George Runner Abandons SOS Rally

[Eagle1]

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.

[Ayatollahgondola]

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?

[Eagle1]

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.

[tim55]

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.

[ilbegone]

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.

[Jeanfromfillmore]

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.

[Eagle1]

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.

[admin]

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.

[Eagle1]

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?

[admin]

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.

[Eagle1]

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.

Well then by all means do apologize to Mr Runner. Just make sure that you make it clear to him that I am not a part of that apology.

If he hadn't opened his mouth as he did nothing would have occurred. Also make sure that he knows that you weren't there. I am sure he will eat it up.

By now Roger has beaten you to the apology table.

Using Castro as an example is a very poor analogy...look at what he went on to do. Better for him to have been denounced immediately.
Realistically an apology should come from me not you...and that ain't happening.

[Ayatollahgondola]

Well then by all means do apologize to Mr Runner. Just make sure that you make it clear to him that I am not a part of that apology.

If he hadn't opened his mouth as he did nothing would have occurred. Also make sure that he knows that you weren't there. I am sure he will eat it up.

By now Roger has beaten you to the apology table.

Using Castro as an example is a very poor analogy...look at what he went on to do. Better for him to have been denounced immediately.
Realistically an apology should come from me not you...and that ain't happening.

OK, let's use another analogy:

Remember the US embassy take-over in Iran? The US embassy was a guest on their soil. The Iranians tossed out all protocols and went in using their immediate feelings. How well did that work for them in the longrun? Who trusted them after that?
By contrast, take a look at the incident in London where the libyans in their embassy fired on protesters on the street below, killing a female Bobby in the process. The british certainly had every provocation to go in guns blazing by natural standards. They did not however, and followed the protocols befitting their standards and expelled the lot of them after. Then, a few years later, granted airspace to US warplanes as the bombed Tripoli.
I'm asking that we don't become slaves to our emotions.

[Eagle1]

"I'm asking that we don't become slaves to our emotions."

You won't get an argument from me on that.

I believe that we should exercise greater judgment in selecting those invited to speak. Runner doesn't cut it for me.

Rather than putting traitors on display at our rallies I believe that we should host their replacements.

Again I have no objection to you issuing an apology if you feel that it is appropriate. Just make sure that I am not a part of that apology.

I guarantee you that in the future Runner will respect me and not someone issuing apologies after he "F'd" it up.

The same happened with Sheriff Lee Bacca. He made the mistake of getting in my face at a meeting with his people. Today he says "Hi Frank".

He may not know who a thousand of his deputies are but he knows me.
He knows where I stand and he would not dare disrespect me.

Runner will also fall in line the same way.

I generally feel some remorse after being rough with anyone but I do not here.

Key point: Neither you nor Jean were there to see him in action. I will never reward his kind of behavior with an apology.

As for all the others in other orgs issuing condemnations and wanting to give Runner an apology, they are tripping over themselves to remain in good graces with someone who is not on their team.

Runner is a cold hearted individual.

[Ayatollahgondola]

OK, I see we are not going to agree on this at all, so let's just not argue over it anymore.

[Eagle1]

It was never an argument for me AG, just an exchange of ideas.
It will not cause me to think less of you and the group if you do issue an apology.
We all have to do what we feel we must do.:):):)

[Ole Glory]

"I'm asking that we don't become slaves to our emotions."

You won't get an argument from me on that.

I believe that we should exercise greater judgment in selecting those invited to speak. Runner doesn't cut it for me.

Again I have no objection to you issuing an apology if you feel that it is appropriate. Just make sure that I am not a part of that apology.

I guarantee you that in the future Runner will respect me and not someone issuing apologies after he "F'd" it up.

I generally feel some remorse after being rough with anyone but I do not here.

Key point: Neither you nor Jean were there to see him in action. I will never reward his kind of behavior with an apology.

1. Please make sure that I am not a part of that apology.

2. I thought Runner was there for an Anti Illegal Alien Rally not part of a Tea Party Rally, this is where misunderstandings come into play. When you start putting everything and anything in the mix. KISS! No one knows what is going on or why they are there.

3. I say screw the people of SCV. What a bunch of idiots! All they are talking about is the incident with the Pastor/Runner/Frank. Not one mention of the fact that at the start of the Rally we were INVADED. A group of foreign nationals INVADED the rally site, speaking in a foreign language as they chanted Si Se Puede, (YES WE CAN) Si Se Puede and carrying signs in a foreign language. One woman barked, “We work so hard”.

[Ole Glory]

UPDATED: Santa Clarita council candidate arrested for alleged rape of 14-year-old girls

Santa Clarita City Council candidate Johnny Pride was arrested March 4 on suspicion of raping multiple victims younger than 18.
Dan Watson (The Signal)

By Signal Staff
Posted: March 5, 2010 10:54 a.m.
POSTED March 6, 2010 12:41 a.m.
1 Image

Santa Clarita City Council candidate Johnny Pride has been arrested on suspicion of raping two 14-year-old girls, a sheriff's report said.

Pride, 26, of Valencia, was booked on charges of rape, lewd conduct with a minor, sodomy, oral copulation of a minor and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, the report stated.

He is expected to appear in court Monday.

The exact details of the alleged crimes could not be released because the victims were minors, said sheriff's Detective Brian Hudson of the Special Victims Bureau, which is heading up the investigation.

Detectives arrested Pride on Thursday at 5:37 p.m. He was being held in lieu of $500,000 bail.

Pride was arrested just hours after participating in a candidates' forum at a Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce luncheon.

Pride, a model and actor, has appeared in at least two reality television shows, including "The Conveyor Belt of Love," in which he wore only bikini briefs and held a dog, and in "The Battle of the Bods," which showed Pride wearing only boxer-briefs.

During his campaign for City Council, he said he works often with children and claimed to have started a nonprofit organization to bring them school supplies. However, the group he described was never registered with the state, as nonprofits are required to do.

Pride worked briefly for the William S. Hart Union High School District at Canyon High School in 2008 for less than a month, said district spokeswoman Pat Willett.

He was a walk-on coach and a substitute campus supervisor, though it was not clear which sport he coached, she said.

Just after he announced his candidacy, Pride's MySpace profile listed his hometown as "YOUR MOMS (sic) VAGINA" and his occupation as "Your moms (sic) boyfriend!"

He later changed his profile and told The Signal his MySpace profile had been hacked.

At the SCV Chamber of Commerce candidates' forum, Pride spoke about his involvement with the city's youth and families.

Jackie MacDougall, the co-founder of SCVmomsblog.com, asked all the candidates why they were the best choice for families.
Pride responded:

"Two years ago, I was a member of the city, state and national (Parent Teacher Association) and I have coached for the last three years in the city and I have dealt with numerous mothers," Pride said. "And I'll tell you what, I‘ve never seen a more active group."

The crowd laughed.

"Well, in a different way I've dealt with them, not in that way. I've heard their concerns and I know their struggle for safety, and they want the best for their children and I have dealt with that first-hand. So I know what they are looking for, and that is why I think I would be a great representative for the mothers out here."

Signal staff writers Jonathan Randles, Marianne Love and Brandon Lowrey contributed to this report.

[Ole Glory]

Please make sure that I am not a part of that apology.

I say screw the people of SCV. What a bunch of idiots! All they are talking about is the incident with the Pastor/Runner/Frank. Not one mention of the fact that at the start of the Rally we were INVADED. A group of foreign nationals INVADED the rally site, speaking in a foreign language as they chanted Si Se Puede, (YES WE CAN) Si Se Puede and carrying signs in a foreign language. One woman barked, “We work so hard”.

Case in Point:

Not so fast, Reza
Mitch Bruckner
Newhall
Posted: March 4, 2010 10:57 p.m.
POSTED March 5, 2010 4:55 a.m.

Regarding "Kellar should be applauded" (The Signal, Feb. 20):

"When you cross our borders without permission, you are here illegally and are not entitled to any benefits - period, end of discussion. It's very black and white in my book; no gray area," Mary Reza wrote.

Really? What if someone here illegally, is robbed of his or her hard-earned day's pay and is shot in the chest? Should they be denied medical benefits?

Illegal immigration is a complicated problem. Like all complicated societal issues, solutions require careful thought and responsible leadership.

Economic issues have always been the driving force behind immigration to this great land. Like all the immigrant families that have preceded them, our Mexican neighbors come here with the dream of earning a living and proudly assimilating.

Economics, not liberal politics, is at the root of the difficulties we are now encountering with our most recent generation of immigrants.

"It's about time someone locally spoke out publicly about our illegal immigration problem. Yes, it's crippling us financially and culturally.

It's a fact, folks," Reza wrote.

Not so fast. Many U.S. companies and residents alike derive financial benefit from illegal immigration.

Personally, what I believe is crippling our nation is a broken political system which caters only to the rich and powerful. The world's financial titans pull all the strings of our elected dummies, hoarding all the money, while the middle class receives less and less basic services.

Race-baiting effectively distracts the mob from what is harming us most, turning us against one another while nothing ever changes. No finance reform despite a world teetering on financial collapse. No health care reform. No money for education. Not even immigration reform. Only corporate bailouts.

It is our broken, corrupt political system that is crippling us. Not illegal immigrants. Stoking the ugly, racist instincts of the voting mob accomplishes nothing of value for society.

I believe Bob Kellar is a good man and I'm glad he is on our City Council. The silly debate concerning his recent comments is an unfortunate distraction.

[Rim05]

A group of foreign nationals INVADED the rally site, speaking in a foreign language as they chanted Si Se Puede, (YES WE CAN) Si Se Puede and carrying signs in a foreign language. One woman barked, “We work so hard”.


I would like to tell that woman what hard work is. The Texas sun that I worked in was as hot as any sun in CA and we (kids) worked full days and never complained. I wonder what she calls 'hard' work. There are many hard working people besides her and her group.

[ilbegone]

I would like to tell that woman what hard work is. The Texas sun that I worked in was as hot as any sun in CA and we (kids) worked full days and never complained. I wonder what she calls 'hard' work. There are many hard working people besides her and her group.

The definition of "Hard work" is relative to one's individual experience in life.

One thing I have seen over the years is a tendency for people to judge others (both favorably and unfavorably) in occupations and conditions they themselves have never experienced.

Some of the worst are managers and supervisors who have never engaged in the occupations they are overseeing, but people of every stripe somehow become "experts" concerning occupations they have never experienced. And, the greater the wealth of one who passes judgment, the less understanding there is.

As well with the working class, if someone has a larger wage rate than "I", then that person doesn't really earn his money and rather than aspire to "His" income, "I" will demand that he be brought down to "mine".

The old 19th century Robber Baron quote - "I can hire half the working class to kill the other half".

[Eagle1]

[/QUOTE] Not one mention of the fact that at the start of the Rally we were INVADED. A group of foreign nationals INVADED the rally site, speaking in a foreign language as they chanted Si Se Puede, (YES WE CAN) Si Se Puede and carrying signs in a foreign language. One woman barked, “We work so hard”. [QUOTE]

Now there's an intelligent observation. How very true that under the collective nose's of SCV politicians and a state Senator these people made their appearance and harassed Americans who held in their possession a legal document to occupy the area they were in.

Under the watchful eyes of the LA county Sheriff's the illegals and their supporters did indeed harass us by arrogantly and illegally (once here illegally everything they do is illegal) invade our space.

The incident was a demonstration of everything that is wrong with politicians and law enforcement today.

[PochoPatriot]

Under the watchful eyes of the LA county Sheriff's the illegals and their supporters did indeed harass us by arrogantly and illegally (once here illegally everything they do is illegal) invade our space.

This is nothing new. At Leimert Park, the LAPD refused to allow the permitted activity of legal and law abiding citizens to take place after the illegal aliens and their enablers took over the Park. Sadly, only five men crossed the police line that day in an act of civil disobedience. I still wonder why so few have the courage of their convictions, but I digress.

Second case, in Lynwood (protesting a luncheon speech given by former Mexican President Vicente Fox, the Sherriff's Dept. pinned legal and law abiding citizens between the street and a hostile group of illegals, one of which pulled up his shirt revealing a pistol tucked in the waist band of his pants. When advised that this gangbanger had brandished a weapon, a Deputy REFUSED to do anything about it. Further, while the law abiding and legal citizens were exercising their Constitutionally protect right to free speech on PUBLIC property, the illegal aliens, and their spawn were on private property.

The only place where LE was even remotely interested in assisting citizens exercising their First Amendment right was in Simi Valley.

Law enforcement is either unable or unwilling to protect American citizens exercising their First Amendment rights from the illegal rabble that has invaded our country.