Save Our State  

Go Back   Save Our State > General Forum (non official Save Our State business) > Elections, Politics, and Partisanship

Elections, Politics, and Partisanship Topics relating to politics, elections, or party affiliations of interests to SOS associates

WELCOME BACK!.............NEW EFFORTS AHEAD..........CHECK BACK SOON.........UPDATE YOUR EMAIL FOR NEW NOTIFICATIONS.........
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-28-2010, 03:05 PM
Eagle1 Eagle1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NOTAZTLAN
Posts: 406
Default George Runner Abandons SOS Rally

At our Santa Clarita rally held on Saturday, 27, 2010 State Senator George Runner made a quick appearance followed by an exit based on his desire to curtail Pastor Yancey's chastisement of illegal aliens and their supporters vociferous interruptions of Yancey's attempt to deliver the invocation.

For George Runner Yancey's "shut up" statement to the pro-illegal alien group
was far more than he could bear and said that if Yancey did that, that he, Runner would leave. Runner's ultimatum was delivered in the tone of one in control who is doing a servant a favor just by being there.

The arrogance of it was typical of Runner whom a few years back when asked what he could do to help us (the city) in the AV with the illegal immigration problem replied that there was nothing he could do. It was more than obvious that he would do nothing, not that he couldn't do anything.

Runner's demand for immediate censorship of Pastor Yancey's first amendment rights was answered with a courteous, "both you and the Pastor have first amendment rights, if you don't like what Yancey said you can address it at the microphone".

Runner stuck to the he would leave if Yancey wasn't restrained. My answer was "well then just leave".

I did not consult anyone on this. My answer was immediate and the anger that prompted me to issue the reply was based on the aversion that I hold towards elected officials who say they are on our side, do nothing, and want to impose their will on others by withholding something...in Runner's case his presence.

After having met many who have suffered through the murder of their loved ones by illegals, I found Runner's position unacceptable and he unworthy of
attendance.

I never thought much of him and I consider him to be useless.
However he may have begun his career it is clear that his politics are not the politics of the American people.

George Runner left because his bully tactics were met with an answer he never expected to hear.......one that more people should make to their elected "representatives".

If a politician is not solidly for the American people then he is not at all with us.

Some here may have seen it as a departure from some "protocol" where we must yield to spoiled brats like Runner. I disagree vehemently.

We frequently say vote the incumbents out....if it were so simple as simply telling them to go away...as was the case with Runner.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-28-2010, 10:47 PM
Ayatollahgondola's Avatar
Ayatollahgondola Ayatollahgondola is offline
SOS Associate
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,057
Default

Does anyone really know his public stance on illegal's? I know you have a strong opinion of him Eagle1, but has he been categorically open borders or was he just one to avoid the subject at all costs?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-01-2010, 07:49 AM
Eagle1 Eagle1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NOTAZTLAN
Posts: 406
Default

He is anti-illegal immigration, or at least that is what I have been told. As a legislator I am not aware of his having made an effort to introduce any legislation to help us out.

Judging from his reactions at the event he does seem to want to walk the middle.

He fits in with Buck McKeon and others. He is nothing like Tancredo.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-01-2010, 07:54 AM
tim55 tim55 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 100
Default

I thought your response to this bozo was fantastic. Address your beefs at the microphone, or go ahead and leave. The first ammendment is not exclusive. You are to be commended.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-01-2010, 06:28 PM
ilbegone's Avatar
ilbegone ilbegone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,068
Default

Quote:
George Runner left because his bully tactics were met with an answer he never expected to hear.......one that more people should make to their elected "representatives".
Spot on.

Go away if you don't desire to accommodate your electorate.
__________________
Freibier gab's gestern

Hay burros en el maiz

RAP IS TO MUSIC WHAT ETCH-A-SKETCH IS TO ART

Don't drink and post.

"A nickel will get you on the subway, but garlic will get you a seat." - Old New York Yiddish Saying

"You can observe a lot just by watching." Yogi Berra

Old journeyman commenting on young apprentices - "Think about it, these are their old days"

SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

Never, ever, wear a bright colored shirt to a stand up comedy show.

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-02-2010, 12:54 PM
Jeanfromfillmore's Avatar
Jeanfromfillmore Jeanfromfillmore is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,287
Default

Let me clear something up here. George Runner was not there to talk about illegal immigration. He was there to talk about taxes. We were expecting two Tea Party organizations who had asked their member to attend our rally. Mr. Runner was to address their concerns about taxes. Taxes are the main concern of the Tea Party=TaxedEnoughAlready. It was the intention of having the Tea Party's member there, which would have been huge if not for the weather, to broach the issue of illegal immigration and the problems that are a result of illegals being here to citizens who were not familiar with its impact.

I do not agree that an invited guest should have been treated in such a way. It could have been handled much better. Mr Runner showed up, an even in the rain. If he had been given a chance to speak, which was still his decision, he could have been asked afterwords what his opinion on illegal immigration was. If it disagreed with those there at least there would have been a dialog. How can things get accomplished if we only speak to those that agree with us? How can we expect to get anywhere it we won't speak to those that could have an impact?

I understand the frustration of not having politicians on our side and those that won't stand up, but I don't feel that shunning them will help. But maybe I'm wrong, and this is the right approach. It does seem that not much else has worked. What I do know is it will be very difficult to get ANY seated politician to speak at another of our rallies.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-03-2010, 07:57 AM
Eagle1 Eagle1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NOTAZTLAN
Posts: 406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeanfromfillmore View Post
Let me clear something up here. George Runner was not there to talk about illegal immigration. He was there to talk about taxes. We were expecting two Tea Party organizations who had asked their member to attend our rally. Mr. Runner was to address their concerns about taxes. Taxes are the main concern of the Tea Party=TaxedEnoughAlready. It was the intention of having the Tea Party's member there, which would have been huge if not for the weather, to broach the issue of illegal immigration and the problems that are a result of illegals being here to citizens who were not familiar with its impact.

I do not agree that an invited guest should have been treated in such a way. It could have been handled much better. Mr Runner showed up, an even in the rain. If he had been given a chance to speak, which was still his decision, he could have been asked afterwords what his opinion on illegal immigration was. If it disagreed with those there at least there would have been a dialog. How can things get accomplished if we only speak to those that agree with us? How can we expect to get anywhere it we won't speak to those that could have an impact?

I understand the frustration of not having politicians on our side and those that won't stand up, but I don't feel that shunning them will help. But maybe I'm wrong, and this is the right approach. It does seem that not much else has worked. What I do know is it will be very difficult to get ANY seated politician to speak at another of our rallies.
I disagree entirely. If the invited guest treats the host and the event as if it is beneath him and proceeds to issue an ultimatum when he has been treated respectfully and still remains adamant of a "he or me" scenario then the guest has overstepped his bounds and is pushing it.

Having been to a number of events that Tom Tancredo has attended I cannot
imagine Tom behaving as Runner did.

Why is only the host's or emcee's reactive behavior addressed but not Runner's caustic, childish, self centered indulgence?

People must stop treating these horrible politicians as if they are Gods.

If Runner had shown some class this never would have happened.

This is no different than someone punching any of us and expecting to not be punched in return.

This would not have happened if Runner had kept his temper and related to the emcee on civil terms.

Maybe this is the first time that Runner has been treated in a normal fashion.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-03-2010, 09:19 AM
admin's Avatar
admin admin is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 469
Default

there is no single response here the way I see it;

Runner exhibited classic pro illegal sentiment, and it might have been intentional, but who knows? We can't take a side that supports him on that basis. However, we shouldn't invite people and then denounce them at the same time. If you didn't like runner's comments, it would have been best to address them in a more dignified manner, thank him for expressing his opposing view, or at least picked another time to chastise him in the fashion you did. He was our guest, and being gracious hosts, we have to assume that we made the error in conflicting agendas. As a non profit, we do have an obligation to be a little diplomatic in public. Runner seems to be a typical sellout republican, and we would do best to consider him as opposition in the future, but in the interim, I think it's best we fashion our own apology so Gitlin doesn't become our agent by default. we don't apologize for our agenda, but maybe for our manners we should. I don't fault you for saying what you said Frank. Just when you said it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-04-2010, 08:53 AM
Eagle1 Eagle1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NOTAZTLAN
Posts: 406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by admin View Post
there is no single response here the way I see it;

Runner exhibited classic pro illegal sentiment, and it might have been intentional, but who knows? We can't take a side that supports him on that basis. However, we shouldn't invite people and then denounce them at the same time. If you didn't like runner's comments, it would have been best to address them in a more dignified manner, thank him for expressing his opposing view, or at least picked another time to chastise him in the fashion you did. He was our guest, and being gracious hosts, we have to assume that we made the error in conflicting agendas. As a non profit, we do have an obligation to be a little diplomatic in public. Runner seems to be a typical sellout republican, and we would do best to consider him as opposition in the future, but in the interim, I think it's best we fashion our own apology so Gitlin doesn't become our agent by default. we don't apologize for our agenda, but maybe for our manners we should. I don't fault you for saying what you said Frank. Just when you said it.
I understand what you are saying and I would agree that I should have shown greater restraint...I just couldn't do it at the moment.

It would have been better with respect to the SOS image to have been more diplomatic.

Then again, I think that we will be seeing more of this type of behavior as things get even worse. People are fed up with the politically correct treatment of politicians that have brought us to the brink of extinction
and yet get pampered.

Do you think that this thing with Runner has any lasting consequences?
I don't think so. If anything until SOS issues an apology this group will be known as one that will not give a corrupt politician a pass. As a number of folks have said to me they felt it was very okay and they wished to address other corrupt politicians in the same way. That will force them to think and act differently.

I hear Runner has paid an amount for an ethics violation for not reporting gifts. There are other things associated with this individual as reported to me by others.

You should think before issuing an apology. Mr Gitlin's apology is his and will not have any bearing on SOS.

Good manners haven't worked in having politicians address the various issues that threaten us.

Other people talk about chasing our politicians down the street. Well that didn't happen at the Saturday rally.

In a couple of weeks...not months...the impact of my obviously unrestrained reaction will be forgotten. I believe the act may make SOS more popular than not. After all it was only me ..not the SOS crew taking this guy to the woodshed.

I suggest no apology....that I believe to be inappropriate. Just let sleeping dogs lie. It will be a none issue soon and I believe it is one now.
What is to be gained by apologizing to this creature other than to feed his ego?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-04-2010, 09:29 AM
admin's Avatar
admin admin is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 469
Default

We have our own rules of conduct and code of behavior to uphold, so it isn't relative to what Runner thinks, or Gitlin, for that matter. We won't be apologizing for any broad spectrum that might give rise to be supportive of Runner's political agenda, or his actions towards us or the competition there that day. It's one thing, and that one thing only. It serves to remind us that we are leaders of our own domain, and we don't fear being seen as weak of obligatory because we issue and apology for a breach of our own manners. We apologize for our manners and nothing else. This goes in the "mob rule" column. We may be angry and ready for retribution against politicians, but we do it in an organized, officially sanctioned, and proper way. We want people to trust us, and know that when they are invited to attend our events that they will be given the respect due any guest. All visiting dignitaries(using the term loosely) get treated in a diplomatic fashion when visiting from outside the US. Castro came to the US, and was not humiliated as he addressed the event attendees. That's how diplomacy works. When they leave, beat them up all you want for their views, but not at the dinner table that they were cordially invited to.
We'd be doing it for us. We are allowed to hold our own heads up, even after the fact.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SaveOurState ©2009 - 2016 All Rights Reserved