better, or should in any case. They are not going to be coming to me and asking for a ticket to be "fixed." The next layer down is the average citizen, other than the attorneys or other individuals in the criminal justice system, who also should know better. They too are held to a higher standard. The first to see the difference in the administration of "just-us" [justice] as favoring some over others because of their position, wealth, or political affiliation, are the "rank-and-file" citizens. When the citizens see the laws being unequally applied, for one reason or another, then the sarcasm starts, and trust in the system and those administering it collapses, and the end result is anarchy. Public trust is what is expected of elected officials. When they fail to do what is expected of them, then we have a very bad situation with total lack of trust in the "system of justice." I actually view my status as "an outsider" as being much more favorable than having a "good old boy" as sheriff, where the clan who is in power hoards it over other clans. Not good! We need "neutrality" in peace keeping/law enforcement as much as possible, in my opinion.
I believe that no matter where I am in the world, if I could be the "sheriff" in China, I believe that I could do the same unbiased job there as I could do here too. I don't think it is a matter of geography and time spent in one location, as much as a matter of respect for persons, property, and the right to live peaceably within a community without becoming a victim of crime.
3.) My view of the Sheriff is someone who is not beholden to anyone for anything. Thus, this is my main concern about taking donations or "like-kind" donations of things for my campaign. I owe nothing and have nothing over my head, and can be as neutral as humanly possible toward all citizens in our county, "owing" no one in return.
It is my opinion that politics is rife with corruption at this time in Brown County. If I follow the logic of your reasoning, I have no right to take any steps to correct what I perceive to be corruption in our community until I have lived under such corruption in this specific geographic location for 10-15 years or more. After I have endured the waste of my tax money for 10-15 years, by incompetent, unqualified individuals in office for some of those 10-15 years, wasting my tax money, like, for instance, over $600K in settlements of lawsuits against the Sheriff's Department alone already under Mr. Wenninger, then somehow I achieve some kind of magical standing to actively do something to protect my interests, like run for office myself. Such reasoning does not offend me at all in any way. It just absolutely makes no sense whatsoever to me in any way, shape, or form.
Some of it is not criminal per se, but does not pass the "smell test," to me. Take for instance this scenario: An elected official has a monetary interest in a business and uses his/her position to facilitate the acquisition of a license or permit in a shorter amount of time over other business establishments which indirectly lines his pockets quicker. Is that a misuse of power and authority? To me it may not be criminal in nature, but sure does have the appearance of impropriety in my book. This kind of action, to me, defines one's character. It stinks to high heaven!
For instance, if I were elected sheriff, and I knew of a potential felonious condition that I may have a property interest in if I were to hide the fact from law enforcement, such that, if I hid that fact I might have a better chance of acquiring some interest, whereas if I disclose such problem I may lose the chance to acquire that interest, what should I do in that situation? I believe that I have a DUTY, as Sheriff, and under the law if a felony, to disclose the problem to law enforcement, even though it may forever preclude me from attaining my goal of acquiring that interest. I'll go the route that may damage my chances of acquiring that interest in order to maintain my public integrity in exchange for my worldly interest loss, which is temporary at best at this point in my life.
I could die tomorrow from an aneurysm just like my old buddy, who worked at Lucasville Prison for thirty years, sitting in a chair at a family reunion. Life is too short sometimes, and even Bill Gates doesn't know when he is punching out with nothing in his pockets out of the billions he owns. 600,000 years from now everything we now see in front of us will all be a part of molten lava, including the hard drive these digital file electrons are stored on right now. So, what is important? Where you came from on the face of the earth? Take a look at the "Map of the Universe" from National Geographic, or go outside at night and look at the stars. Just where do you think you will be in another 100 years? Please tell me? Geographic location and time in location has absolutely nothing to do with how one treats people, in my opinion. Such should be the same no matter where one is located on the face of the earth, in Brown County, Hamilton, Clermont, Franklin, etc. The State law is the law, and it should be applied the same to all individuals within our State. Such should not be a function of geographic location, how long one has lived within the county, etc.
Sarcastically, this is all just RANT anyway! To me it seems like I just got married yesterday, and I was in the Navy yesterday, but that was almost 32 and 35 years ago now. Time flies, and most in our county will sooner or later find ourselves in the nursing homes I visited today in Brown County, campaigning for votes. What a sick process we have, in my opinion, to do what is best for our communities at this time. Just my opinion, mind you.
In closing. I don't look at this as being a factor of time as you do with regard to living at some approximate longitude and latitude on the face of the earth in this Universe. I look at it as being more a factor of mutual respect between humans. Everyone is entitled to respect, and expects such from others. No one, including me most, is entitled to more than anyone else when it comes to basic human respect. In our country everyone is entitled to believe in the religion they wish, back the political party they wish to belong to, etc. We all collectively sink or swim according to what the majority of people want to vote for - as long as the ballots are not tampered with in elections. I just want to be treated the same as say a Mike Daley, who apparently has a ton of money to try and derail Bruce Wallace's candidacy, all supposedly over a little-league baseball controversy. What's that all about??? I'd say EGO, as a first guess, not knowing all the facts involved, has a lot to do with it. Is winning a game the most important thing in a sub-teen with respect to his whole life? Biblically speaking, no way!
Take for instance the research I did concerning the ineligibility of Mr. Wenninger as a candidate for sheriff in 2001. Why didn't someone straighten that out 7.5 years ago? I say, because, after being an investigator for 3.5 years here in Brown County, a lot of government officials have "skeletons in their closet," making them ineffective with respect to the enforcement of the laws against other officials who also have "skeletons in their closet." Drop one and they all fall like a house of cards. It is that simple. So, what would you rather have as sheriff, another "good old boy" who can continue the cover-up, or an "independent" who can expose the corruption? It's up to you as an elector, and you will get what you vote for in the general election.
I can guarantee you this. I will get a good night's sleep on the evening of November 4th, probably better than you, unless I win - in which case my supporters will keep me up all night long. Ideally, if I win, it would be best for the county for Jessica Little to be elected prosecuting attorney, and Gregory Napolitano to be elected State Senator - IN MY OPINION. We'll see what happens. Can't wait until it is over! Believer me! I tell you the truth! If I am a liar, don't vote for me, or you will be part of the problem.
When it comes to Jessica Little and Robert Rickey, I think it is best to investigate and approach both and find out who you would support foremost. I know Bob from working in the prosecutor's office for 6-8 months. Bob is a very nice guy. A great attorney in labor law, and he is "hard to read," as most good attorneys are, plus he is also hard to get an answer out of, from my recollection, while working and interfacing with him probably not more than a handful of times directly on cases he had. I can't remember Bob ever doing a felony common pleas case while in the prosecutor's office. I know he defended clients in common pleas before, because I have newspapers up in the bathroom, where they come in handy at times to keep one's mind occupied. Bob's picture was on the front page of one, defending someone in common pleas court. I knew nothing about Jessica Little except for the derogatory comments I had heard about her prior to taking the time to directly confront her in person myself.
I personally think that the best way to find out about an individual is to take the time to talk to them in person. I did that with Jessica Little, and then proceeded to make her life hell with the hierarchy of her party because they thought she was involved with my billboard on Rt. 68. I found this out from the "grapevine" of those Republicans who are supporting my candidacy. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Brown County Republican Party is divided severely within. From my perspective one side leans to typical "politics" and the other toward "truth." In my opinion, the side Jessica Little is on the "truth" side of that party. Talk to her. I did. I put her on the spot with things that concerned me about how she saw things if being prosecutor. She was approachable. Bob shakes hands very well, but always seems somewhat aloof to me, even when I worked at the prosecutor's office. Does that mean I could not work with Bob? Not at all. After working in the prosecutor's office for 3.5 years, I know what needs to be improved with respect to what comes into the office from law enforcement personnel. I can work with whomever gets elected as prosecutor.
All I'm saying is that Jessica Little has much more experience than Bob at this time. Furthermore, the rumor I have heard, that is circulating around the common pleas court building, is not far-fetched from what I know personally. I can see where financially-speaking, it would be extremely convenient for Bob to hire Mr. Grennan after the election to help run the prosecutor's office, if Bob gets elected. That's just my evaluation of the situation from what Mr. Grennan has told me over the last few years with respect to his thoughts on retirement and his outlook on Bob as Bob quit, ran against him, and won, plus Mr. Grennan's total turn-around as evidenced from his speech at the Democrat Fall Dinner two weeks ago. I see a willing Grennan taking a pay cut in order to get his four years in for retirement. Again, JUST MY OPINION, which does not count for much, I realize. Nevertheless, it's my right to have a personal opinion, stated as such. It's another's right to reject my opinion as much as it is mine to reject his/hers.
Way before I even had a thought about becoming a police officer, right after my wife and I moved here to Brown County, I was reading a BEACON underground newsletter that said Mr. Wenninger was not working a full day for his pay. Well, since I live five doors down from Dwayne, I went to his house and confronted he and Tammy in their driveway. I asked him the following. I said, "Don't you think you should have to work a 40-hour week like everyone else if you are getting paid $50K+ or so to do a job? His answer was that he only needed, by law, eight hours a month as sheriff.
Well, as an attorney, I had direct access to the ORC through the Ohio Bar Association Casemaker program. There is no direct law with respect the amount of hours a sheriff has to work for his salary. The eight hours has to do with maintaining the police certificate monthly. The sheriff, by statute, has to personally inspect the jail monthly. Other than that, he does not have to work at all to get that $58K per year, except to insure subpoenas get served. So, the question becomes, do you think he should be working daily, as all the rest of us have to do on a salary, in order to keep things working properly within the department? I do as a taxpayer! You may not. That's your choice.
I believe that if I am being taxed for police protection, I expect that the money paid for salaries is being well-spent, in that, I expect him to be doing at the very least 40 hours per week, minimum. I think I am taxed too much already, and that tax money is being wasted by the billions daily. You have the right to disagree. It's still a free country. But I ask you, why should those who are working have to pay for those too lazy to work, being taxed to the hilt, and those capable, but unwilling to work, get my tax money in welfare for free and I can say nothing about that expenditure? I think that those on welfare, if not physically disabled, should have to work for their stipend. I also think, why should we taxpayers have to pay for the upkeep of those who broke the law, when they too could work, at least in a garden in the summer-time, to make the food required to support them while in jail? The system we have now is just dragging the rest of us right down with those who do not play by the same rules as the rest of us do. That's the way I see it. I have no apologies for that.
I never in my life ever considered becoming a police officer until March 2004. I started working at the prosecutor's office on January 22, 2004. It was Mr. Grennan who came in to my office one day and asked me if I would like to go to the police academy. I was 55 at the time. Larry Littleton, ex-Chief Deputy BCSO, was my fellow investigator at the time. After I had started the course January 19, 2005, it was Larry who said that if I passed the police academy course I could run for sheriff. That's when the sheriff thought arose. The first thing I did was to go to my Ohio Bar Association site and use Casemaker to look up the Ohio Revised Code sections that dealt with Sheriff qualifications. I found that, sure enough, if I completed the course successfully, I could be an eligible candidate for sheriff. I went from 265 pounds to 206 pounds from January 19th to September 13th to make the 1.5 mile run in 14:09, after doing the requisite amount of push-ups and sit-ups also in less than a minute each to qualify. Since I already had witnessed the lack of cooperation between the Sheriff's Department and Prosecutor's Office, I, like Chuck Norris has recently said in one of his articles, was not personally satisfied with what is going on locally, and considered running myself for that public office. That's what I did. And now I find that I completely understand why most people who are qualified never run for public office. The process to get there STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN! No one in their right mind would expose themselves to this process without a very good reason to do so. Mine was because my wife and I are not moving anymore, and I thought I'd do what I am qualified to do for my community, as long as I still have my health and half a mind left. So I decided to run.
Actually, Mr. Wenninger has not met the legal requirements to be sheriff. That's the problem that has been around since 2001, that no one for 7.5+ years has taken a step to correct. He never played by the rules as spelled out in the law, yet everyone else who has run for sheriff since 2001 has met all the requirements to be a valid candidate playing by the rules. That's the crux of my protest to the Board of Elections, which they did not accept because my constitutional rights are denied under current election laws. According to my legal research, Mr. Wenninger has been a "civilian" since January 1, 2005. He's not even a valid peace officer in the State of Ohio. We'll see what the 12th District Court of Appeals does this coming week with my appeal. Four Republicans reviewing an appeal concerning a Republican sheriff.
I can tell you right now, I'll never run again, unless I get in, do a good job, and the people want me to run again, I'll do it, for my community. Otherwise, I have plenty of other job opportunities available to me. I am fortunate in that respect. I believe that I actually have more police street work experience than Sheriff Simon Leis in Hamilton County, but not his prosecutor experience. I am just as qualified to run a Sheriff's Office as Sheriff Leis and Sheriff Rodenburg. It is the Chief Deputy, however, that literally runs the department daily. In my administration, he/she will be the highest paid employee, if I have any say about it. It is the rank and file who deserve the most recognition, as long as they maintain the integrity and disposition required of a deputy to serve their citizens in a "protect and serve" function. They are the "heroes" you should be referring to in your letters, not me.
Tue 10/14/2008 3:51 PM:
PLAN FOR FIRST 100 DAYS
In addition to implementing a real blanket mutual aid agreement for the benefit of all Brown County Residents during the first 100 days my, and my administration goals for the first 100 days are:
1) Minimum 40-hour work week from week one - I and my staff will lead from the front.
2) Attend every Township Trustee, Village Board, and School Board meeting to learn expectations from elected officials and the public.
3) Meet with every employee individually to define their roles as employees and public servants.
4) Meet with relevant elected County Officials to develop a collaborative long term plan for the S.O. to better meet the needs of the citizens of Brown County in concert with other County and State service agencies.
5) Meet specifically with the Prosecutor and Judges to review current issues with the Jail with the intent to develop diversion programs (including treatment) for non-violent offenders to free up jail space for those who present a more immediate threat to public safety
6) Initiate a county-wide or multi-county/multi-jurisdictional drug task-force. Intent is to secure some level of State or Federal funding through grants, if available.
7) Complete audit of all Sheriff's Office functions including property room and all financial dealings and record keeping. Intent is to determine if there are areas of funding that can be transferred to the public safety functions of the Sheriff's Office.
8) Meet with the Union(s) representing all Sheriff's employees to work with them to develop a truly non-partisan hiring and promotion system that is based on definable standards including testing and merit. The goal is to develop the best pool of qualified employees. While I believe that hiring local is always preferred, hiring (and promoting) the most professional and qualified best serves the citizens of Brown County.
9) Comprehensive review of all Department Rules, Regulations, Policies and Procedures to assure that they are up to date. Operational procedures will be established in conjunction with the rank and file to establish a definable system of accountability for all employees to assure that the tax dollars that are allotted to the Sheriff's Office functions are being used in the most efficient manner possible.
10) Establish a clear Mission and Goal Statement for the Sheriff's Office based on our duty to best Serve our County, State and Nation. These are more than just words. They establish, publicly, organizational accountability and vision for not only employees, but those we serve as well.
Matt, I know this is a great deal to do in the first 100 days. But with focus, determination, and a good team effort, it can be accomplished.With all the rhetoric throughout this election on a national, state and local level, from both candidates in this particular race, the question I really want to ask all voters in this election, when it comes to the Office of Sheriff, is "Can we do better?" Regardless of the the current Sheriff's credentials, regardless of who has lived in Brown County the longest, regardless of party affiliation (or no party affiliation) "Can we do better?" It is obvious that after eight years the current Sheriff is doing the best he can. If you are satisfied with the current state of the Sheriff's Office, then by all means re-elect the current Sheriff. If you really believe "We can do better," then the choice is clear from my perspective.
Tue 10/14/2008 7:06 PM:
On the recent recording of Sheriff Wenninger's speech, he talks about
buying drugs at night for undercover operations. Is not this kind of
strange? Would not most criminals know what the sheriff looks like? But
maybe if he truly only works 8 hours per month, no one would know what
he looks like? He could even work undercover for other local police
Why would any Sheriff in Ohio purposefully put himself into a position where he could be "knocked-off" by a drug dealer in deals that could go down "bad?" Why, I guess this is supposed to prove he's a REAL "Sheriff" indeed!
His statement doesn't make any sense whatsoever, except maybe as an attempt to explain away and compensate for his lack of time in the office daily. The real question is what else is he doing at night, if there are no prosecutions wherein he has had to testify since doing this drug buying nightly for so long? I have my own ideas, gleaned from what many others in the know have told about his time "out and about on ‘department’ business" nightly.The problem in all of this is "retaliation" and "complicity." Retaliation is well known on the street, as witnessed by my supporters, i.e., the UDF incident, where I became the bad guy, even though it was not me doing the intimidation, but instead put on the spot by the revised code to report the potential commission of a felony under the election laws. Go Figure! “Good” is now bad, and “Bad” is now good.
Tue 10/14/2008 10:12 PM:
WHAT A SLAP IN THE FACE TO ANY CITIZEN OF BROWN COUNTY!!!!!
My only questions are ?????
WHERE'S THE DOPE D.W.?
WHERE'S THE INDICTMENTS?
HOW COME NO ONE IS IN PRISON YET?
GOOD CITIZENS OF BROWN COUNTY..
THERE IS AN OLD SAYING...
FOOL ME ONCE--- SHAME ON ME.
FOOL ME TWICE--- SHAME ON YOU.
REMEMBER WHEN YOU VOTE, ONLY YOU KNOW WHO YOU VOTED FOR. YOU CAN'T BE INTIMIDATED, IF KNOW ONE ELSE KNOWS.
I for one don't plan on being fooled a third time!
Answer: Thanks Steve for your comments. I have a friend in Virginia. She works in a gigantic law office in D.C. Her comment was, "What a perfect cover!!! If he gets busted, he simply says he's doing it as part of his job.” No dope. No indictments. No testifying in court. Plausible???
Wed 10/15/2008 7:11 AM:
Comment/Question: You know that I am a big supporter or your campaign. After reading the posts from yesterday evening I thought I would weigh in a bit.
I am a big time conservative and supporter of my beloved Republican Party. Democrats have to park in the road in front of my house when coming to visit.
The driveway is reserved for conservatives. That being said the actions I have seen from Dwayne Wenninger in telling you to shut your god damned mouth show a bully who is drunk with his own power and not a conservative interested in serving those around him. I moved to Brown County in 2001 and now own two properties here. Technically I am an “outsider” but don’t feel like one. This is my home. We have a lot in common in that I have served active duty enlisted with the Army in Germany. As a reservist I have obtained my commission and served with the Army national guard as well as Navy and Air Force reserve. After active duty I earned a bachelors degree in chemical engineering and a masters degree in chemistry. I have lived in Ohio, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Germany. Brown County, Ohio is much more similar than different to any of those places. People expect to be treated with respect. The politics in this county are very inbred. An outsider who is not beholden to the county machine is the best person to clean up the office of sheriff and return respect to the people who voted him in. I believe you are this person. What has Dwayne Wenninger as an “insider” ever accomplished other than living in this particular county. That counts for nothing. Give me someone with some perspective who has seen more than just the political machinery within a single county. All things being equal I will take a veteran every time over a non-veteran. Wenninger for being so high and mighty in telling you to shut the fuck up and shut your god damned mouth has never even served his country, never completed a college degree, never met the requirements of the office. Changing the law after the fact does not mean one has “now” met the requirements. If he is truly working only 8 hours per month he should be ashamed of himself. He needs to take on role models who are sheriffs around this country who are doing something positive. He is a small town hack who is taking the money without doing the job while cussing at citizens who he is attempting to bully. Mike
Answer: Thanks for the mail, Mike. I'm with you on this. I don't understand the thought process behind this "outsider"/"insider" way of thinking. No matter where I have ever lived, if I thought something was not right, I'd take moves to speak up and do something about it. Not doing so would be shrugging off my duty as a concerned citizen in the community within which I lived. I just don't get how that has anything to do with living in and being part of a community.
Wed 10/15/2008 2:52 PM:
Answer: Thank you, David, for your response to a letter posted earlier about your wife. I was thinking a little more about what "Thinking It Through" [TIT] said in his letter, as it pertains to my wife's occupation and dedication in life. She is from Catawba Island, Port Clinton, Ohio, from family land on the inland harbor of Lake Erie. So, she is an "outsider" by TIT's analysis. Okay. My wife became an OB/GYN physician because she thought that most male physicians she had worked with over the years were more concerned about their own sleeping schedules than accommodating the unpredictable delivery times associated with pregnant women she supported as a nurse when it came time for their deliveries. There were male physicians who opted for a C-Section just so they would not have to wake up at night to do a delivery.
So, since she too has not been a resident of Brown County for 10-15 years yet, living at the specific longitude and latitude where our home is located, does that mean she should not be in a position to assist her pregnant ladies the way she thinks it should be done, in their best interest instead of her night time sleeping schedule? The degree of individual responsibility associated with her profession is at least equivalent to the responsibility for that of a Sheriff's. Correct me if I am wrong, but a lady in labor is not too concerned about how long my wife has lived in this county, but rather how well she will attend to her needs through labor and delivery. The responsibility concept involved is essentially the same with peace keeping officers there to "protect and serve" the citizens of our county, isn't it?
Wed 10/15/2008 4:36 PM:
All general orders, policies, procedures, and department regulations, will be published and signed off by everyone in the department as soon as possible. I have already started compiling these documents, and will be working on them in earnest after the election results. My Sheriff's Department will be run professionally and objectively as far as humanly possible with the main goal of protecting and serving the citizens of our county. The officers in my department are the most important assets to be supported and protected as much as possible. As long as my officers are acting professionally, respectfully, and honorably with those they contact, I will be adamantly demanding strict, comprehensive enforcement of laws applicable against anyone involved in harming these irreplaceable assets so essential and vital to the goals of our organization. I know WE, as a team, can collectively do a better job than what has been done over the last eight years by the present administration.
Thu 10/16/2008 3:30 PM:
I was told about you a couple weeks ago by a New Richmond cop. I had
read a few things about you but was mislead. I thought THE BEACON people
were bringing up old news about D.W. lack of qualifications again. I had
thought by everything that happened 5 or 6 years ago that D.W. was found
to have actually met the requirements needed. The press had not ever
reported anything to allow us to know the truth. It is obvious that D.W.
is NOT lawfully in his position. His case being sealed and Mr Niehaus
passing that bill confirms it. Are all the D.W. fans ignorant, scared of
him or just stupid? Who could we bring civil and/or legal action
against? I did not think as voters we should have to be responsible to
verify a candidates qualifications. Do we not pay state and county
officials to do that job for us?
Answer: Thanks for the mail, Pd. Off. I essentially agree with you completely. Mr. Wenninger was never qualified to be an eligible candidate from day one. The problem is that those whose responsibility to do something about it did not do their job - the prosecutor and/or the attorney general. Why? Is it because of incompetence, or because of some other reasons why nothing has been done going on eight full years now? Mr. Wenninger's legal status at this time creates more liability exposure than ever before, particularly since notice of his status has be publicly aired now since April this year.
Fri 10/17/2008 11:03 AM:
Where is the outrage? The past five years we all witnessed "THE I TEAM"
expose waste and corruption. Do we not remember all the cases of what
was called "double dipping"? If anyone in the Cincy area has watched the
news we all know it was reported with secret sting reporting.
Answer: Thank you, Harold. When I was getting ready to post your question, it was brought up that maybe you are just not familiar with "the way of life" of those living in Brown County for 10 years or more. I'm still trying to figure out exactly what those kind of statements mean. Take for instance this view. If I take a stand for the rule of law, that is Ohio law, and someone is against me for wanting to do that, suggesting that I "don't really know the people of Brown County and am not familiar with their way of life," what is the implication? Why, it suggests that the people of Brown County do not like the rule of law when it comes to them specifically. So, what is the distinction between "the people of Brown County" who have been here more than 10 years versus those of us who have been here less than 10 years? Where's the beef? What's the beef? When it comes to the law, to me it seems that the law should apply the same to everyone who lives in the county as well as those just passing through no matter how long they have been IN this county. How else is the law supposed to be administered? Are there really "some animals more equal than others" here in Brown County? How do you identify them? I guess that is what I am supposed to be "getting" from the comments of many who have been living here more than 10 years. I don't get it. That line of reasoning doesn't make any sense to me at all.
THE NEWS DEMOCRAT QUESTIONNAIRE
Are your qualifications met on the state level?
Yes. I meet and exceed the qualifications required to be a valid candidate for Sheriff under ORC Section 311.01(B).
What are your qualifications?
ORC 311.01(B)(1) Varnau is a citizen of the United States, born March 4, 1949, in Cincinnati, OH.
ORC 311.01(B)((2) Varnau has been a resident of Brown County since December 4, 2003.
ORC 311.01(B)((3) Varnau registered to vote in Brown County December 8, 2003, in Precinct 150 – Lewis Township North.
ORC 311.01(B)((4) Varnau was awarded a high school diploma in 1967 from Moeller High School, Kenwood, OH.
ORC 311.01(B)((5) Varnau has not been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a felony or any offense involving moral turpitude under the laws of this or any other state or the United States, and has not been convicted of or pleaded guilty to an offense that is a misdemeanor of the first degree under the laws of this state or an offense under the laws of any other state or the United States that carries a penalty that is substantially equivalent to the penalty for a misdemeanor of the first degree under the laws of this state.
ORC 311.01(B)((6) Varnau submitted, on April 19, 2006, his request to the Common Pleas Court to be fingerprinted and subjected to a search of local, state, and national fingerprint files to disclose any criminal record.
ORC 311.01(B)((7) Varnau submitted, on April 19, 2006, to the Common Pleas Court a complete history of his places of residence for a period of six years immediately preceding the qualification date and a complete history of the person’s places of employment for a period of six years immediately preceding the qualification date, indicating the name and address of each employer and the period of time employed by that employer.
ORC 311.01(B)((8)(a) Varnau has obtained, within the four-year period ending immediately prior to the qualification date, a valid basic peace officer certificate of training, on September 28, 2005, issued by the Ohio peace officer training commission, and, within the four-year period ending immediately prior to the qualification date, has been employed as a full-time peace officer, April 2006, by the Sardinia Police Department, as defined in section 109.71 of the Revised Code, performing duties related to the enforcement of statutes, ordinances, or codes; and also has been employed for more than three years as a law enforcement officer in the prosecutor’s office.
ORC 311.01(B)((9)(b) Varnau has completed satisfactorily more than two years of post-secondary education or the equivalent in semester or quarter hours in a college or university authorized to confer degrees by the Ohio board of regents, obtaining a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering (BSME) from the University of Cincinnati on June 11, 1978, and a Juris Doctor (JD) degree from Capital University Law School on September 1, 1988.
I am also a member of the Ohio Bar in good standing; am an auxiliary police officer for Ripley, OH; and, teach legal sections to cadets in the Police Academy at the Southern Hills JVS.
Should the office of Sheriff be a full-time job? Will you treat it like a full-time job?
The office of sheriff is a full-time job - 24/7. At a minimum, if not on vacation, sick, or dead, I promise to be on the job, in uniform, at least eight hours per day, 40 hours per week. I will have no other employment at the same time for the four years I serve as sheriff of Brown County.
What will you do in the next four years to make the office more available to the media?
I, or my Chief Deputy, will be contactable by reporters, either by e-mail, phone, or in person. We will respond as soon as possible, trying to keep the media informed about the news that can be legitimately released for public consumption.
What are your goals for the office of sheriff?
My first action will be to institute a blanket mutual aid agreement that spells out the type of cooperation expected among all county and adjacent county law enforcement departments so that "permission" to respond is automatic - not dependent on a second tier of "permission" from me or my department personnel in order to start responding immediately as dispatched by communications.
I will strive to extend the support and cooperation among all departments in our county. We are all on the same team when it comes to protecting and serving the citizens of our county.
I will work closely with the prosecutor's office so that the jail is not filled up with non-violent offenders, making more cells available for those who actually deserve one.
I will be there daily to manage the day-to-day operations, making myself readily available as necessary to assist in solving problems and fulfilling the needs of my personnel. The citizens come first; then my personnel; then me. If we are short on personnel, I'll be able to make calls and serve papers myself.
Why do you want to be the Brown County Sheriff?
My wife and I moved here to Brown County, settling down for good - not moving anymore. I worked in the prosecutor's office as an investigator for 3.5 years. What I saw, going on from that perspective, made me realize that our county deserves better service than what it has been receiving from the Sheriff's Department. That must change. I am qualified and able to work to make that change. I will do the job for all of us collectively as a county unit, so that all citizens have more faith and trust in our law enforcement department and personnel. I plan on working at the job in a way that those who have supported my candidacy will have no regrets of having done so after four years of service to our community. I hope to perform in a way, where if the citizens of our county will want four more additional years of my service, after the end of my first four years, that my record will eliminate the need for most of the kind of politicking I'm involved in now.
BROWN COUNTY PRESS QUESTIONNAIRE
1.) List your name and age.
Dennis John Varnau – 59
2.) Tell in 175 words or less why you are running for office and any experience or other qualifications that make you a credible candidate for this office.
After working in the county prosecutor’s office as an investigator and attorney for 3.5 years, I realized that peace keeping and law enforcement in our county was/is “broken” in many ways. Crimes were/are being committed with no response to the scene by the sheriff’s department at all, or, if a response is made, typically it may be hours after the call for help. Citizens have died that possibly could have survived if a county or municipal peace officer had responded timely to the scene. Since my educational background and certifications meet and exceed that required to be a valid candidate for sheriff, I decided to run for the office myself to get that department back to the basics. I know I can do a better job of “protecting and serving” the citizens of our county than what the current administration has done over the last eight years. I’ll be a genuine full-time sheriff, at work daily, in uniform, at least a minimum of 40 hours per week, personally managing the department where and when needed.
3.) What do you think are the three most important issues facing Brown County today?
From my perspective as a candidate for sheriff, I believe: A.) there is a dearth of cooperation and team work among officers and personnel involved in the county’s criminal justice system; B.) that a lack of management has a lot to do with the existing problem identified in issue “A”; and, C.) that a lack of future funding and grant money dictates an even greater need to correct that which is missing in issue “B.”
Sat 10/18/2008 2:03 PM:
I am a 70 year old Veteran and retired police officer tired of the
direction of where our country is heading. I am now an Independent. Our
Country needs more people like you. You have my vote. I hope to meet you
Sat 10/18/2008 6:27 PM:
I have noticed these past few weeks at every appearance you and D.W.
have been at that he (D.W.) sees nothing wrong with the poor service our
county has received under his admin. I have not heard him offer any
solutions just more of the same we have had these past 7 years.
Answer: Thank you, BCP, for the mail. I am still trying to figure out how a person who has lived in Brown County for over 10-15 years, as Mr. Wenninger has, is entitled to receive $58,000.00 per year in salary, and he says he only has to work eight hours a month by law. I guess for some unidentified reason he is automatically entitled to receive that taxpayer money without having to work for it in return. That is the message I am getting from the letters to the editor in newspapers and letters sent to me to post on this website. Sometimes I think I am living in London, England, and he is somehow linked to the Royal Family. Obviously, if I am elected there will be change, but change for change alone is not a valid reason to change, unless the change puts someone in the position that is willing to do the job daily to the best of his abilities, which is what I intend to do, if elected.
Every time I had to do something, like serving subpoenas, in Adams County, there was always a deputy available to help out when needed. Adams County does not have the budget our county has for its department, yet they have deputies willing and able to show up when needed. I'm wondering if Brown County's budget has been cut, or if it just has not been increased to the levels that Mr. Wenninger desires, or thinks he is entitled to for some reason. I know someone was willing to donate new guns for the whole department but Mr. Wenninger wanted the money instead of the guns, so the donation never happened. Wow! What in the world happened in making that decision? Free guns, but no money. Guns cost money? Infusion of value, for free, dictates a potential reallocation of funds, resources, etc., instantly in my mind?
The key here is the kind of change needed, which is in overall management from my perspective at this time. Most business owners are at their company daily, usually longer than the employees, for a reason. I don't know of any instances where the owner of a company is not daily managing his/her business in person, not by cell phone. If you want a business to be successful, it needs constant real-time management to survive. It's no different managing a government entity. Somebody has to be there doing the job as required, and pitching in when needed to fill in at any level requiring assistance.
Senator Niehaus' letter to the editor was on October 9, 2008. Notice the jump in bandwidth on the 10th over the 9th. Now notice the jump in bandwidth on the 18th, after my response to Senator Niehaus' letter hit the streets. The bandwidth more than doubled to the highest yet for any day this month. Guess what document was downloaded the most? "The Senator Niehaus Affair" .pdf document. Hopefully the internet will pay off on information to inform voters, like it did in "cash bombs" for Ron Paul's campaign. Once the Clermont County voters become aware of that .pdf file on Senator Niehaus, and they start accessing the information, Senator Niehaus just might then be in some re-election trouble, since he only won by a slim margin last time? Start getting used to our new, Senator Napolitano.
Sun 10/19/2008 2:53 AM:
I was just reading the Sunday News Democrat. The front page of the
election section starts off with Dwayne Wenninger. The question to him
is should that job be full-time or part-time. He answered it is more
than a full-time job. He never states how many hours of service he
believes to be full-time. He goes into saying recreational activities
can be relaxing. He said "project work" fills most of his down-time.
Answer: Thanks again, Scott. Mr. Wenninger's qualifications have NOT yet been "vetted" or "exhaustively" reviewed. If that were the case, then why did he have his trial court case "sealed" from the public forever? That is what my official protest with the Board of Elections is all about. If the 12th District Appeals Court decides this week to send it back to the trial court, and if the trial court makes a decision to grant the writ prior to the election, then my protest will provide the challenge to Mr. Wenninger's qualifications that have never been questioned before. If the court drags its feet past the election without giving a decision, that will give me additional constitutional "standing" to continue my legal challenge to Mr. Wenninger's lack of qualifications to be a candidate for sheriff. Either way, sooner or later, Mr. Wenninger's lack of qualification to even be a legitimate candidate will be reviewed, that is, unless he loses the election, in which case my protest and court proceedings will become moot, and no further action will be necessary on my part to disclose the truth about Mr. Wenninger's lack of qualifications.
Sunday 10/19/08 2:30 PM:
Stopped in today to see Lola Fry (93) at the Regency Hospital in the Deaconess Hospital complex across the street from the University of Cincinnati. Took her today's Democrat and Press. She is in Room 469 on the 4th Floor. There is convenient parking across the street from the hospital in a large parking garage. I'm sure she would appreciate seeing old friends stop in to visit. Lola's mind is still sharp as a tack! She cannot talk unless they do something with the many tubes that are supplying oxygen to her. She could not talk to me today, but she could write down answers. She told me that she was a member of the Mount Orab VFW for 70 years. Lola wanted an absentee ballot voters form so she could vote. Imagine that. A 93 year old woman who is laid up in a hospital bed finds it important to vote, whereas so many others can't find the time to take part in their basic civic duty to vote. The last time I saw Lola in the Brown County General Hospital, she woke up from a sleep right after I entered her room. After a few seconds, she made the statement, "Nothing works anymore," referring to her body functions. What a sense of humor, even in her condition at that time. At her age she still has the best outlook on life anyone could imagine. Go visit her while you still have the opportunity to do so. I know she will appreciate you stopping by to see her.
I saw a line of people outside the funeral home in Ripley yesterday. There must have been over 100 people waiting in line for hours. I wondered how many of them actually got to visit with the deceased person prior to his/her death, when the person could have still personally enjoyed their company? It must be pretty hard to spend day-after-day in a hospital bed with dozens of tubes running in and out of your body, without anyone stopping by to visit. Lola did not make the Brown County Fair parade this year because she was in the hospital. I don't think she will be in next year's parade either because time is not slowing down. It's time to go see her while you can. Make her day.
Mon 10/20/2008 1:31 PM:
Dennis, YOU have my support. As a resident of Brown County for 18 years
and a close follower of the political crud that goes on, I too feel it's
time for a change. The citizens of Brown County need to WAKE UP, OPEN
THEIR EYES and realize that OUR county is going to HE** in a handbasket.
D.W. has played the county long enough and has gotten us NOWHERE! His 8
years has been total BS! There aren't enough Deputies on the road,
waiting for "permission" to respond to an emergency call is absolutely
ABSURD, $58,000 and 8 hours required by law does NOTHING for the
Sheriff's Department, it does NOTHING for us citizens, it does NOTHING
PERIOD. WE, need a leader. WE, need someone dedicated to doing the job
to the best of their ability. WE, need someone that will be there not
only for the Department but for US as well. WAKE UP CITIZENS OF BROWN
COUNTY, it is OUR DUTY as citizens to stand up and make changes happen.
Mon 10/20/2008 2:00 PM:
OLD BILLBOARD SIGN - NEW LOCATION IN ABERDEEN
Fri 10/24/2008 3:01 AM:
Hello Dennis (Sheriff Elect?),
Answer: Thank you for the support, Johnny. I understand the situation, believe me. My supporters who have been the victims of retaliation by someone, or a few of our finest citizens, also understand. This election is not about me or Mr. Wenninger, but about our county and its well-being into the future. Things are not going to be getting better in the short term economy-wise, which in turn will most likely lead to more crime. The more people support my campaign, the more I feel the responsibility building to do my absolute best in carrying through on what I have been standing for throughout this campaign. I want the people of our county to look up to the officers in our county as being the best of any surrounding county in professionalism, respectfulness, courtesy, fairness, and honesty. Serving with integrity, I want my officers to be proud of the job they are doing daily for our citizens. This is what the people want out of our elected officials and those who have taken an oath to protect and serve. In line with that, I am hoping that my team can manage the department in a way which will make it possible to compensate my officers better. Their pay is pitiful, from my perspective. That is something I am going to be continually striving to rectify. On the other side of the coin, the public has the right to expect that when they come in contact with one of our officers, they are going to be treated properly every time. I promise to do my best to set the example. We have to succeed for the benefit of all our whole county. It has to be team work all the way with everyone pulling their own weight at the very least.
Tue 10/28/2008 9:08 PM:
Question/Comment: Dennis, I've read your website both sides and I must say you seem bent on wanting the Sheriff's job by default. Why did you not run in the primary ? Have you always been a "Independent". Let's just say for one minute the Sheriff is removed from office...do you think you should be the one to step in ? Now you can go on a 5 chapter rant...Oh and don't forget to throw in Veitnam [sic], Navy, Lawyer, Reserve police, Air Force Intell, Phillipines [sic], Wife being a Commander, Rads, Nuclear, Engineer, Machinist, Nuclear Power School, WESPAC, U235, Blah..Blah..Blah. Hurry Dennis I need to read something that will put me to sleep. Anony
Answer: Thanks Anony for your mail. I'll try to help you get some deep sleep prior to November 4th.
If the election laws had been followed all the way back in 2000, Buddy Coburn or K.O. Martin would have been the sheriff in that election. If the election laws had been followed in 2004, K.O. Martin would have been sheriff. I don't see how "default" enters into the picture, except for the fact that Mr. Wenninger is not eligible in this election as a valid candidate for sheriff under the specific requirements, clearly spelled out in the Ohio Revised Code. If the laws were followed in this election, yes, I would win by "default" as you put it, because Mr. Wenninger is not a valid candidate, and since I am the only other person running for the office, I would have no "opponent."
If you take the time to become familiar with Ohio's election laws, and the protocol associated with them, you would realize that since I am an independent that had no opponent in the primary, there was no need for me to "run" against anyone. Since there were two Republican candidates vying for the office of sheriff, there had to be a primary run-off to determine which candidate would represent the Republican Party in the General Election. It's too bad that the Republican Party did not pick the only qualified candidate they had on that primary ballot - Captain Don Newman, who met all the requirements to be a valid candidate for the office of sheriff. What happened is this, pure "politics" entered the equation and prevented the genuine qualified candidate from obtaining his just position as the Republican candidate for sheriff. After it is all vetted out in the future, I believe that the Republican Party hierarchy will have a very deep "black eye" for weakly capitulating with those actually "controlling" their county party.
If you have read and comprehended "both sides" of my website, you may have missed where I addressed how long I have been an Independent. Over 25-30 years or more as documented under the Endorsement section.
If I lose the election on November 4th, and Mr. Wenninger is removed from office soon thereafter for any number of existing reasons, then I think it is the Republican Party who is entitled to appoint his successor, in which case, the most obvious choice would be Captain Newman, a fully-qualified candidate for the office, and honest Republican, who would do the job better than it has been done the past eight years. If the 12th District Appeals Court and/or the trial court delay my mandamus case past the election date, then I will have additional constitutional standing to get the FACT before a court to prove that Mr. Wenninger has NEVER been qualified to be a valid candidate for sheriff. He is essentially "The Sheriff That Never Was," as far as my legal analysis delineates. The courts will decide, if I lose the election. It's the law that is important in this matter, not Mr. Wenninger or myself. If the law is trumped by politics, then we are all at a disadvantage sooner or later, depending on whether a "Hatfield [Democrat]" or a "McCoy [Republican]" is in the position of sheriff. The only way the law becomes supreme over politics is if there is a "Pusser [Independent]" in the position of sheriff. NO cronyism, nepotism, or favoritism, should be involved in the administration of the laws of our land. And, the Sheriff should be held to the HIGHEST standard existing for all under the same laws. He is supposed to be the one with genuine integrity, not acting with the "do as I say, not as I do" mentality.
Thu 10/30/2008 12:38 PM:
Am I the only one who noticed the obvious in the Bob Rickey v/s Jessica
Little article in The News Democrat Sunday Oct. 26? Bob brought up
the "rumor" about him hiring Grennan to work in his office. Rickey said
the rumor was unfounded and that he never made that statement. He said
it would be a very, very difficult working office if you have the
prosecutor who lost the primary, still working there in some capacity.
Even if Mr. Rickey outright denies that he would hire Mr. Grennan at this point in time, that does not necessarily mean he would not do it in January with a different set of economic conditions. I expect the dollar will completely crash within the next three months or so. If that happens, and even if it doesn't, you can expect to see the budgets of all county government entities cut severely. When that happens it is not hard to understand the cost/benefit of being able to hire someone who needs, and wants, four more years towards his retirement, being willing to work for a pittance in return, particularly since the person already knows how to handle Common Pleas felony cases for Mr. Rickey. That would be a "necessity" from Mr. Rickey's perspective at that time, because I believe, if I remember correctly, Mr. Rickey never even did a jury trial in Municipal Court, much less touch a felony case in Common Pleas Court. As I said before, Mr. Rickey only did Municipal Court for about six to eight months or so in the prosecutor's office. He touched no other areas within the prosecutor's office to my knowledge. Ask Mr. Grennan, or contact the prosecutor's office, to find out the exact time Mr. Rickey worked in that office, and also ask the different areas he had experience working while there, like felony cases in Common Pleas Court, Grand Jury, Appeals, foreclosures, etc. Ask Mr. Grennan if he would work, or plan on working, for Mr. Rickey if he is elected to office. I heard that Mr. Grennan was asked directly by one person and avoided answering the question, whereas another person was told by Mr. Grennan that it was not true. It is a real possibility from my perspective that can't be tossed out of consideration.
As far as the lady who backs Mr. Rickey's candidacy, her backing is solely based upon an emotional connection. She taught Mr. Rickey as a student years ago. It is like a "mother/son" type of emotional connection that transcends any form of common sense, logic, or reason. Votes based upon that basis are part of the reason why we find ourselves in the present condition facing our society today nationally and locally.
We are bankrupt as a nation, not only economically, but also morally, with the rule of law and our constitutions having been discarded years ago in favor of a two-party, "Hatfield [Democrat]/McCoy [Republican]" type of government, wherein politics trumps the law daily in our civil and criminal justice systems, depending on who has the larger membership numbers in their mob.
If you ever wondered who the words "Domestic Enemies" refers to, it is probably those in positions of authority who have destroyed our country from within by abandoning the rule of law through their surreptitious and/or underhanded political actions. After the total collapse of our society, under the weight of what confronts it now economically and otherwise, there will still be plenty of rope around. I would not want to be one of those traitors collectively identified as being involved, instrumental, or complicit, through my actions, as having helped to bring about the gradual destruction of our great country.
Thu 10/30/2008 3:08 PM:
I want to wish you the best - "Victory" - on election day. I have
followed your site closely for the past several months and am appalled
that the incumbent appears to be a businessman first and part-time
sheriff second. I believe your County would be well served by a man of
God with strong morals, ethics and solid views/plans on how to improve
on and perform this most important job!
Answer: Thank you for the mail, Charles.
Sat 11/1/2008 7:13 AM:
I am having a hard time keeping my mouth shut while I sit here and read
the comments that have been sent to you and subsequently posted on your
website. While most of what is written here is support for you (and
should be expected, as it is YOUR website), I am encouraged, somewhat,
to see people asking the tough questions and calling you out on
occasion. I don't necessarily expect a response to what will ensue here,
but if you feel the need, go for it.
Answer: Thank you for the mail, Anonymous. I am glad that you did take the time to air your views on the topics you covered. I will answer them the same as I have done for every other letter that has been sent into me, whether pro or con.
If telling the truth is "stirring the pot," then a lot more "stirring" needs to be done in our county, because truth is something that seems to have been put on the back burner way too long, to the detriment of many who were not "connected," receiving treatment they did not deserve. Living in a specific geographic location for a specified amount of time is not a variable in the equation of law enforcement and the criminal justice system. Laws need to be enforced the same to all individuals across the social spectrum, equally and with fairness. Just because someone who has committed a crime is of the same political party or has had, or is holding, a high elected position, or is "connected" in some way to the same, such person should not get a "get out of jail" card for free. Everyone else committing the same crime who has gone to jail should also then get a "get out of jail" free card too.
Your letter published here constitutes some of your involvement in the election. You have a right to air your views on candidates and issues the same as I. I could have just deleted your letter and no one would ever have known you sent it to me before the election. In fact, there would have been no way for you to prove that I had even received it. Your letter, however, identifies several issues that need to be addressed.
I, just like you, as an elector, whether I am a candidate or not, have the same rights to air my views on candidates and issues. If I were not running, I'd have pointed out the exact same facts as I have done during this campaign cycle with respect to Bob's experience as compared to Jessica Little's. I have not "torn" Bob Rickey down at all in what I have said about his experience as compared to Jessica Little's. I have said nothing to "tear down" Bob Rickey. All I have said is this. Bob Rickey only worked in the prosecutor's office six to eight months or so. All he did while in the position of assistant prosecutor was work cases in Municipal Court. I believe that Bob never even conducted a jury trial in that court while in that position. To my knowledge, Bob never handled a felony case in Common Pleas Court, nor did he ever conduct a grand jury, or filed any appeals with the 12th District Court of Appeals, or had anything to do with foreclosures. He may have filled in at juvenile court, but Municipal Court and possible slight juvenile court appearances would be the full extent of Bob's experience as an assistant prosecutor. Prior to that he worked as a labor law attorney for approximately five years, and from what I have heard is regarded as a very good attorney in that practice area. Other than that, in my opinion Bob holds himself out as a very good attorney in that he is "hard to read." This is an attorney "trait" that one will find present in most attorneys. If you think I am lying about what I have just reiterated, then ask Bob to clarify where I have stated something inaccurately. Everything I just said is all the truth and factual.
As far as me running for prosecutor, I too am "qualified" as an attorney, but I don't have the overall experience necessary to act as the prosecutor over all matters involved in that office daily. "Community involvement," "hometown sacrifice," "time in community" and "being a good guy" etc., has absolutely nothing to do with, and does not satisfy, the need for the extensive experience necessary to be county prosecutor. I'd have to hire someone who has that experience to "run" the things that I would not be able to do if I were elected as prosecutor. That's exactly what I will have in my Chief Deputy and other supervisors at the Sheriff's Office. Bob is going to have to hire someone to do those things he does not know how to do himself, and the money necessary to hire someone with that amount of experience is not going to be available for the prosecutor's office, especially if there are more cuts in funding ahead for all offices. Bob will have to pay someone an equivalent salary to his to get an experienced attorney that will be able to do the job properly daily. If Bob wins, one way or another he will have to get the job done. Bob worked in the office before. He knows just how unorganized things are, and that it is going to take much time to get things rearranged properly. It is going to take every hour of every working day just to keep things flowing properly. Bob will have little if any time for his family, guaranteed, if he is going to do the job properly as prosecutor. Campaign money should never trump the experience levels of the candidates, in my opinion. And politics should never trump the law!
That's where Mr. Grennan enters the picture. As you pointed out, and I can verify from personal knowledge, Mr. Grennan wants four more years toward his retirement. One recent letter to the editor suggested that he can just purchase four more years of his PERS, but that same person who suggested such is involved in a lawsuit against Mr. Grennan which could potentially find him liable in the future, if he loses, for hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not into a million or more by the time it is all over. So, where is Mr. Grennan going to get the money to buy what he needs? Won't happen. Mr. Grennan will be the best solution for Bob if he wins the election, because Mr. Grennan will be a perfect cost/benefit solution to rectify the "lack of experience" on the job problem. Mr. Grennan will work for a pittance just to get his four years. Mr. Grennan was looking to get a job with the Attorney General's Office to get those four more years. He was looking into that because it would be a "cush job" for him if he could get it. That's what he said. He won't be getting a job at the Attorney General's Office. He'll be there for Bob as the only viable solution to the "lack of experience" problem.
As far as retirements go, I don't think you can really count on that for sure. With all the turmoil economically, where the dollar is guaranteed to crash in the coming months, etc., do you really believe that you can count on your retirement being there in the years to come? To me, that is wishful thinking at best. Even one of the Big Three auto makers retirement funds has lost several TRILLION dollars over the last few months. What are all those retired auto workers going to do when they lose their retirement checks because some crooks on Wall Street, the banks, and real estate, have absconded with the money, leaving everything else in complete turmoil? No, I don't think you have much control over your retirement at all, but you may think you do at this time. Time will tell, however, and the future does not look very good with respect to retirement funds, not to mention the strain on entitlement programs with the "baby boomers" just starting to lay their claims on some of that sinking money pot. When the dollar crashes, and the government gives you the opportunity to trade in, let's say, five old dollars for one new North American Union "AMERO," you will have again been "ripped off" by those in Washington, D.C., and you will personally not be able to do anything about it. The politicians in D.C. who were voted into office will have lined their and their friends' pockets with your money - at your expense. They could care less about you and your retirement, and you can do absolutely nothing about it. Mark my words on this. I definitely don't know it all, but anyone paying the slightest bit of attention to what is going on, with their eyes open, can see it coming. Go ahead, GOOGLE the Amero currency when you have time.
Sat 11/1/2008 4:28 PM:
Sat 11/1/2008 5:14 PM:
I'm confused. I have read this website several times, talked to you
about your principles, read what you have published and not once have I
known you to bash anyone. We as Americans have a right to voice our
opinion, just like anonymous. All I have seen or heard you do is inform
the public of the facts, whether it be lack of experience or corrupt
activity. Something that far too many politicians refuse to do because
they are afraid of what might happen to their precious campaign. You
care more about people than the election and that's something that makes
you stand out from the crowd. Keep up the good work.
Answer: Thank for your mail, Tosha.
Sun 11/2/2008 9:17 PM:
I was up at Lake Loreli this last week and found that one of my brother's long-time friends lived just two doors down from an active supporter of my campaign. I stopped in to see him and his family and visit for a while. The one nugget I came away with is this. He has some friends who are missionaries in Kenya, Africa, at this time. They have told him that it is no secret in Kenya that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, Africa. They know that from being directly involved in that country's daily life. And, if you read the recent news about Barack Obama's family there in Kenya, the powers that be have stopped all people from interviewing the family members.
Now, if Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen, then he is Constitutionally not a valid candidate for the office of President. Sound familiar to another person who is not a valid candidate for office? The problem we have in this country right now is that the "rule of law" is no longer valid in America. The rule of law has been discarded in exchange for party mob rule. Which ever party is in control of a local or national political arena, that is the law that will be applied, or the existing law(s) will be changed to reflect, and favor, the mob in control. I'm telling you, we are all in trouble no matter which party one belongs to with this kind of "rule." Our country, which has been known as one that follows the rule of law, is no more. It is gone. Since it is gone, we will all collectively lose in the end. It's only a matter of time. That's my humble opinion.
Wed 11/5/2008 1:49 PM:
I am not so sure I understand all the implications of this ruling.
Explain, please, when you can. I hate it that you didn't win, but you
made a hell of a standing! A little more publicizing of your campaign a
few months earlier could very well have mad a difference. GOOD SHOW with
So, please tell me, does it take the total collapse of the dollar and our way of life to wake people up?
Then you have people voting "straight tickets" just because they are "Republican" or "Democrat." My property taxes keep going up, and the more they go up, the less high school graduates can read and write, much less give change at a fast-food restaurant. Give them a couple of pennies to round off your change to a nickel or dime, and see what kind of "log jam" you will have on your hands. I'm not kidding! Try it sometime!