Response to rupester's July 1, 2013 Rant

July 25, 2013   I received the following e-mail from rupester and I promised to respond. So below the e-mail is the response. I don't really like the constant attention I have to give her, but it's her demand and I don't like her lies to stand. Thus, I must respond. It's a "Catch 22" for me: if I don't answer, a lie stands and I don't allow lies; OR if I do respond I'm called "mean". Okay. I'll deal with mean because the TRUTH is more important than "mean".

"From: Maureen Rupe
"Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 12:04 PM
"To: Lindy
"Subject: Pitiful

"Your opinion Ms. McKinney is that I am now vile, meaning wicked, repulsive, repellant, odious, revolting, disgusting, and repugnant. The derogatory and libelous names you now have for me is extensive and displays your hatred for me. If it was just political disagreements, people that have their full faculties do not use words that attack the person, only the argument for their philosophy.

"Your problem is, and it will prove to be a very serious one for you, you embellish and turn everything I say into a What you think and What you want me to mean. For example let’s take the “Maureen Rupe Exposed” site. When I said it had gone to porn sites, which it had in the related sites and I have printed proof, you couldn’t leave it there could you? Your diatribe even stated I have nude photos of myself, which you had better come up with, as you will need them. Does your husband know what you wrote about me? How would he feel if someone wrote that about you? I should ask him. This libelous defamation of my character is coming to an end. Plus an attorney who is the son of a friend, saw the site Maureen Rupe Exposed whilst looking at porn sites for a case. He is willing to be a witness in court. That is how I found out.

"According to you ,I am a Liar that made it up,    Are you aware how many times you have wrote my campaign site is illegal. Wrong. how many times and letters to the commission and others that I plagiarize, wrong. How many times you have lied and I have proof of the lies. I think it is called Libel and defamation.

"The open letter to Maureen Rupe proves beyond a doubt your unbalanced mental state. “God Told Me To,” shades of Jim Jones and other psychotics. I believe with all my heart you are a dangerous person that carries a gun. That is not God talking to you, it is the Devil and he has you fooled into doing his work.

"I shall send your open letter everywhere I can think of, as everyone that has read it has had the same opinion as I, that you need help. Your attacks are getting worse and I believe you are capable of violent actions. I can no longer allow this to go on without trying to stop it. Don’t you ever mention by name ( a disguising threat) any grandchild of mine again.

"You must lead a very unhappy life, spewing out hatred , that is all your site consists of,      I hope you have shown your husband what you wrote about me concerning ‘’Maureen Rupe Exposed’’as I shall.

"Your writing in magazine’s,     do they know your true capabilities.          By the way, I am to ill to ever run for office, I am 69 now , but you look for anything that can to insult me.

"You are obsessed with hate and jealousy for me,    You hate every good thing I have done yet boast when you clip a few coupons.

"Please show this to Keith as it will effect him. Just as you have effected my husband and Family. What goes around comes around, for you, and the Editor of PSJ History.

"What you wrote on February 16th 2013,     could only be written by evil,    to hurt and destroy and you loved it.      God help you,    he is not talking to you or on your side.

"Sincerely,
"Maureen Rupe

Yeah. I know. It was quite a surprise to me, too. But, that's the way it works. So, my sentence by sentence response is below. Sigh. Again. Her words are in black, my words are in red.

"Your opinion Ms. McKinney is that I am now vile, meaning wicked, repulsive, repellant, odious, revolting, disgusting, and repugnant." No, not "now". You've been such since you started supporting the wrong things: incorporation, the 1¢ sales tax, scarborough the dull, etc., as well as your attacks on Infantini, William Powell, and other Conservatives. That's what made you vile, not just recently, but for many years. You're a progressive, like thevileone (the prezidunce) and I think progressivism is vile. Thus, you are vile because of your desire to make America a socialist/communist/marxist nation. That's what is vile. The truth is that when you do what you do it is bad for Port St. John (incorporation); bad for Brevard (1¢ sales tax & your candidacy for D1 Commie); bad for America (your environmentalism when environmentalists have been proven to have lied about global warming and totally lost credibility; your support of thevileone [prezidunce] and other progressives). That's what is wrong. Take all of that away and you're a nice person. For a little while we did a little hanging out together. Remember when you used to call me and tell me that Don Williams murdered his wife, Linda? Yeah. How many people who were NOT considered a friend would you call and say that to? Hmmm? Oh, and now we know that you can use a dictionary. Well, well. Progress at last.

"The derogatory and libelous names you now have for me is extensive and displays your hatred for me." Grow up. They're defining names not derogatory names.

"If it was just political disagreements, people that have their full faculties do not use words that attack the person, only the argument for their philosophy." Okay. You set the standard, ADHERE TO IT! Your words: "Nazi or Skinhead hate site". "malicious,vindictive [sic], hateful hypocrites"; "unhappy, devious individuals"; "pathetic evil creatures". "a well-known individual of twisted logic." "dark creature, sitting in the madness hours, spewing out hatred." "you are a liar" "a Bully". So rupester you don't have your full faculties? You wrote the "Nazi/Skinhead" comment in 2008, so it's been at least five years since you've had your full faculties. I'm so sorry that you lost your faculties all those years ago. Poor, poor, rupester. Oh, yes. Add to that now you say I don't have my full faculties? When it comes to arguing philosophy, I have yet to hear from you with a word of philosophical discussion. How many times have you contacted me with nothing but demands, threats and whining? Where is your "philosophy" when you write to me threatening to sue? Where is your discussion of political stances instead of just demands that I think YOUR way? Contact me next time with philosophical discussions and you may be able to cast a stone. Until then, take a philosophical, hypothetical, progressive hike!

"Your problem is, and it will prove to be a very serious one for you, you embellish and turn everything I say into a What you think and What you want me to mean." The logical progression (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 what is the next logical number?) of the words you say lead somewhere. That "somewhere" is where I go. For instance, you said that MRE went to "many porn sites". Thus if I had responded by talking about a giraffe, it would make no sense whatsoever. I, on the other hand, said stuff about pornography. I asked if you had pics of yourself because you brought up porn and you would be the one to know if there were porn about you out there, n'est-ce pas? I had no idea what alleged evidence you had about MRE having "gone to many porn sites" until the e-mail I am now responding to. You did not include any evidence and the evidence you include now is rather sketchy ("which it had in the related sites"?). So, what you say leads me to ask questions, to follow the street you send me down and to use logical progression to go where you send me. Can you understand that? (Why do I bother asking?)

"For example let's take the "Maureen Rupe Exposed" site. When I said it had gone to porn sites, which it had in the related sites and I have printed proof, you couldn't leave it there could you?" First, neither I nor the owner of Maureen Rupe Exposed PUT an ad on a porn site. ONLY the owners of those sites can PUT an ad on their site, unless they contract with someone else to do so. I have no such contract, nor would I ever accept such a contract. I do not condone, view, nor support porn. Second, if your oh-so-great attorney found the "Maureen Rupe Exposed" site in a search engine result of sites about porn, I'm sure he was also searching for something that included the word "Exposed" or one of the words associated with "Maureen Rupe Exposed". Third, if he found an actual link to "Maureen Rupe Exposed" ON an actual porn site (poor soul having to look at that garbage), it still proves nothing as far as my (or the MRE owner's) guilt for the alleged ad. Nothing on this site, nor the MRE site has now, nor has ever had, porn on it, nor are either sites associated with it. You know this. You print out anything at all that mentions you (to feed your ego, or to fuel your obsession with threatening lawsuits, I am unsure which) so you have no case. Your alleged attorney knows this. Even though you know this you have to mouth off and get attention from me at certain intervals and you cannot do without it. So enjoy your fill. Lap it up. Get off on it, whatever you do. But don't try to silence me when you DEMAND MY ATTENTION SO OFTEN. You come crying about how I treat you when the last time I mentioned you was the fact that I thought you may be running again. Oh, boohoo. Get over me! I am not your paramour! I am not interested! I am not going to be whatever you want me to be to you! Move on! I will correct any and all lies I see fit to correct: including yours, but that does not mean I want to pay any other kind of attention to you. Understand? Move on.

"Your diatribe even stated I have nude photos of myself, which you had better come up with, as you will need them." Learn to read. I never said you DO HAVE, I ASKED if you or anyone else did. Asking if you did is VERY different from saying that you DO. If I ask you if you robbed a bank would that be an accusation that you DID? No. It would be a question. If I asked you if you were a purple people eater, would that be stating that you WERE? No. It would be asking. Learn to read. Also, how can I "come up with" them if I asked if they were IN YOUR POSESSION? Shall I come search your house to find something you say you don't have but demand of me? I followed the logical progression of what you said and the fact that you try to demand of me something you say you don't have in answer to a question I asked... I'll take your word for it and not ask my attorney to get a search warrant for your house. That should be a comfort to you.

"Does your husband know what you wrote about me?" Now you bring my hubby up again? That's the second time you've done so. What is this preoccupation you have with my husband? He knows what you wrote and how I responded. He reads and understands English.

"How would he feel if someone wrote that about you?" He would know that I'm strong enough to not be upset about what others say and that I don't give a rat's pattuti about what others think, say, or lie about me. That includes you. He would think it's stupid and funny that anyone would bother to say such nonsense.

"I should ask him." I thought you were a feminist. Suddenly I should turn to my husband to get control, to get affirmation, to get... What? True feminists don't need their husband's permission, affirmation, care about how a man feels, nor to get support for their endeavors. True feminists (most are Conservatives because libs need support groups) do things themselves without the support, approval or acquiescence of others. Or do you not know this?

"This libelous defamation of my character is coming to an end." You keep writing things that I have to tell the public the truth about, correcting your lie: correction is not libel. You're mistaken: it's not "defamation" it is "definition".

"Plus an attorney who is the son of a friend, saw the site Maureen Rupe Exposed whilst looking at porn sites for a case. He is willing to be a witness in court." First Your sentence says that your attorney friend "saw the site Maureen Rupe Exposed whilst looking at porn sites" -- which says NOTHING. It does not give us specifics as to what he was doing at the time: did he have five tabs open and was looking for porn sites on four of them, and on the fifth tab look at the MRE site? Did he stop looking at porn long enough to listen to your whining and look at MRE for a while in the middle of other things? Or did he actually see a porn website that had a direct link from the porn site to the MRE site? Even IF that be the case, I had nothing to do with the MRE site allegedly being on a porn site. I linked to your campaign website (your illegally still up campaign website) and you didn't put the link on my site. So, does that make YOU responsible for the fact that I linked to YOUR site? Hello?!! If your attorney thinks otherwise, he doesn't know how the internet works, either. Also, any attorney would have to PROVE that I or the OWNER/EDITOR of MRE PUT THOSE ADS THERE in order to have any hope of winning any kind of case. He would also have to PROVE that they were NOT PUT THERE BY ANYONE OTHER THAN I or the OWNER/EDITOR of MRE. PLUS he would have to PROVE that I or the OWNER/EDITOR OF MRE had intent to spread PORNOGRAPHY that featured YOU. Hello! If it doesn't exist, how can ANYONE USE IT? DUH-AND-A-HALF!

"That is how I found out." From someone else who apparently doesn't understand how the internet works? Reliable informant.

"According to you ,I am a Liar that made it up," And you don't know how to use proper punctuation.

"Are you aware how many times you have wrote my campaign site is illegal. Wrong." Correction: YOU ARE WRONG. Your campaign website is still available online FIVE YEARS AFTER YOUR DEFEAT which breaks State Statute 106.1435, which states in part:

"(1)Each candidate, whether for a federal, state, county, or district office, shall make a good faith effort to remove all of his or her political campaign advertisements within 30 days after:

"(a)Withdrawal of his or her candidacy;
"(b)Having been eliminated as a candidate; or
"(c)Being elected to office.

"how many times and letters to the commission and others that I plagiarize, wrong." (Again with the punctuation? I thought you went to an "innovative school" that was "highly respected": in everything except grammar and punctuation?) I have proven that you plagiarized your articles so much so that even the pooper-paper made you start stating your sources.

"How many times you have lied and I have proof of the lies." Show me! Show the WORLD! I've challenged you before and you've never delivered. Show me what you say is my lie/are my lies. I've proven that you lie for the last eleven years, since the incorporation days. My focus, my goal, my defining issue has always been the truth. If you had proof of my lies you would have taken me up on my challenge of March 2012.

"I think it is called Libel and defamation." That's what you get for thinking. The word is "Definition". Definition.

"The open letter to Maureen Rupe proves beyond a doubt your unbalanced mental state." You are so strange. I open that letter with "God loves you" and you think that's "unbalanced". Saying "God loves you" makes me dangerous? That says more about you than it does about me. Atheists don't believe in GOD so I can understand that it scares you, but don't be afraid because someone who loves you wants what's best for you. GOD does. I do. Stop lying and everything will be hunky-dorey.

"'God Told Me To,' shades of Jim Jones and other psychotics. [I inserted the link.]" Now that's slander. Ask your oh-so-great attorney. Also, you put quotes around "God Told Me To", but I never said that in my letter. So you're now lying via misquoting me. Shame on you for lying while defending your lies. Lips move much?

"I believe with all my heart you are a dangerous person that carries a gun." I've known you for how many -- 20+ years? -- and I know that you are lying. You no more believe me to be a danger to you than you think a banana is a danger (unless, of course, you're allergic to bananas, in which case I am quite wrong; or if you slip on the banana peel). And if you actually DO think me a danger to you, then you may need to find professional help. You once gave me a stuffed koala bear (made of real fur, no less!) and I still have that bear. Remember all those calls about Linda Williams? Now you believe me a "dangerous person"? Right. Drama queen.

"That is not God talking to you, it is the Devil and he has you fooled into doing his work." So you believe in the Devil, but not GOD? Interesting. Sad, too.

"I shall send your open letter everywhere I can think of, as everyone that has read it has had the same opinion as I, that you need help." Not "everyone who has read it" because you don't know everyone who has read it. How presumptuous of you. You really do have such an ego on you. I need help? Ever considered a mirror? If you wish to send the open letter I wrote to you to Satan himself, go ahead. Enjoy. Use the internet and save the stamps and trees. Just don't come whining to me when nothing happens. Take your chances at another big disappointment. Let me make it easier for you. Here's the FL Division of Licensing complaint form. You'll want to click on "Class "G" Statewide Firearm License" and you can tell them that I posted a letter to you that said that GOD loves you. Let's see how dangerous they think that is. The second one I suggest you send your letter to is this guy. He'll be sure to look into it for you, too. Remember to tell him that I posted a letter to you saying that GOD loves you.

"Your attacks are getting worse and I believe you are capable of violent actions." Really? Really? I don't believe you think that for a heartbeat. Not for an iota. If you do believe it, you're seriously delusional.

"I can no longer allow this to go on without trying to stop it." Go for it. Have fun! Enjoy! Keep me informed of your progress.

"Don't you ever mention by name ( a disguising threat) any grandchild of mine again." That's a sad commentary on your personality and drama queen-ness, not a commentary on me. I did nothing even close to a threat against your cutie-pie grandson. Nothing; but you know that and are being all "Oh, I'm scared!" You're growing more ridiculous with old age and I'm starting to wonder about your mind. Please, for your own sake, stop being so pathetic.

"You must lead a very unhappy life, spewing out hatred , that is all your site consists of," (Punctuation! Punctuation!) You know what? I understand where you're coming from. You're coming from the "victim" mentality instead of the "opposition" mentality. Your victim mentality does not serve you well. You are not my "victim". You are my "opposition". We are diametrically opposed. You, progressive; me Conservative. You, environmental; I put people ahead a Scrub Jay. You = ends justifies the means; I totally disagree. My site consists of standing up for the TRUTH in everything. I write against thevileone, you, lefties, commies, Islamics who kill, rape, burn and maim, and other such nonsense. There's nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with telling the truth about the things -- and people -- I strongly disagree with. Free speech? I got that. As do you. In fact, my publishing your letters is allowing your Free Speech to be exercised, even though it creates more work for me. No one who knows me thinks that I "lead a very unhappy life". No one. Not even thou.

"I hope you have shown your husband what you wrote about me concerning ''Maureen Rupe Exposed''as I shall." There you go again: husband, husband, husband! Where is the feminist? When shall you show him? I'd love to be there. I'm sure he's looking forward to it, too, and will get a kick out of telling you to take a hike. BTW, Does Bob know that you spend this much time obsessing about MY husband? Should he be worried?

"Your writing in magazine's, do they know your true capabilities." Have you ever heard of question marks and plurals instead of possessives? I write for a total of three websites besides my own. Yes. They know about my website. That's part of the reason they hired me. I didn't have to hide anything to be hired. Besides, with search engines capable of finding porn with "Maureen Rupe Exposed" on them, I'm sure the "magazine's [sic]" for whom I write could have found anything I tried to hide from them if I had done so.

"By the way, I am to [sic] ill to ever run for office, I am 69 now , but you look for anything that [sic] can to insult me." I'm not glad you're ill, but I am SO VERY GLAD you'll not run for office again. That's good news! Thank you! I think I speak for a large portion -- approximately 74% -- of the population of the people you tried to forcibly incorporate when I say "THANK YOU!"

"You are obsessed with hate and jealousy for me," I do not hate you. If I saw you lying on the ground having a heart attack, bleeding, or in need of assistance I would do what I could to help you. I cannot guarantee I would be able to save your life because I have never had a CPR lesson (I know I should fix that), nor do I deal well with blood, but I'd try. As for jealousy of you: for what should I be jealous? I've been inside your house at least once when I was picking you up to take you somewhere -- not jealous. I've seen your hubby -- definitely not jealous. I've seen your friends -- nope, not jealous. I've learned your beliefs -- nothing to be jealous of there (repulsed, yes, jealous, no). If it's things that you own that you think me jealous of, I don't know what that could be. My things are just as nice as, if not nicer than, yours. Accomplishments? Nope. I disagree with most of what you've done. Forcible incorporation of five communities? Proud of that? Of what, exactly, is there to be jealous? I'd dearly love to know. (Although considering how often you mention my husband, I begin to wonder if you're jealous of him.)

"You hate every good thing I have done yet boast when you clip a few coupons." I don't hate "every good thing you've done" because, for the most part, I don't see the things you've done as being good. PSJ Incorporation (as well as forcibly incorporating five other communities that wanted nothing to do with it); supporting the 1¢ sales tax; suing to stop CAPIT; plagiarism; the candidates you supported; PSJHOA's wrongdoings; EELs; PSJAB; etc., etc., etc. The list goes on and on and on. I don't think the PSJ Parish Medical Center is necessary and it's a waste of space. We already had more medical offices and facilities than we can shake a stick at. I see most of the "accomplishments" you loudly proclaim with great pride, as being bad. So of what am I supposedly jealous? As to the coupon clipping: I haven't mentioned that in almost a year and the reason I mentioned it at all was to educate others on the program I had signed up for and participated in. It helped our troops and that's not something even you can complain about, is it? The more people doing things to help our troops the better. But you throw that in my face as something I'm "boast[ing]" about? Really? Your memory of that and mentioning it is a serious psychological clue as to your state of mind. Sad.

"Please show this to Keith as it will effect him." You know, I'm beginning to wonder with all of the mentions you make of my husband, if you have a thing for him. Is that what is happening here? You have to threaten me to try to drive a wedge between us? Think he'll leave me and go to you? Is that it? If so, take your best shot. Should Bob be jealous? Has he seen what YOU write about MY husband?

"Just as you have effected my husband and Family." YOU effected your husband and family. It was YOUR lies I corrected. It was YOU who got involved in PSJ4T and I corrected their lies and defeated their goals. It was YOU who ran for public office and lied in your campaign info (proven time and time and time again) and I who defeated you. It was YOU who wrote lies about Bill Powell, Trudie Infantini, Pete Costello, myself, and others and I who stood up to you and corrected your lies. It IS YOU who writes to me knowing the pattern and history of my website and my printing of your rants. YOU have effected YOUR husband and family. Your actions effected your family. Not many grandmothers will throw their granddaughters under the bus, or sic their husbands on someone: it was you who actually wrote the complaint, wasn't it? It's your style and wording, but your hubby's signature. So whose idea was it? I'm betting on you.

"What goes around comes around, for you, and the Editor of PSJ History." The editor/owner of PSJ History has done nothing but post the proven truth. I also happen to know that you have not as yet contacted the owner/editor of PSJ History. Why is that? Your e-mail complains about MRE but you fail to contact the owner/editor of MRE? Is it only MY ATTENTION you want? Am I that special to you? Or is that your way of saying that your plan for getting my attention is working only if I write back to you? Well, next time you write, I won't write back, how's that? Let's see if that makes you go away, go crazy, or if you'll keep writing until I do write. Experiment time!

"What you wrote on February 16th 2013, could only be written by evil, to hurt and destroy and you loved it. [I inserted the link]" What I wrote on February 16, 2013 was following the pathway you led me down. YOU brought up porn; not I. YOU brought up "many sites"; not I. YOU say that "Maureen Rupe Exposed" has your name, address, and an aerial view of your house on it. YOU included your name and address on the resume the MRE site linked to at your old campaign site (still up illegally) and your name and address is on the complaint you and your hubby filed against MRE in its original incarnation. That was YOUR doing. The aerial view never existed anywhere but in your imagination. I commented upon YOUR statements: it is called a conversation. Again, if you had said "porn sites" and I had said "giraffe" in response, there would be reason to worry. But my reaction was natural, logical and reasonable because YOU mentioned porn that went to "many sites". Was I supposed to say, "I'll tell the owner of MRE to take the site down"? It's not going to happen. Why would I help you squelch Free Speech?

"God help you, he is not talking to you or on your side." This from an avowed Atheist? How on earth would YOU know? You allege "he is not talking to you or on your side." Check out the links and see what GOD has to say about that. A word of advice: Atheists who are not well versed in the Bible should not try to take on someone who believes in, reads and studies the Bible. It should definitely be a "No Go!" territory for you. Will you listen and learn? I seriously doubt it. Atheists have an automatic function built in: "Go for the Christianity jugular! Attack his/her Christianity!" Somehow atheists always seem to think that attacking our Christianity will make us back away from a fight. GOD doesn't tell me to "put on the full armor of GOD" in order to back down. Armor is meant for battle and it will never work to attack me for my Christianity. You know that -- or at least SHOULD -- by now.

"Sincerely,
"Maureen Rupe

So there you have it. I said I would respond and I have. Next time she writes, I will TRY to not respond. Sometimes it depends on how ridiculous she gets and how much fun I can have with it. Other times it depends on how busy I am as to how quickly I get to the response part. As I said earlier, I'll try to NOT respond next... Wait. I just remembered that she doesn't like me not responding. Remember her "I am waiting." e-mail? Yeah. She demands my attention. It will just be more painful if I don't respond relatively quickly. And she says I'm obsessed? Rrrriiiiggghhhttt.

Remember: Anyone who does not give you a wake-up call when they see you being stupid, self-destructive, or both, just plain doesn't care about you. It's those of us who do wake you up who care.