It’s Official, Robert Lee Has Won!

Robert Lee  The mandated auto recount of the absentee ballots in the GOP primary race for Sussex County Sheriff’s race is done.   The Department of elections has concluded through the recount that the numbers reported on primary night were accurate.

I had hope to be able to simply post this as a pro-Lee post, but of course the fanatical Jeff Christopher seems unwilling to accept defeat and the will of the voters like a man. Instead Jeff Christopher

cry baby  after learning the results of the recount has had his law firm, the same law firm that handle the case of his law suit that cost tax payers thousands of dollars, to get on the radio immediately and claim voter fraud. Isn’t it odd that they didn’t mention this prior to the announcement of the recount results? Just in case it went their way.

Jeff Christopher and his supporters talk to no end about our system of government and our rule of law, and every time it goes against them they cry foul and corruption. Face Mr. Christopher you lost, now ride off into the sunset and leave this God forsaken place as you promised.


51 Comments on "It’s Official, Robert Lee Has Won!"

  1. dogeatdog says:

    Jeff will not except defeat. Just as Jeff did not accept the court ruling. Time to go gracefully!! I’m waiting to see the conspiracy theory’s start. Maybe bigfoot will be called to testify in court on the where a bout’s of his absentee ballot?? Good Bye and move on! LEE is our man he won fair and square!

  2. JS says:

    When will Christopher’s lies stop? First,” I’m nothing like Bob Reed. I don’t want a county police force”. Second, “I’m the Chief Law Enforcement Officer In Sussex County, Third, “If I lose I’m leaving this God forsaken State”,, Fourth “We’ll see about the recount, after that, the people have spoken”, Fifth, there must have been vote fraud, I couldn’t lose.Sixth, I’ve had so many people call me that I’m considering a write in campaign. Enough already. The vast, vast majority of Sussex County now belongs to the ABC Party (Anybody but Christopher) .

  3. karma says:

    The sheriff of nuttingham and his band of fruity nutcakes already started the conspiracy theories. Since he lost the primary I don’t believe he can be a write in.It will be good to see the yellow litter gone from our roadways.

    Congratulations to the primary winner Robert T. Lee.

  4. Rick says:

    The vote was very close to fifty-fifty; the partisan vote was evenly divided.

    Of course, 80% of Sussex Republicans had absolutely no interest whatsoever in who ran for sheriff. That is the real story.

  5. fightingbluehen says:

    Yeah, I was listening to the Jim Rash Show on WGMD this morning, and someone from the law firm Murray Law,LLC called in to the show asking for witnesses to some apparent voting problems in the Christopher/Lee race for sheriff.
    Not sure why the person from Murray Law,LLC didn’t advise the people to call the Department of Elections. I can only guess that the person from Murray Law,LLC figured that the voters would be better served by Murray Law,LLC than the Department of Elections.

    Hey ,isn’t Murray Law,LLC the same firm that represents Sheriff Christopher?

  6. dogeatdog says:

    This is down right crazy!! Sounds like a game with children. You beat me the first time now we’ll play best out of three game. YOU LOST!!

  7. not surprised says:

    Yawn, typical sociopath.

    This just shows what Ron Samms knew in 2010, Christopher isn’t a republican or a conservative.

    If he runs a write in campaign, he’ll lose, democrats and independents won’t vote for him, he’ll split the republican vote and Beau Gooch will be Sheriff.

  8. Honi Soit says:

    If Christopher wants to wage a write-in campaign, he’ll have to file a Write-in Candidate Declaration by 4:30 on September 30. If he doesn’t and if voters write in his name anyway, the votes won’t count.

  9. jack says:

    Sherriff Crying Christopher………………….

  10. karma says:

    thanks for that info Honi. I listened to Christopher and then Murray LLC . Christopher claims he didn’t instigate the proposed investigation. Murray LLC says Christopher is the one who brought it to the law firms attention. So which is it, wwhy isn’t the law firm telling these people to contact the elections commission. Why is the only primary they’re making issue over is Christopher’s. If they were turned away as they claim why aren’t they saying anything about the other primaries Republicans could vote on. Something stinks more than a truck load of rotten mackerel.

  11. Itsawonderfulworld says:

    It’s a great day to live in Sussex County! I’m sure Christopher’s feelings are hurt as well as his ego. The voter frauds theorists will be chirping as always. I would expect nothing less. Sorry but the people have spoken! get over it and move on!!!!

  12. JS says:

    Interesting that only Christopher supporters were turned away. How on God’s green earth would any election worker know who the voter was going to vote for. If someone showed up and said “I’m an R”
    how would you know to turn him/her away because they were going to vote for Christopher? Since the vote was 50/50 there should have been as many people who were Lee supporters that were turned away.None of them called Lee to complain. Also, listen to the radio blurb from the Murray “law firm”. Both people who Murray claims to have interviewed apparently were allowed to vote after a phone call was placed to the Dept of Elections. No one was denied the right to vote (if they were smart enough to register / change their registration properly) Christopher is so scared that he will be out of the spotlight that he will do anything. “Loser” is an appropriate description.

  13. Old Sussex County Native says:

    The fact that he is now entertaining a write in campaign, or accepting being the Independent Party candidate clearly shows his ego, and that he never was at heart a republican. He’s for himself, power for himself, and oblivious to history. He picks and chooses particles from history, and does not accept that we have had four constitutions, he does not accept that all “conservators of the peace” have their duties defined by the Legislature, and makes up crazy stuff that all NATIVE Delawareans know is not true. He was not stripped of anything. He never had those powers when he took office. He is, to me, now approaching the radical kook category…

  14. Frank Knotts says:

    FBH, Patrick Murray also called the Susan Monday Show. The reason he wants people to call his law firm and not the election commission, is so they can manipulate and get the story straight before they send them to the commission. These people are anything but law abiding citizens, if Jeff Christopher was a law abiding citizens then he would abide by the results of a fair election and the mandated recount.
    I have stood the polls in the 35th for many years now, and there are always people who show up to find that their names are not on the list, or that they have come to the wrong polling place, this year had the added confusion of redistricting that changed some polling places for people, none of this rises to voter fraud.
    Yes Murray is the same law firm that cost tax payers thousands of dollars on Christopher’s losing law suit.
    I would hope that the few honorable people who helped during the campaign would now distance themselves from Christopher. The Christopher ship has hit the iceberg and is slowly sinking, and these people are just too fanatical or too stubborn to get in the lifeboats and row away before being sucked under by the USS Christopher.
    Jeff Christopher just became Al Gore!

  15. Itsawonderfulworld says:

    Well said by all of the above. The kook in Chief Doug Beatty on WGMD drools over Christopher and calls everyone else nuts, idiots etc. He needs to stop drinking the kool aid.. Christopher’s quest has been about power and ego. He’s a loose cannon. That my friends is what people are afraid of. He needs to man up, except that the people have spoken and ride off into the sunset. And take Barney with him!

  16. JS says:

    Old Sussex County Native, it is too late for him to run as a member of the Independent Party. The deadline for a minor party candidate to declare was 9/02. Christopher’s name will not appear on the ballot. The only thing registering as a write in by 9/30 gets him is that write in votes for him will be counted. If he doesn’t register by 9/30 a write in vote for him would be ignored.

  17. Tony Stark says:

    So what was State Vice Chair, Nellie Jordan, doing whispering in Jeff Christopher’s ear during the recount???

  18. Justsaying says:

    So I am not the rant type of guy but enough is enough. I am fed up with the bias of the Sussex County. In 2010, when COD beat Mike Castle the tea party movement and this involved were elated. When talks of Castle launching a write in came up they basted him and said he needed to accept the vote and he did.

    In 2012, it was Bodenweiser knocking off Booth and again people talked about a write-in and Booth was gracious and exce

  19. Old Sussex County Native says:

    What are you “Just Sayin’?” — What the Hell is biased about abiding by the election system we have had throughout the modern era?
    Even Nixon accepted his defeat by Kennedy which was very, very close and had the dignity to tell his advisors that he would not contest the election, and he accepted the results.

  20. Dave says:

    Ok, I stand corrected. I thought that all the Republicans in Sussex County were whack jobs. From the results it appears that only relatively small number of them are. Assuming that the Christopher voters were more likely to vote since they had the greatest investment in Christopher, 5,088 votes out of a total of ~51,700 Sussex County GOP means that only about 10% of the GOP in Sussex are fruitcakes. That would agree with the usual statistical averages that the loudest screamers are a actually a very small percentage of the whole. Still, that 10% taints the GOP brand and let’s face it, you can’t continue to shoot yourself in the foot without ultimately winding up lame.

  21. justsaying says:

    To finish my post

    Booth did not form a write-in even after Bodenweiser dropped out. He had integrity and went with the voters decision which was to replace him.

    But Sheriff Christopher refuses to show that integrity. He continues to push his agenda. The vote is down. Yet the State nor the Sussex GOP has asked him to respect the vote. Thats the bias, the people who wanted the party to embrace COD and Bodenweiser when they won are not going to call for a stop to this or embrace the Republican candidate Robert Lee as choosen by the voters?

    Furthermore, Christpher wants to serve as the deputy including serving papers for the Courts but1 also wants arrest powers… Seems hypocritical to serve those positions when he clearly continues to challenge the Courts and their rulings and complains about the laws. How are you going to defend the State Constitution when you don’t believe in it? How do you preach enforcing the law when you don’t want to follow them. It is time for the GOP leadership to step up and end the bias and lets focus on winning elections by supporting our candidates as they were selected by the primaries and democracy!

  22. fightingbluehen says:

    “FBH, Patrick Murray also called the Susan Monday Show. The reason he wants people to call his law firm and not the election commission, is so they can manipulate and get the story straight before they send them to the commission.”

    The fact that Murray Law,LLC, in conjunction with or not in conjunction with Sheriff Christopher, tried to solicit communications with potential witnesses to voter discrepancies that could influence the result of the election, at least gives the appearance of impropriety ,and could at worst be a conflict of interest by Murray Law,LLC.
    Not to mention that they used the radio to do it, which could get the Federal Communications Commission involved.

    Of course this is all just conjecture for the topic of discussion at this point.

  23. Rick says:

    …the loudest screamers are a actually a very small percentage of the whole…

    It applies both ways. There just happened to be twenty more anti-Christopher screamers than pro-Christopher screamers. And 80% of Sussex Republicans had no interest whatsoever.

    …that 10% taints the GOP brand and let’s face it, you can’t continue to shoot yourself in the foot without ultimately winding up lame.

    Really? Well, let’s see how many Democrats are elected in Sussex this November.

    It’s funny how Frank and so many of his sycophants on this misnamed site celebrate Christopher’s razor-thin loss. The name of this blog is “Delaware Right.” Presumably, the implication is that this site was intended to present views of the political right, i.e., the conservative position.

    In a political context, here is the definition of “conservative.”

    1. Holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.

    The traditional role of the sheriff as a “conservator of the peace” stems from English Common Law, upon which Delaware law was based.

    1.Holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.

    It is generally recognized that the English judge and legal scholar, Sir William Blackstone, effectively and thoroughly described the tenets of English Common Law in his four-volume treatise “Commentaries on the Laws of England.” Here, he describes the traditional role of the local sheriffs;

    “As the keeper of the king’s peace, both by common law and special commission, he is the first man in the county, and superior in rank to any nobleman therein, during his office. He may apprehend, and commit to prison, all persons who break the peace, or attempt to break it: and may bind any one in a recognizance to keep the king’s peace. He may, and is bound ex officio [officially] to, pursue and take all traitors, murderers, felons, and other misdoers, and commit them to jail for safe custody. He is also to defend his county against any of the king’s enemies when they come into the land: and for this purpose, as well as for keeping the peace and pursuing felons, he may command all the people of his county to attend him; which is called the posse comitatus, or power of the county: which summons every person above fifteen years old, and under the degree of a peer, is bound to attend upon warning, under pain of fine and imprisonment. But though the sheriff is thus the principal conservator of the peace in his county, yet, by the express directions of the great charter, he, together with the constable, coroner, and certain other officers of the king, are forbidden to hold any pleas of the crown, or, in other words, to try any criminal offense. For it would be highly unbecoming, that the executioners of justice should be also the judges; should impose, as well as levy, fines and amercements; should one day condemn a man to death, and personally execute him the next. Neither may he act as an ordinary justice of the peace during the time of his office: for this would be equally inconsistent; he being in many respects the servant of the justices.

    IN his ministerial capacity the sheriff is bound to execute all process issuing from the king’s courts of justice. In the commencement of civil causes, he is to serve the writ, to arrest, and to take bail; when the cause comes to trial, he must summon and return the jury; when it is determined, he must see the judgment of the court carried into execution. In criminal matters, he also arrests and imprisons, he returns the jury, he has the custody of the delinquent, and he executes the sentence of the court, though it extend to death itself.

    As the king’s bailiff, it is his business to preserve the rights of the king within his bailiwick; for so his county is frequently called in the writs: a word introduced by the princes of the Norman line; in imitation of the French, whose territory is divided into bailiwicks, as that of England into counties. He must seize to the king’s use all lands devolved to the crown by attainder or escheat; must levy all fines and forfeitures; must seize and keep all waifs, wrecks, estrays, and the like, unless they be granted to some subject; and must also collect the king’s rents within his bailiwick, if commanded by process from the exchequer.”

    And one can presume that this was the basis upon which the framers of the original Delaware Constitution of 1776;

    “ART. 25. The common law of England, as-well as so much of the statute law as has been heretofore adopted in practice in this State, shall remain in force, unless they shall be altered by a future law of the legislature; such parts only excepted as are repugnant to the rights and privileges contained in this constitution, and the declaration of rights, &c., agreed to by this convention.”

    In the 1776 constitution, there no mention whatsoever of the sheriffs powers. Thus, they are implied to be those as described by Blackstone, under English common law.

    In 1831, a new constitution was adopted. From Article VII;

    “…and the treasurer, secretary, prothonotaries, registers, recorders, sheriffs, and coroners shall, by virtue of their offices, be conservators thereof within the counties respectively where they reside.”

    Again, the sheriff is deemed a conservator of the peace (and again, as defined by Blackstone, since there is no wording altering the English common law definition) by virtue of [his] their offices…

    And finally, the Delaware Constitution of 1897~

    “Article XV, § 1. Conservators of the peace.

    Section 1. The Chancellor, Judges and Attorney-General shall be conservators of the peace throughout the State; and the Sheriffs shall be conservators of the peace within the counties respectively in which they reside.”

    Exactly where has the definition of “conservator of the peace” been changed, not only from the 1831 constitution, but from the “common law” constitution of 1776, or even from the Blackstone’s era itself?

    The answer; it was never changed. That is, it wasn’t changed until the Socialist-Democrat-dominated legislature was somehow able to amend the constitution without bothering with the triviality of an actual amendment. For all practical purposes, they simply erased a portion of the Delaware Constitution, while claiming that the offending words were not words at all, in that they had no meaning; or, at least, the meaning of the words didn’t fit what they wanted them to mean.

    The whole purpose, within English common law and within the Delaware Constitution(s), of a sheriff as “conservator of the peace” was to give autonomy to the counties. While the sheriff(s) had to comply with state law, they were not answerable to state authorities as-per the execution of their general duties. This falls within the realm of what is generally-known as the separation of powers.

    Like 80% of Sussex Republicans, I couldn’t care less who the sheriff is, as far as the ability to exercise his duties of office. But, I am a conservative. Again, let’s revisit the definition of a “conservative”…

    “1. Holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.”

    Frank, there is nothing conservative about turning your back on three-hundred-years of legal history. Like the majority of those who post on this blog, you adopt the so-called liberal position, and by “liberal,” I mean in the current political context, i.e., adherence to the statist or big-government
    perspective on the function of government. You essentially support, and quite vehemently, a rogue legislature that amended the constitution without amending it.

    “Delaware Right?” What a joke. Whatever this meager site represents, it certainly isn’t representative of conservative political philosophy.

  24. Gerald says:

    I don’t have to nothing. Rick said it! Thanks Rick

  25. Dunleve says:

    Rick, What section of the Delaware Constitution are you referring to. Christopher supporters always put: Article XV.

    Write it correctly: Article XV – MISCELLANEOUS


    So important, its an afterthought.

  26. JS says:

    I swear that the Christopher people must make up this crap as they go along. Rick, that is a nice “cut and paste” from Blackstone but it has absolutely nothing to do with the office of sheriff in Delaware today. It is ludicrous to believe that Jeff Christopher thinks that he can trace his lineage to colonial Britain when the very first Delaware constitution doesn’t even mention the word “sheriff”. By time the office is mentioned in the Delaware Constitution of 1792 we had fought a war to become Americans. We were no longer British, we were Americans and already becoming an amalgam of cultures and ethnicities. We were free to adopt laws and institutions that worked for us; not for Britain, not for Maryland, not for Pennsylvania but for us as Delawareans. And we did. Why would anyone believe that the office of sheriff, set forth in the Constitution of 1792, mirrored Britain’s when we, at the same time, we were setting up a court system and government vastly different. The cornerstone of conservatism is the right of the states to be self determining within the frame work of the United States. The people of the State of Delaware have always had the right to establish offices and their limits without regard to “Well, Maryland does it this way”. So what?
    We speak in reverential tones of our forefathers and their view of America. That is fine for our federal constitution but the people of the State of Delaware have adopted, and then discarded, 3 constitutions before the constitutional convention of 1897 which has given us our present, albeit much amended, constitution.
    As Blackstone is to English common law, a jurist named Victor Wooley is to Delaware law. In 1906, just 9 years after the adoption of the Constitution of 1897, Wooly wrote THE treatise on Delaware law. His book, (a copy of which you can find here ) is cited by Delaware Courts to this day. Chapter 2, Sec. 93 describes the duties of a Delaware Sheriff. Specifically Wooley states, “It is the duty of the Sheriff of each county to attend the several courts of law and equity during every term thereof in his county, and as the executive officer of the court to execute all writs, orders and decrees.” That is a Delaware sheriff under our present constitution. Wooley wrote that in 1906. It isn’t coincidental then that New Castle County began its first police patrols in 1908.
    A “conservative” may be bound to history, but he isn’t bound to make it up.

  27. karma says:

    Rick read Delaware Code Title 10 Chapter 21 as far back as 1915 the General Assembly made it very clear; Sheriffs’ and Deputy Sheriffs’ “SHALL NOT HAVE ANY ARREST AUTHORITY”.

    § 2103 Sheriffs and regular deputies.

    Sheriffs and deputy sheriffs shall not have any arrest authority. However, sheriffs and deputy sheriffs may take into custody and transport a person when specifically so ordered by a judge or commissioner of Superior Court.

    23 Del. Laws, c. 60, § 13; Code 1915, § 1443; Code 1935, § 1602; 10 Del. C. 1953, § 2103; 55 Del. Laws, c. 85, § 32K; 70 Del. Laws, c. 186, § 1; 78 Del. Laws, c. 266, § 16.;

  28. Frank Knotts says:

    Rick, you need to find a new argument, since that great long comment you posted is totally irrelevant, just like Jeff Christopher. The primary was held according to the laws of the state, an auto recount was held, according to the laws of the state, the election was certified today according to the laws of the state, the only people not willing to abide by the laws of the state, are the very people that have for the past four years spent every waking moment of their lives talking about protecting the laws of the state.
    Many of Christopher’s most ardent supporters, at least the rational ones, are advising him not to do the write-in campaign, some are speaking publically, others privately, they are getting in the lifeboats and rowing like hell to get away from the sinking ship.
    First it was, “if I lose the law suit I will leave this God forsaken place”, then it was “if the voters in the primary choose my opponent, then that is the will of the people”, now it is,” not enough people voted in the primary so I have to do a write in and then that will be the will of the people.”
    Christopher and the supporters who will not accept the loss are demonstrating exactly the type of people they are.

  29. Geezer says:

    “Christopher and the supporters who will not accept the loss are demonstrating exactly the type of people they are.”

    Yes, they are demonstrating that they are NOT FROM DELAWARE. The “conservative” position about sheriffs in Delaware would be to continue the tradition of the sheriff serving court papers, as that is all sheriffs have done in living memory (with apologies to the 100-year-olds who may be reading this).

    People like Rick are actually radicals, not conservatives — cranky, friendless jerks unloved by all. In an earlier age, kids set flaming bags of dog poop on their porches, rang the doorbell and ran away.

  30. Rick says:

    Rick, that is a nice “cut and paste” from Blackstone but it has absolutely nothing to do with the office of sheriff in Delaware today.

    Of course I “cut and past[ed]” from Blackstone. What should I have done, transcribe it?

    The Delaware constitution, including the legal system, is based upon English common law, and the sheriff is still called a “conservator of the peace” in the Delaware constitution.

    Rick, you need to find a new argument, since that great long comment you posted is totally irrelevant, just like Jeff Christopher.

    I’m glad to see that you admit that the Delaware constitution is now “irrelevant.” I agree.

    I am not a Christopher supporter, per se. Particularly now, since the legislature has succeeded in convincing some of us, and the courts, that words don’t mean what they say. So, who cares who the sheriff is (80% of Sussex Republicans certainly don’t)? Gooch, Lee, Christopher, what’s the difference?

    Frank, you are not a conservative. If you were, you wouldn’t celebrate the trashing of the people’s document. You call this blog “Delaware Right’…simply read the majority of the comments, and you’ll see that your site is fully ensconced in the left-of-center world of the malleable moderate, who stand for nothing other than “moderation” itself. Which is essentially a pro-incrementalist position (always leading left), and anathema to conservatism.

  31. karma says:

    “Yes, they are demonstrating that they are NOT FROM DELAWARE.”

    Geezer frighteningly there are lifetime residents of Delaware who support Christopher. The pistol shootin RWNJ who thinks she will be elected the next governor is a perfect example.

  32. Rick says:

    People like Rick are actually radicals, not conservatives — cranky, friendless jerks unloved by all. In an earlier age, kids set flaming bags of dog poop on their porches, rang the doorbell and ran away.…Fatso

    How would you know that I am “unloved by all?” Oh, I forgot…as a smartass liberal know-it-all talk radio host, you are endowed with an innate gift of superhuman prescience.

    Okay Fatso, you’ve again demonstrated your “liberal” manners…now, go eat Philadelphia.

  33. JS says:

    “The Delaware constitution, including the legal system, is based upon English common law, and the sheriff is still called a “conservator of the peace” in the Delaware constitution.”

    Simply because something is “based on” something else doesn’t mean that it is the same as or performs the same function. Maryland uses their sheriff for police duties, Rhode Island, on the other hand, charges its sheriff’s with “serving the judiciary” by being responsible for courthouse and cell block security as well serving process. Is Rhode Island wrong because its sheriff don’t perform police work? Of course not. Our Supreme Court ruled that, under the Constitution of 1897, the power of arrest was not a “core duty” of a Delaware sheriff. There very well may have been a vestige of arrest power but, by 1897, the sheriff was an officer of the court, serving the court. Because the power of arrest is not a core duty of the sheriff, the legislature was free to pass a law saying that the sheriff has no power of arrest. To suggest that “conservator of the peace” confers police and arrest power on the office of Sheriff is to suggest that, among others, the Attorney General and the Chancellor of Chancery Court also have police and arrest powers. Not hardly. Conservator of the Peace, in Delaware, is not a job description but rather describes a groupof offices, that, acting together, promote the public welfare.
    If Christopher had not been so ham handed in his grab for power by declaring himself the supreme law enforcement official in Sussex County, he very well could have begun moving the office of Sheriff in another direction. Now, for all his lies and bluster, IF the Cult of Christopher somehow succeeds in this write in campaign, come January Christopher is going to be serving papers and conducting sales. He’ll never do anything other than that while he holds the office… and he has no one to blame except himself.

  34. fightingbluehen says:

    “To suggest that “conservator of the peace” confers police and arrest power on the office of Sheriff is to suggest that, among others, the Attorney General and the Chancellor of Chancery Court also have police and arrest powers.”

    Just like the comic book character, “Judge Dredd”.

    That dude is cool.

  35. Dave says:

    Moderates are neither left nor right. Heck they aren’t even in the center. Mostly they are solutionists. They see problems and seek solutions, recognizing that there isn’t any free lunch. They seek a balance between the needs of the individual and the needs of the many. They search for safety without compromising liberty. Traffic lights were invented by moderates. Social Security was created by moderates who recognized the need for basic level of subsistence for everyone. It wasn’t intended as the be all, end all for retirement. They recognize that it is ridiculous to attempt to deport 12,000,000 people who are here illegally and that as a nation we must find a way to accommodate them and their children into the social and civil fabric of the nation, while at the same time creating a more secure border. They recognize that reasonable constraints on firearms are in the nations best interests both for the individual and the population at large. There are so many things that moderates believe, understand, and are willing to do, the story is endless.

    But one thing they don’t believe binaryism. They are not literalists. They don’t believe that something is all of this or all of that. If anything they are pragmatic about what we can do, regardless of what we should be and they attempt to balance the shoulds with the cans and are cognizant that for all benefits to society there is a cost, not just in dollars but in all aspects of society. They recognize that constraints on what we do and what we have is the price we pay for civilization and without civilization we are no better than insignificant tribes constantly at war with each other, failing to understand that they need each other to create and maintain a civilization.

    But you wouldn’t know that because for you the phrase COP can only mean one thing. You never even entertain the possibility that you could be wrong; that there could be different meanings. You can’t conceive of anything else simply because you wear blinders and are held hostage by your own paradigms. It must suck to be you and have to live like that.

    I am proud to be a moderate.

  36. Itsawonderfulworld says:

    I’m right there with you Dave,

  37. Frank Knotts says:

    Rick, like many who can’t face the fact that Christopher lost, now plays the spin and deflect game.
    Rick the state constitution is not irrelevant, but your argument for what a sheriff is, is irrelevant, because the two candidates left in the race for the office are willing to serve in its current form.
    So you Rick and your argument are irrelevant, because you are debating shadows. The same as I urged people to move past Castle after that primary, I encourage people to move past Christopher and his supporters who want only to cling to the sinking ship until it drags them under.
    The legislature (elected by the people) spoke on the issue, the courts (appointed by people elected by the people) spoke on the issue, the voters in the GOP (who are the people) spoke on the issue, and in every arena Christopher’s agenda failed. So Jeff Christopher and people like Rick would have us believe that everyone is wrong, but them.

  38. Itsawonderfulworld says:

    You da man, Frank!

  39. Old Sussex County Native says:

    To JS: Believe it or not, even in Maryland there are counties, such as Price Georges County, where the Sheriff’s DO NOT do police work, they serve the Judiciary as officers of the court. It is County by County in Maryland, some do have Sheriff’s that do police work, and others do not. Minnesota is the same, they have huge areas of the state where the County Sheriffs DO NOT do police work. Same is true in Pennsylvania, there are Counties where the Sheriff does police work, and Counties where they do not. There is no such thing as a Sheriff in Connecticut. The office of Sheriff was done away with some years ago. Sheriffs in Hawaii are appointed by the Public Safety Dept., and don’t do much of any police work either. Christopher is a damn idiot and being untruthful when he says Delaware is the only state where the Sheriff’s don’t have police powers. Remember folks, HE IS NOT A NATIVE TO DELAWARE, and the odds are he’s never studied Delaware History. Us old natives had to take Delaware History in the 9th grade, a YEAR LONG course. which helps us old geezers to know a thing or two about our own state. The biggest embarassment is how many times our State had to re-write Constitutions because of hideous things, such as the oath elected officials had to take swearing an allegiance to the Holy Trinity (thereby preventing Jews from serving in public office.) The Feds struck down many things in our defective Constitutions many times! Embarassing, yes — that’s why we are on our 4th Constitution now, the heavily amended one of 1897. Kinda hard to strap on all this Constitution rhetoric when we have had so many!!!

  40. Rick says:

    Rick, like many who can’t face the fact that Christopher lost, now plays the spin and deflect game.

    What? I couldn’t care less that Christopher lost. What’s the difference who the sheriff is, after the illegal conduct of the legislature. My problem is with the constitution- or, more properly, what is left of it.

    By-the-way. Did you read my post re; English common law, the historical role of the sheriff, etc.? If so, please explain to me specifically how what I posted was wrong.

  41. JS says:

    If the legislature acted illegally, why isn’t Christopher arresting them?

  42. waterpirate says:

    To portend one self a ” constitutional expert ” with no higher learning or published works on the subject is just laughable. It smacks of ego and too much free time on ones hands. At the end of the day, the court spoke. The only person with enough juice to re define a word was Bill Clinton, and Christopher is not .

  43. Frank Knotts says:

    Rick, we have had this discussion, anything prior to the ratification of the 1897 Delaware constitution is irrelevant, and if you have to go outside of that document to define COP, then you have admitted that the definition is not within the document, and things that are not in the document can be neither constitutional, nor unconstitutional.
    Your argument is just regurgitation of Christopher’s argument, which has been deemed flawed by two courts and a GOP primary. If he does the write-in it will be deemed flawed by the general election process and Beau Gooch will be sheriff.
    And what really scares me and should scare every citizen of Delaware, is what will Christopher and his “POSSE” do when they lose the writ-in? Will it be time for the revolution so many of them long for? Is Christopher just pushing so that he gets some kind of stand off like the one at the Bundy Ranch? Some of these people are not completely stable and I fear that they are loading up ready for the call from their leader Jeff Christopher, and others may decide to act on their own.
    This nation is based on the rule of law, the very laws Christopher claims to want to protect, well he can protect them best by respecting them and stop playing the child!

  44. Oathkeeper1 says:

    Frank you’re IDIOT and the other jackwagons that follow you and post all the negatives about the Sheriff’s office and the Constitution are IDIOTS also. You say that everything prior to the ratification of the Constitution is irrelevant then your stating history is irrelevant and hence anything prior today is irrelevant then you are irrelevant since you don’t exist. All of you that HATE Jeff Christopher and only voted for Lee because of that have no real reason to have voted for Lee in the first place. You can’t give one viable reason to have voted for Lee, that is what is wrong with the GOP in this state and the country. Lee will do nothing for the people of Sussex county neither will Gooch so if you people want to continue moving Forward (a socialist term) then God help you because neither of these men will.

  45. karma says:

    Oathkeeper1 go back to the oath keeper organization ask them why they didn’t do a goddamn thing to support your sheriffs defense fund. They claim to have 30,000 dues paying members putting 1.2 million annually into their coffers.
    You like all the other jockstraps oops sorry I meant supporters use the same lame ass excuse. Anyone who didn’t vote for your Constitutional GOD hates him.

  46. Frank Knotts says:

    I would like to direct everyone’s attention to the comment above from “OATHKEEPER”, this is a shining example of a Jeff Christopher supporter. One does wonder if they are a registered Republican and were able to vote in the primary.
    But notice the name calling and threatening tone of the comment, this is indicative (oathkeeper, that means it is similar) of Jeff Christopher’s entire campaign. It has been about fear mongering and playing to peoples weaknesses.
    Oathkeeper asked for one viable reason to vote for Robert Lee, easy, he will uphold the office of the sheriff in its current form, he will not bring law suits against the county and the state that cost tax payers money, he will not make wild fantastical accusations and claims, he will respect the rule of law, he will fulfill his duties as they are defined, he will not be a constant distraction and nuisance to the people of the county. I know you only asked for one, but I thought this might help you to know that unlike Christopher’s one trick pony act, Lee actually has support for many reasons.
    As for your total lack of any real or personal knowledge of our state’s constitution (seems like you are simply regurgitating Jeffisms) , let me help you.
    No constitution, nor their content is relevant once a new constitution is ratified. No common law definition is relevant once either an issue is addressed within the new constitution, or actual statutory law (Oathkeeper, that means laws passed by a legislature), has been passed according to the parameters of the new constitution. Anything that is not within the constitution is free to be addressed by statutory law (Oathkeeper see previous definition) and thus is not unconstitutional.
    This is exactly what happened with Christopher’s case, and why his entire argument on this issue is flawed and failed.
    Maybe Oathkeeper if you would come out of the bunker once in a while and go to a library or talk to average citizens, instead of only going to 9/12 meetings and bean growing seminars and courses on what to keep in your bug-out bag, you would be more open to logic, rather than the fear mongering tactics of a fanatic.

  47. Frank Knotts says:

    Karma, great point. For all their talk Christopher had no real outside funding, at least none he reported.

  48. karma says:

    Frank the majority of the defense fund contributions came from Maryland not Delaware.
    The one guy from Delaware who helped raise more defense money than anyone else was thrown under the bus by the johnny come lately sheriff supporters.
    The guy finally figured that out after one of these lunatics filed a false child abuse report against him and his wife.

  49. JS says:

    Oathkeeper1, what we get with Lee is honesty. Jeff Christopher has told so many lies that he can’t keep count. Why can’t the Cult of Christopher understand that we are not operating under the Constitution of 1776 any longer. A constitutional convention, resulting in a new state constitution, has been called 3 times since then. This has nothing to do with being anti constitution. It has everything to do with the rule of law. You are supporting a man who voluntarily shared the stage with a man advocating putting women on the front line of the Clive Bundy standoff
    The same night he willingly took the stage with an identified white supremacist who advocates secession of the southern states and identifies “Dixie” as our National Anthem. Christopher is an egomaniac. He claims to stand for the common man but Jeff Christopher only stands for Jeff Christopher. He knows he has no chance of winning a write in campaign but he is telling people that he is going to “wreck” the election.

Got something to say? Go for it!