Posted by Pauly
on 7/16/2012, 1:03 am, in reply to "Re: Pauly"
I found it strange that a question on Steve's dogs got a reply with unsubstantiated rumors about his dogs ancestry. But somehow my pointing out that the same people who have spread these rumors have questionable motives, now makes me childish? What are you talking about?
Lets put it out there..the main people who initially claimed that gar was part boxer were Jack Osgood and Rayburn Stover. One of whom had dogs from Steve and parted ways with him under unfriendly circumstances, and the other has a documented history of bagging on other breeders with similar lines to question their "purity"...and whom himself has sold crossed up dogs as ab's to unknowing customers. Casey latched onto it as yet another way to try and discredit the performance breeders, as they were going back and forth between the Watchkeeper and the Bulldog Journal, NABA vs ABA.
I guess it doesn't matter to you that Jon L met Kenneth Bagwell in person, and was told that was all horseshit, that the litter gar was from was all AB. A guy who hasn't bred dogs in years, has nothing to gain one way or another. Easier I guess to believe the stories from these trustworthy oldtimers.
Casey, if you don't remember, was the one who published the story about country boy being part johnson dog in the journal. But I guess since that effects your dogs, that part must be false.
Now all the sudden I can't put the rumors in context, but everyone else is free to repeat them without check and balance? Come on.
And the underhanded remark about spending too much time on TG...please.
If putting perspective on history is somehow now out of bounds then let me know.
Message Thread | Skip to this response ↓
« Back to index