[Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

Stephen A. Frye s.frye at verizon.net
Thu Feb 14 09:31:21 MST 2013


Absolutely.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 7:57 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

 

You're missing the point. Do you think Dorner and the LAPD would have
received the same tenor of coverage if he were white and his victims were
black?

On 2/14/2013 10:50 AM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

Had Dorner lived, do you believe he would have gone unpunished?

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 7:10 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

 

What LAPD is or was is irreverent to my point as I am talking about a
national cultural shift. You are free to accuse me of going off on a tangent
to some extend and I'll plead guilty. It doesn't matter that you don't care
about color. If you disagree with Obama you are a racist by their
definition. Sorry but again by today's definition of racism, all those
normally illegal things are perfectly justified if they are against whites
in order to shift responsibility away from black criminals. To a lesser
extent that same thing applies to Muslim radicals. They are not even called
terrorists by this administration. That is just the way modern politics are
now and I think that was the seed of John's point I was trying to bring out.
Again liberals, including this administration, tolerate certain crimes.

On 2/14/2013 9:48 AM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

I knew that the race card would be played.  But set that aside for a moment,
and just look - in excruciating detail - at the history of the LAPD.  Then
come back and claim again that the racism there was a perverted perception.

 

I don't care what color the victim may be, and I don't care what crime he or
she committed.  Planting evidence, framing, lying in sworn testimony is
wrong.  And it was blatant.  Doesn't excuse what he did, but just maybe up
until the time he started his crime spree he really was a victim.

 

Racism is alive and well in this country - and don't feed me that
affirmative action crap line.  I don't know a single person, not one, that
has lost  or not gotten a job because of affirmative action.  I do know
people who weren't sold gas, or groceries, or given a job, or given a
promotion because they were black, or Mexican, or something else.  I have
stood in line in supposedly tolerant California and watched a rental place
refuse to rent something to a black man, and then rent it to the white man
behind him.  I have been in a convenience store and heard the owner tell a
black man we don't sell to "niggers".  My son was traveling through the
south on leave from the army and his black friend had to hide in the trunk
before they could buy gas.  So don't preach to me about the "perverted
perceptions" of racism.  I am still searching for that one place where it
doesn't exist.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 6:04 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

 

Agreed. However, I think John has a seed of a valid point in his argument.
There is a mindset that has developed (the offspring of liberal think
independent of Obama although he is one of them) that people are not
responsible for their own behavior. This is especially true for black
criminals who are perceived victims of their perverted definition of racism.
There is also a culture of condoning violence, if it is the right type. This
all combines to breed a devaluation of life and acceptance of violence.
While white on black crime is trumpted by the media as well as politicians
as almost entirely caused by racism, the majority of violent crime is black
on black and receives no attention at all.

On 2/13/2013 6:43 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

All right.  You win.  I painted with too wide a brush.  Mea maxima culpa.
But I stand on my assertion, referring to John's post, that Obama is in no
way causing the Dorner incident.  It is not the 'Obama mind set", he's a
frickin' criminal, with a grudge, on a murder spree.  Unarguable.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 6:25 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

 

Au contraire. Read back to my original assertion. I was responding only to
your (false) assertion that Obama is not tolerating crime. Provably he is
and I have done so.

On 2/12/2013 9:33 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

I am not arguing anything.  I told you I wouldn't go there.  All I am saying
is that there are those who could argue on these points that he is not
responsible.  Not me.  Not me.  Not me.  Not me.  Not me.  I won't go there.
I won't argue it - though I do not believe it is "unarguable".  I sometimes
tend to think that your definition of "unarguable" is:  adj;  Dennis says
so, so it is absolute.

 

You are carrying this to ridiculous extremes.  Read back my ORIGINAL claim
that Obama is not causing the crime in this country - specifically citing
John's post regarding Dorner here in California.  He referred to Dorner's
(and the consequential) actions as the "Obama mindset".  How about
addressing that for a while.  Give "unarguable" a rest, or at least apply it
to that situation.  That one I will argue - unarguable or not.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 5:45 PM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

 

Come on Stephen. Voter intimidation is a violation of law. How can one argue
it is not? Selling guns to known gun runners is a violation of the law. How
can you argue it is not?

On 2/12/2013 6:26 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

I don't know that all of this has happened since Obama.  I think a lot of it
has been in the works for a long time.

 

Your claim abut that which is unarguable.  For many it is very arguable.
Though I do agree is fruitless to argue with either position.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 5:44 AM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

 

I think you are back peddling or at least deflecting. I said nothing about
torture or any debatable crimes. I am talking about blatant violations of
the law (provable) that Holder has said he will ignore (such as voter
intimidation by the New Black Panthers) or the now infamous Fast and
Furious. Holder has publicly stated he will not prosecute certain black on
white crimes. I am not aware of any law violations knowingly tolerated by
Bush. However, if you are, then let me know and I will equally condemn them.

I agree with your general assessment that Obama is not responsible for
crimes. However, it is not arguable that the liberal mindset of PC and
"tolerance" (except for those with whom they disagree) has had a
debilitating effect on our culture in general and Obama has taken that
mindset to new highs to the ultimate detriment of everyone.

On 2/11/2013 10:38 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

Sorry, I won't buy into this.  If I do, then I also buy into Bush committing
war crimes, and we are still even.

 

I will not get into the political battle of Holder, Obama, Bush, torture,
none of that.  No one can win those discussions.

 

And I still assert my original point.  Obama is not responsible for present
day crime any more than Bush was during his tenure in office.  John blames
Obama for everything from crime to bad breath, and that is absolutely no
different than Obama and the democrats blaming Bush for everything.  No
difference whatsoever - Michael Savage notwithstanding.  SSDD.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 7:20 PM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

 

Oops. You were on a roll until you blew it and said he is not tolerating
crime. Clearly, Eric Holder provably is. Obama is the boss and he has not
instructed Holder to enforce certain laws that Holder has been ignoring.
Thus he tolerates crime. QED.

On 2/11/2013 8:44 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

John, you are ignoring facts.  But who needs those, anyway?  Right?  Are you
using valid statistics, John, or just your own observations?   Your post
here is purely emotional and devoid of any facts or data.  "Michael Savage
says" is not data.  Like I wrote, John:   your conclusions on this do not
follow from the real, available data.  Non sequitur.  Textbook example.

 

My only point here is to quit blaming Obama for everything.  I don't like
him.  I despise him.  But he is no more fully at fault than Bush was.  He is
not fomenting crime, he is not promoting crime, and he is not tolerating
crime - any more than Bush or any other president.  When you try to pin all
of this on him - or when the liberals try to pin it all on Bush - you/they
lose all credibility.  There is no difference between what you are doing and
what the libs try to do to the conservatives.  One in the same.
Indistinguishable.

 

From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of John A. Quayle
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 5:23 PM
To: Rushtalk Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.

 

At 07:30 PM 2/11/2013, you wrote:










Content-type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="Boundary_(ID_cdN1eB/3ZjQiWNdiLbLX/g)"
Content-language: en-us

John, get a grip.  There was violent crime prior to Obama.  In fact, in many
metro areas, violent crime is down.  Was the violent crime from 2000 -> 2008
the Bush mindset?


         Stephen, YOU get a grip, my friend! Violent crime - no matter who
is at fault - is far more prevalent now than ever before. Do you not see
this? 











Anything goes?  Maybe in Pennsylvania, but certainly not here. Again,
violent crime is down here. Still not any tolerable level, but down. You may
label it any way you want, and you can accuse me of sleeping through it,
ignoring it, whatever you chose. But you will not intimidate me into your
way of thinking.  


         I'm not out to intimidate anybody, Stephen. Either you see it or
you don't! Disregard for one's fellow man is rampant now-a-days. 











It is simply illogical, and unfounded.  


         I can't help you......................











The true non sequitur.
 
From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [ mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com
<mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com> ] On Behalf Of John A. Quayle
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 4:08 PM
To: Rushtalk Discussion List; 'Rushtalk Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.
 
At 06:36 PM 2/11/2013, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

Content-type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="Boundary_(ID_3AhmmRbGprIzb7OR3LWhAw)"
Content-language: en-us

 
 
From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [  <mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com>
mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of John A. Quayle
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 1:29 AM
To: Rushtalk Discussion List; 'Rushtalk Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] This is pathetic.
 
At 01:25 PM 2/10/2013, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

Content-type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="Boundary_(ID_J94BtNOXtHYbKcAg89NuNw)"
Content-language: en-us

The panic induced shooting of these two women is a travesty.  But it has
NOTHING to do with Obama.  You continue to lose more and more credibility
when you post like this.  Blaming this on Obama is as stupid as Obama
blaming his stupidity on Bush.

         It's a mindset......go back to sleep, Stephen.............
 
Yawn.  The mindset is believing that you - yes, you -can blame all of the
ills of society on Obama just like he blames all of them on Bush.  There is
no difference.

         Again, it's a mindset, as predicted by Michael Savage........he
predicted lawlessness in October of 2008. We're there. If you refuse to
acknowledge it, that's YOUR problem. We're at the stage where anything goes
and the Constitution means nothing. Don't wanna see it? I can't help you.
There's no more protection or law that helps the average schmuck. It's sad
and you don't see it! - jaq
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk












_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 











_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 










_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 









_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 








_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 







_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 






_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20130214/267bf69b/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list