Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Desiree Capuano & James Pendleton
250 E. Placita Lago Del Mago
Sahuarita, AZ     85629
Tel: 520-288-8200
Back to Mailbox Back to mailbox
Newer Message Newer message
Older Message Older message
Re: More of what I know
From: Patrick <>
To: Desiree Capuano <>
Date: Mon, May 11 2015 12:13:58 pm

In point of fact, you are NOT a very patient person.  You become 
emotional and act irrationally and say things without thinking them 
through.  You do things without considering the potential consequence.  
That is why your actions usually backfire on you.

I think it is clear that I *HAVE* won the arguments.  I have 
successfully proven each of your statements either incorrect or moot.  
You have not proven any of my statements incorrect or moot. Therefore, 
yes, I have indeed won the arguments.

There is no evidence to support a claim that I am arrogant or ignorant.  
In fact, if anything, these discussions today only prove the opposite - 
that *YOU* are the arrogant one (for thinking that you're something 
significant when there is no basis for such), and phenomenally ignorant 
(your words make that abundantly clear).


On 05/11/2015 11:44 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
> this has been fun...really.  I understand you think you 'won' your 
> argument and you have proven once again to show how ignorant I am and 
> are gloating about how the whole world is going to see me for the way 
> I really am.  You keep thinking that.  You arrogance and ignorance 
> will be your undoing.  I am a very patient person :-)  Talk to you 
> later :-)
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Patrick 
> > wrote:
>     No.  A dictionary provides the definitions of words.  In some
>     cases, like feeling and emotions, there can be no definition due
>     to the circular reference.  So, we have to look past the word and
>     consider the concept which the word attempts to embody.
>     You're really making yourself look incredibly unintelligent here. 
>     Consider you have a bachelors degree (albeit, a pseudo one) and I
>     have grade 8.  You're really impressing the world with your wit
>     and intellect.  Thank god we get to put these wonderful
>     discussions on your website.
>     Patrick
>     On 05/11/2015 11:30 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>     Oh, so in this case  isn't
>>     good enough because it would make you wrong about something
>>     right?  I get it.
>>     On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Patrick
>>     > wrote:
>>         Desiree:
>>         You're incorrect (again).  Annoyance is not an emotion.  It
>>         is a mental state characterized by irritation and
>>         distraction.  Annoyance can lead to frustration and anger
>>         (anger can be considered an emotion).  Annoyance is a
>>         potential cause of an emotion (or emotional state) - it is
>>         not, itself, an emotion.  For more information you can refer to
>>         But you bring up a good point:  you insistence that
>>         "annoyance" is an emotion, when it's actually the *cause* (or
>>         more specifically, catalyst) of an emotional response, is
>>         unequivocal proof that you are incapable of distinguishing a
>>         cause from an effect - just as I had stated you are, a few
>>         days ago.  Thank you for proving my point.
>>         I also point out that the term "feeling" uses, in it's
>>         definition, the term "emotion", which uses in it's
>>         definition, the term "feeling".  That is a circular
>>         reference.  You do know what a circular reference is, right? 
>>         You do understand that if two terms (whether in diction or in
>>         math) depend on each other such that they create a circular
>>         reference then neither term can ever actually be resolved. 
>>         Wasn't logic covered in your bachelors curriculum?
>>         Patrick
>>         On 05/11/2015 10:59 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>         Oh but you can't possibly be annoyed Richard...annoyance is
>>>         an emotion...
>>>         (from
>>>         annoyance
>>>         [uh-noi-uh ns]
>>>         Spell Syllables
>>>         Examples Word Origin
>>>         noun
>>>         1. a person or thing that annoys; nuisance:
>>>         2. an act or instance of annoying.
>>>         *3. the feeling of being annoyed.*
>>>         On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Patrick
>>>         >
>>>         wrote:
>>>             Desiree:
>>>             Admittedly, yes, I am quickly annoyed by stupidity.
>>>             Patrick
>>>             On 05/11/2015 10:40 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>             oh, don't you know?  I'm trying to play right into your
>>>>             plan of turning G***** against me by showing him how
>>>>             you never get annoyed..."Why is it that you don't just
>>>>             shut up and fuck off"  - clearly not annoyed.
>>>>             On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 7:14 PM, Patrick
>>>>             >>>             > wrote:
>>>>                 Desiree:
>>>>                 If your position is that you are going to allow
>>>>                 G***** to visit and there's nothing I can do to
>>>>                 make you refuse to allow him to visit, then why are
>>>>                 we even having all of this communication? Why is it
>>>>                 that you don't just shut up and fuck off, and let
>>>>                 that be the end of it?  On my end, the purpose of
>>>>                 the communication revolves around G***** being
>>>>                 able to come to Vancouver for part of the summer so
>>>>                 that I can fulfill my duties to him as his father. 
>>>>                 You seem to be arguing about the same thing,
>>>>                 however now you're saying that you're going to
>>>>                 allow him to come and there's nothing I can do to
>>>>                 make you NOT allow it.
>>>>                 So, what the fuck are we talking for then?  If
>>>>                 you're going to allow G***** to visit then there
>>>>                 is nothing further for us to say to each other.
>>>>                 Anything I could possibly want to say to or about
>>>>                 you I'd rather post on your web site, anyway.
>>>>                 Patrick
>>>>                 On 05/07/2015 04:27 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>>                 Oh you little man.  I don't fear you or G*****
>>>>>                 opinion of me.  I am also not preventing
>>>>>                 visitation. Try as you might to get me to say
>>>>>                 'no' I will not do it.
>>>>>                 On Thursday, May 7, 2015, Patrick
>>>>>                 >>>>                 > wrote:
>>>>>                     Desiree:
>>>>>                     By the way, I know you don't deal well with
>>>>>                     reality, so I don't expect you to respond
>>>>>                     sincerely to these most recent messages.
>>>>>                     Patrick
>>>>>                     On 05/07/2015 01:07 PM, Patrick wrote:
>>>>>                         Desiree:
>>>>>                         I also know that you don't want to let
>>>>>                         G***** visit with me because you know
>>>>>                         that when he visits we bond more and that
>>>>>                         puts more distance "emotionally" between
>>>>>                         you and him; yet you don't want to
>>>>>                         explicitly refuse to let him visit because
>>>>>                         you know that he will resent you for it.
>>>>>                         So, you're trying to create a situation
>>>>>                         whereby you can say it was because of me
>>>>>                         that he couldn't visit.  But I've
>>>>>                         explained to him that my mother used to do
>>>>>                         the same stuff when I was a kid. That my
>>>>>                         father eventually stopped coming to visit
>>>>>                         and I learned later in life that it was
>>>>>                         because of the games my mother would play
>>>>>                         - the same stuff you're doing right now.
>>>>>                         As always, your scheme won't work. The
>>>>>                         only way it could would be if you
>>>>>                         completely cut off communication between
>>>>>                         G***** and I and made it so he could only
>>>>>                         hear your version of events.  But there's
>>>>>                         no way you can do that without grossly
>>>>>                         upsetting the court and G*****.  And your
>>>>>                         versions of events always rely on the
>>>>>                         listener's pity and sense of guilt.
>>>>>                         Eventually, people get tired of hearing
>>>>>                         about how someone is always such a victim
>>>>>                         because in reality most of the problems in
>>>>>                         our lives are the result of our own
>>>>>                         actions and the only people that don't
>>>>>                         realize that are the ones that are always
>>>>>                         trying to blame others for their problems
>>>>>                         - people like you.
>>>>>                         Patrick