Where Have All The Raths' Posts Gone?

Where have all the Raths' posts gone? Long time passing.
Where have all the Raths' posts gone? Long time ago.
Where have all the Raths' posts gone?
Gone to graveyards everyone.
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?
Annie G. January 24, 2014 at 06:48 PM
sweet!!! and your kinda cute, too. good one dan.
Dan Avery January 24, 2014 at 08:22 PM
Thanks Annie G. That's one of the nicest comments I've ever gotten on here
Dan Avery January 29, 2014 at 01:44 PM
Shripathi Kamath January 29, 2014 at 01:49 PM
PubliusSJC January 29, 2014 at 01:26 PM Dan you sure are obsessed with Rath. The best thing a candidate can have is you as a critic. ___________________________________________________ Are you predicting a Raths victory, then? It is odd that Mr. Raths puts up posts, constituents interact with him, and then they are all gone. Does that not ring a bit strange? I mean it cannot be because there is one poster haranguing him, can it? Politicians running for office are a lot sturdier than that, they expect people who like them and who do not. It is part of the landscape.
Dan Avery January 29, 2014 at 01:51 PM
That's exactly right, Shri. The only way one critic could make a politician behave that way, is if the politician had something to hide. Or if he's a complete coward.
Dan Avery January 29, 2014 at 09:02 PM
All I know is that Raths is putting his own religious beliefs before The Constitution, that he plagiarized here on Patch, that he won't defend the positions he's taken when questioned. And he's hired someone with a fraud conviction to help handle his campaign. I also know most voters are completely clueless because the don't really care, and it's up to everyone one to inform others about those seeking one of the highest offices in the country. I also know that the corporations would love to kill your and my ability to speak freely on the web. This sort of watchdog activity is not in their best interests.
Dan Avery January 29, 2014 at 11:36 PM
Okay Plagiarism is theft. Plain and simple. Someone who steals has no honesty whatsoever and no integrity. People who put their religious beliefs first are often in conflict with the Constitution and and American values of freedom and equality. We are not a Christian nation. We were founded on the notion of religious freedom. Therefore, law must come before religious beliefs.
Dan Avery January 29, 2014 at 11:37 PM
It's pretty damn basic my religious vs constitution argument. Anyone who took high school civics should be able to parse it.
Dan Avery January 29, 2014 at 11:44 PM
You know for someone who attacked me out of nowhere, you really don't know a lot.
Dan Avery January 30, 2014 at 12:31 AM
Our founders didn't consider us a Christian nation. They believed in religious freedom. Hence you put the nation before your religion. Duh.
Dan Avery January 30, 2014 at 12:32 AM
And your opinion was a personal attack not an opinion. In other words, you don't have an argument and you've been back peddling the entire time.
GreenInOC January 30, 2014 at 11:06 AM
@PubliusSJC, I'm kind of dumbfounded that you think plagiarism is "minor". I can't even get past that it's so crazy!
Jonathan Volzke January 30, 2014 at 12:06 PM
Oh, GreeninOC, that's just because Publius knows plagiarism ... http://sanjuancapistrano.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/councilman-reeve-gone-at-concordia
GreenInOC January 30, 2014 at 01:32 PM
@PubliusSJC, "Yes Mr. lobbyist, you always try to identify people who you think or want them to be." What does that even mean? How can you trust someone to do anything that is a proven liar?
Shripathi Kamath January 30, 2014 at 01:34 PM
PubliusSJC January 30, 2014 at 01:31 PM Supreme Court Justice David Brewer (1837-1910) explained: [I]n what sense can [America] be called a Christian nation? ___________________________________________________ All this and more, I addressed here: http://bit.ly/1iQaw8k
Dan Avery January 30, 2014 at 06:43 PM
Quoting people doesn't prove your point. What you need to do is explain why the founding fathers set us up as a non-secular nation by establishing the separation of church and state. And how setting us up as a non-secular nation makes us a Christian nation.
Dan Avery January 30, 2014 at 06:45 PM
In other words just because we were founded by Christians, doesn't mean we are a Christian nation. In fact, we are far from being a Christian nation. Large portions of our citizens don't go to church and/or have never read The Bible, let alone thought about what all those stories may mean. Sitting in church doesn't a Christian make.
Dan Avery January 30, 2014 at 06:49 PM
"Yes Dan, you're an ideologue and ignorant." Once you've resorted to name-calling and admitted you'll vote for a proven liar, you've pretty much lost any argument about the nature of our Republic. But thanks for playing.
GreenInOC January 30, 2014 at 08:41 PM
@PubliusSJC, you may not have said would specifically you would vote for but you did say that honesty is not a factor in your choice as demonstrated by your dismissing plagiarism as "minor". I don't know how anyone would trust what someone says they will do if they are a proven liar already. How would you trust that what he says he will do, will be what he does?! ------------------------------------------------------- PubliusSJC January 30, 2014 at 01:13 PM ...I would rather vote for Rath IF he votes down the debt for example than the perfect candidate who adds to it.
GreenInOC January 30, 2014 at 10:16 PM
This was not rewritten, this was what you wrote as indicated by your name and the date stamp. You can also scroll up and read your own words if it helps. ---- PubliusSJC January 30, 2014 at 01:13 PM ...I would rather vote for Rath IF he votes down the debt for example than the perfect candidate who adds to it.
Dan Avery January 31, 2014 at 11:18 AM
Green, I think we are witnessing the product of home schooling. Sad that. I was at a political fund raiser last night for another candidate and Mr. Raths seemed upset at being labeled a liar. He seemed to think putting quotes around someone else's words, or showing any attribution at all was just for "term papers and essays." Stunning. Such is the modern Republican Candidate; a collection of Dimwits, thieves and liars.
Dan Avery January 31, 2014 at 01:38 PM
Danny? Pathetic. Why are you hiding behind an alias? Do you work for the Raths' campaign? Or maybe you're not willing to let your family and friends know what you think? No one owes you answers to any questions you've asked because, quite simply, you've lost any argument you had and are now just embarrassing yourself. But do, please do, carry on. It's funny to watch.
GreenInOC January 31, 2014 at 02:56 PM
@Dan Avery, all of the home schooled students I know are quite brilliant so I think it's unfair to to disparage their reputations based on assumptions!---------------------------------------------------- @PubliusSJC, as someone who is so bent "Christian values" how do you define plagiarism as minor when the Bible doesn't categorize lying as "minor"? Proverbs 12:22 - "Lying lips [are] abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly [are] his delight." James 4:17 - "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin." Why can't Mr. Rath accept responsibility for his actions?
imcjl January 31, 2014 at 03:20 PM
Dan, the one thing I have noticed in your commentary for months is that factual data which does not fit your personal beliefs is to be denigrated, mocked or dismissed. Yet you virtually never provide factual support for your claims and opinions, providing simple personal beliefs or supposition. And you consistently turn commentary and opinion that is counter to YOUR beliefs into personal attacks. Then you move to flaming the writer. Pretty manipulative in my opinion and certainly can be effective in silencing most who oppose you. But I am thinking that is not your desired outcome from a discussion in the public square is it?
Dan Avery January 31, 2014 at 04:29 PM
Green, then you've had the exact opposite experience with home schooling. In the years I spent teaching freshmen at UCI, and a variety of students at Saddleback and Cerritos, the only ones who stood out to me where educated: abroad, at a Catholic school, or in another state. And, yes, I always asked them because they stood out.
Dan Avery January 31, 2014 at 04:42 PM
imcjl, my own writings are either personal in nature or opinion. When is the last time you saw an opinion piece with factual support? Most of the time I am writing about issues that should be common knowledge. When I do need support, like in the piece on Raths' plagiarism, I documented my claims with evidence. When I respond in the comment section here at Patch, I am responding on the level of the person's logic or lack thereof. Those are not personal attacks. Not in the nature of "Dan you sure are obsessed with Rath. The best thing a candidate can have is you as a critic," which was PubliusSJC's opening gambit above. That is a personal attack. It has nothing to do with anything I think. But you are correct, I would love to have more analytical discussions online. Along the lines of my latest blog post which you can find elsewhere on this site. I'm a little at a loss on how to respond here, because you made several negative assertions but didn't document them with examples. The only reason I'm responding at all to you is that you strike me as a person who comments in good faith. You never use PubliusSJC's opening gambit that I have seen. Many many many people on here do. It's all they know. Perhaps I should just ignore them. But sometimes it's just more fun to engage them, since I really don't care what anyone thinks of me. I know who I am. My friends know who I am. And not caring what others think is what makes it possible for me to write honestly.
Dan Avery January 31, 2014 at 04:44 PM
I should point out that when someone attacks me, I will respond in kind. I don't mind sinking to their level. But I never attack the person first. Just their ideas.
imcjl January 31, 2014 at 11:04 PM
Dan, well-said--I can accept that...lol. I was less aware yours was opinion vs. wanting to stick to facts (maybe a parallel is the different shows on cable news, etc). I'm good...
Dan Avery February 01, 2014 at 12:33 AM
lmcji, seriously? your good? Because I do respect you. Your post are very level-headed and I've always respected the way you view the role of the activist. I think your view is the correct one, and I have tried never to insult you when I've differed with your opinion. I'm thinking about our exchange on the man who was in front of Pavilions, wearing an atheist t-shirt, but I forget what he was collecting money for. I think that might have been the one time we saw things from different angles. By the way, if I want to know what is really happening in the world? I never read the headlines. I always go straight to the opinion page. Straight up. That's where you get the start of something that will lead you to the truth. It's funny but I had a roommate in college who was getting a degree in philosophy. I used to argue with him that the best way to the truth of what it means to be human was through the lies of fiction...
Dan Avery February 01, 2014 at 12:34 AM
that should have been "you're good?" instead of what I wrote in the second sentence.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something