Home | Classifieds | Place an Ad | Public Notices | Subscriber Services | 928 Media Lab | Real Estate Search | Galleries | Obits | Yellow Pages | TV Listings | Contact Us
The Prescott Daily Courier | Prescott, Arizona

home : opinions : opinions December 17, 2014

6/10/2013 6:00:00 AM
Letter: Scandals have liberals scrambling


New to Prescott, today I received my first Courier and read it cover to cover. I enjoyed the Opinion page; the article on "better to vote than trust" was insightful especially in light of the seemingly endless list of scandals emanating from this White House. I also enjoyed reading "Scandals slap journalists" and the letter from Juli Dalton.

To sum up what I learned from my first Courier reading, I'll draw on the last five years of living in liberal Illinois; not one liberal will change their mind. Rush is wrong; it's not the low information voter, their opinions are formed from the likes of Jon Stewart and the Ministry of Disinformation headed up by the Davids, Plouffe and Axlerod. It's not the volume of information but the fear-mongering propaganda that influences the liberal mind. We've become a nation set against itself.

The list of scandals in this administration dwarfs that of any POTUS in history and that, my liberal friends, includes your favorite whipping boy Richard Milhous Nixon. The recent side run to have the EPA ban ammunition is just another list of scandals you can add to Fast & Furious, Benghazi, IRS voter suppression, invasion of AP records, the 1st amendment attack on James Rosen and now we learn of secret email accounts in the Obama administration.

Conservatives and those in the middle are not going to change the liberal mind. The only recourse is like the article says, "better to vote than trust."

Ted Gambogi


    Most Viewed     Recently Commented
•   Snow could be on way for Prescott area (3488 views)

•   Winter Weather Advisory issued; 1 to 2 inches of snow predicted today (1866 views)

•   Company reunites vet, WWII plane (1500 views)

•   County bans e-cigarettes: County buildings, vehicles now smoke and vapor free (1470 views)

•   Playground gets makeover, thanks to volunteers (1301 views)

Reader Comments

Posted: Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Article comment by: a bc

@@ a bc Not that long ago...?!?!?!

Do you really believe that 5 or so years is a long time? Frankly, that's not a lot of water under the bridge, but I suppose conservatives are more in a hurry to forget Bush seeing how he kinda wrecked things for the Republican Party. Notice how often he was mentioned in the last election by Romney, et al. Almost never. Heck, he was even a no show at the Republican convention while Bill Clinton gave a great speech over at the Democratic convention. No wonder conservatives get upset when we bring him up, they don't seem to like him either.

Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013
Article comment by: @ a bc Not that long ago...?!?!?!

YOU SAID: Bush :...was prez not that long ago...."

Really? Seems to me that with a little arithmetic we could calculus that if a woman got pregnant the day Barack Obama stole the 2008 and swore in as Prez, the kid would be in the first grade by now.

There have been over 1,500 American soldiers killed in Afghanistan since Obama took over, more than 2X as many a Bush managed to get killed in this foolish adventure.

There are millions of more Americans on Food Stamps, Social Security Disability, and with over 2 million jobs missing completely from America in the 'short' time since Obama took over.

Seems like a long time to me.

An eternity, in fact.

Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013
Article comment by: a bc

@ @ Bob Lynne, You wrote, "So how many years after GWB are the libs and dems crying about him? They still are."

Well, I guess GWB cast a pretty long dark shadow and deserves to be mentioned. I know it may seem like an eternity in political years, but he was prez not that long ago. You rightys still like to go on about how awful Bill Clinton was as a president, so let's not go casting stones. By the way, I think it's you guys who are crying the most about GWB, I mean look how screwed up the GOP is post-Bush.

Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013
Article comment by: Candi Canyon

How can any justice be done when Obama keeps pardoning the people involved. Does he really want the truth or is he covering up more than we think.

Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013
Article comment by: Jasmine Tea

I know one thing for sure… change is inevitable. What I do not understand is why people want to try ideas that have been proven failures time after time, Socialism, Communism, dictatorships and governments that subvert the will of the people.

Maybe the responsibility of ‘freedom’ is too much for many of these people that allow this kind of thing to recur?

We can talk about all these scandals until the cows come home… the facts are that the people allow it to continue. Politicians like Obama and McCain are so transparent to anyone with a brain… that are [WILLING] to see the real picture.

It appears to me that at least 50 million people are so apathetic that you could do just about anything to them, short of taking their welfare check, cell phone, large screen television or their life, they truly are a pathetic lot.

Politicians and illegal aliens will continue to exploit this apathy until something monumental changes.

All of these scandals prove one thing for sure… most laws are made to selectively [BLUDGEON] the enemies of those who have the reins of power. The people like Obama certainly do not feel a need to follow them.

Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013
Article comment by: a bc

@@ a bc OK...so let's investigate, impeach, and decide

I never said anything about a special prosecutor, but go ahead, bring it on. So far the many lengthy and on going Republican investigations have yielded little to nothing in the way of linkage to the White House, the President or even between the various mini-scandals. And this is probably the reason why few people are seriously calling for a special prosecutor or impeachment.

However, I maintain that even if and when any spec. prosecutor/investigation/ impeachment/whatever finds the Prez innocent of any wrong doing, no one in the tin foil hat conspiracy club will believe it. All they'll say is he used his evil presidential super powers and corrupt Chicago ways to subvert the process and get away with something. Look what happened over his birth certificate. Even after he provided everything they asked for, way more than any president ever, they still don't believe it. Look at how you write about him, look at how you write with such certainty, minus any evidence, that he did or knows something. What would your own reaction be if he was found guilty of nothing? I'm pretty certain that nothing would sway you. Guilty until proven guilty.

Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013
Article comment by: @ Bob Lynne

So how many years after GWB are the libs and dems crying about him? They still are.

Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013
Article comment by: @ troll

Lyle/Paula/@: You have claimed that your goal is to "excite" commenters on these articles, so you are, indeed, a troll.

Please don't feed a troll.

Posted: Sunday, June 16, 2013
Article comment by: @ a bc OK...so let's investigate, impeach, and decide

I have suspicions, but no hate. Or, at least none that I would not have for any other seditious passing politician that is trying to put the US in yet another war to save his own skin.

However, I do agree with you on one thing. Until there is a special prosecutor appointed, and an investigation is conducted regarding these events so we can learn who ordered the criminal actions, who knew what, and when they knew it, we will get nowhere.

Obama should have taken action by now, except all he has done is blow smoke via 3rd parties, and you are right. I hate that.

So, since it is obvious the usual Obamunist excuse of "Mistakes were made but no one made them" will not work this time, I assume you would want a total investigation into the matter to show 'haters' like me the true merit and mettle of your failing President.


Posted: Sunday, June 16, 2013
Article comment by: a bc

@Si SI / @ or? - So after all your little scenarios about what is and what isn't evidence you still have nothing concrete to show why Obama or anyone in the White House is guilty of anything but your speculations and suspicions. In America people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, even the President. Although the Constitution of the United States does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments.

Let me help you understand. Your a hopeless conspiracy theorist with nothing to go on but your hate of the president. Let me know when you have something of substance that backs up your claims or show them in your next post, although we both know you still don't have anything but your suspicions and your hate.

Posted: Sunday, June 16, 2013
Article comment by: @ a bc Obama is likely guilty by knowledge & association

a bc you, and the other lefty Obamapologizers are living in a fantasy land. Somewhere along the line you want to believe that a bunch of individuals within the IRS / NSA / FBI / ATF acting alone and independently, all of a sudden decided to begin harassing TEA Party members and anyone else who was ideologically opposed to Obama. This nameless autonomous group of random individuals then just happened to get this idea after the upset elections of 2010, and then really got cooking during the presidential election cycle of 2012.

Is that what you wish yourself and others to believe? Because it is bogus.

Somebody gave this whole shenanigan and vote suppressing pogrom the green light. This person would have to be in the upper tiers of the executive branch in order to coordinate activity and call the shots. There would be no one else in a position to do so, thus the wink-wink / nudge-nudge guidance had to come from the White House.

A likely person in a position to know all of this first hand is Valerie Jarrett a long time Obama apparatchik and loyalist who works directly for Obama...and if Ms. Jarrett knew about this scheme, then so did Obama.

Simple fact.

Posted: Sunday, June 16, 2013
Article comment by: @ a bc Wrong again.

No, a bc, you are completely wrong.

Notifying the police alleging a crime is not 'evidence' of anything. Finding a purse is not 'evidence'. Having a suspect walking down the street is not 'evidence'.

That is all referred to as Reasonable Belief and Probable Cause...things like that. "Evidence" is terminally established by a court, not the police, not the prosecutor, and not the victim. Evidence is collected to build a case for prosecution, it is not evidence just because the police say it is such.

Let me help you understand. A Narcotics Dog is tasked to search a vehicle for drugs. The K-9 alerts to the presence of drugs. This may give probable cause...but it is not 'evidence' of anything, and cannot be used in and of itself to prosecute anyone.

A person is given a drug test that shows positive for heroin. This is NOT evidence of heroin possession, but could be considered a plank in building a case of a potential crime having been committed.

The hypothetical telephone call to police alleging a crime is not 'evidence' of anything.

Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013
Article comment by: Zig E.

a bc, I have to applaud your patience. I gave up trying to have any sort of meaningful dialog with @ long ago. I won't waste time with someone who's constantly in the throws of projectile verbal diarrhea. Pugnacious in nature, name calling, mud slinging, temper tantrums, and straw-man arguments are his/her stock in trade. Ruminating over which is the better way to pull toilet paper from the roll, would be time better spent.

Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013
Article comment by: Mr. Maverick

Ted, your rambling thoughts should have stayed in Illinois where this type of opinion is welcome. Now you have fouled my place to live. Go back to where you came from and leave my state alone. Take your neocon whacked ideology with you.

Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013
Article comment by: a bc

@si si, actually evidence of the purse snatching has been amassed from the beginning. There's an eyewitness, a buried purse, a fleeing suspect, etc. All this would be used as evidence at any subsequent trial, however the man is still innocent until proven otherwise despite his actions.
the difference between your scenario and the current investigations is that you guys are already calling the president guilty when there has been no evidence for this. Theres no purse, no eyewitness or anything pointing to Obama. You're assuming he's guilty because he's just got to be, he's Obama for crying out loud!, and no contradictory evidence or lack of evidence will ever steer you away from your judgement of him. Let's face it, if all the investigations lead to nothing you'll simply say that he rigged the system somehow and is still guilty of something, because he's just got to be.

Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013
Article comment by: Tom Von Deck

@Mr. @: I think you're right about the special prosecutor. You can't expect the administration to investigate itself, and the Republican house is just a little too bloodthirsty. Last I checked, 53% of Americans wanted a special prosecutor on the case. We can make things up about the prez all we want, but being honest and pushing for this prosecutor to be assigned is probably better than crying wolf.

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: a bc

@Mr. @, You had me with your first line "...Of course there is no 'evidence'..." Everything else is pure conspiracy theory, tin-foil hat time nonsense.
Good luck Mr.@. I'm done.

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: Si! Se! me Puede. Reasonable belief is not evidence, it is clues.

a bc, you (along with TVD and all the others (?) seem confused about what is evidence, what is probable cause, what is reasonable belief, etc.

Let me help. Here is the scenario. A women calls 911 and says their purse was stolen by a guy in a red flannel shirt on Whiskey Row. Police patrols respond. Upon arrival and a search , officers see a guy in a red shirt walking down the street carrying a women's style purse.

At this point there is no evidence of a crime, much more a suspect. Only reasonable belief a crime occurred.

The red shirt guy is detained and questioned by police. He denies all, but throws the purse into a hole and tries to cover it up. Suspicious, but not evidence.

The red shirt guy breaks loose and runs away, yelling over his shoulder that the women who called the police is crazy. Still no evidence.

The red shirt guy is captured by police and given a pat down...etc. etc.

At some point the 'investigating' officers will locate evidence that a crime has been committed...or not.

First, however, before any arrest is made, or charges filed, an investigation needs to occur, there is no one charged with a crime, locked up in jail or sent to prison based solely on somebody else calling the police..or notifying congress.

This is where we are with Obama and the Chicago Wrecking Crew. Somebody has called the 'police' (ie. Snowden, TEA Party, etc) authorities have responded...now we need to sort out the deal with an investigation.

Obama can try to start wars and blow smoke all he wants...it won't help.

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: @ a bc Time for a Special Prosecutor.

Of course there is no 'evidence' Obama and the choir in DC and the MSM are trying to cover it all up.

Today, Robert Mueller, FBI chief, whose direct boss is Eric Holder, spun and twisted and flat out lied to Congress regarding status of agents involved in the IRS investigation. Said he did not know a thing. Could / Would not name the primary case agent. Said he had no idea where the investigation stood. Had no clue about anything in fact. Seems Mr. Mueller would like to dumpster the entire affair and move on to polishing Eric Holder's assigned limousine., and hope everyone will lose interest in how their rights are being taken.

Not me. Why? Because there is so much, much, much more to learn. Primarily, was the IRS used to help Obama suppress the vote of conservative Americans (Likely), did the White House and the Obamunist apparatchiks know what the IRS was up to (Yes), did Obama personally give the green light (Absolutely).

However, since the valiant crime fighter Robert Mueller who runs the FBI, and thus reports directly to Eric Holder, who reports directly to Barack Obama, there is no way the FBI will investigate any matter that could bring down everyone from Mueller to the President.

Which is why an independent Special Prosecutor, with subpoena power, and authority to arrest and prosecute, should be appointed ASAP. There will be a need for this evidence in the impeachment trials anyway.

Obama is a fraud. No aspect of his life from the bogus birth certificate, to Michelle's bogus garden, to the bogus Benghazi bungle, to the bogus IRS harassment, to the bogus Fast & Furious, to the bogus ACA, to the bogus State Department's prostitution ring, to the bogus NSA, None of it can withstand any type of real scrutiny.

If congress does not act soon, and appoint a special prosecutor, this charlatan of a president will slip away again...we even know how he is planning to do it. In a word, SYRIA.

As in invade. As in kill thousands. As in support al Qaeda disguised as 'rebels'. As in put the world in war.

Obama is flat planning on engaging in yet another war to take the focus off his clear criminality in the USA, and hopes no one will notice.

I notice.

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: a bc

@Mr.@, you missed my point. I was asking evidence from you about Obama's connection to any of these faux-scandals. You keep saying he's guilty of something, something or other and then fail to deliver any evidence for your claims - evidence "any rookie patrol officer in the DC police department could put together". So where is it? Doesn't "innocent until proven guilty" mean anything to you people?
The reason you haven't produced any evidence is because you have none, otherwise you'd have done it.

Nixon had "...character and love of country"? Yeah, he resigned to save us all the trouble. That's rich. Thanks for rewriting that bit of history. Unbelievable.

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: Bi-Paula Disorder

Once again, you prove my point far more effectively than I could. Sock puppetry? Make that a four year old. I was being too generous.

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: @ Bi-Paula Disorder More sock puppetry from the Usual Suspect

What a hoot, first you misuse the word, then did not even cut & paste the loose definition correctly off Google. Man you lefty-O's are silly. I don't even have to look up the word as I speak fluent German, lived in-country for 7 years, and travel there often.

In other words this is just another thing that lefty-libs think they know, but do not.

So, let me get this straight.

On your Foreign Word of the Day' calendar you notice the convoluted, slangy, and not really a word in any language, "Fremdscham", which you say is "...a German word that has no English equivalent..." and then go on to explain it all...incorrectly.

Frendscham is not a noun, it is never used alone, the actual usage of this 'word' is in a phrase, as in "die Frendscham' which is nothing more than a derivative slang word for Schadenfreude, meaning to feel embarrassed for someone else in German.

I doubt if you feel embarrassed for me, and as to bringing out the "...Fremdscham (to) bring it out in all of the good and decent readers of the Courier. Sad. Very sad."

The only ones getting hoisted by their left wing socialist, blue, sad little Petards are you liberal Obamunists who cannot present a cogent argument in defense or what your DC hero is doing, or logically define what you think you believe in, although it is clear to any logical mind.

Let me help. "As an Obamunist I don't want to be productive, but do feel a 'right' to be dependent on the government and demand my life be paid for by others whom I get to criticize and lord over."

Does that about sum it up?

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: Steamroller Trolling

Oh, Tradewinds. You are just too funny!

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: Inattentive Listener

Haha, this time I got as far as "@Attentive List..." There are so many interesting things to read today, and this isn't one of them.

Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013
Article comment by: The IRS are crooks

@Hooty: The House Ways and Means committee last week heard testimony from Rep.Peter Roskum, former law partner of Al Salvi, who was harassed during his senate campaign by now head of the IRS engaging in beurocratic snares. They even vistited the guy's mother who donated $2k and asked where the money came from. There was no coverage of that hearing/meeting in any of the press of course. But the IRS does play the role of harasser of its political foes no doubt, and the secret is out.

  - Page 1 -  Page 2

Article Comment Submission Form
Comments are not posted immediately. Submissions must adhere to our Use of Service Terms of Use agreement. Rambling or nonsensical comments may not be posted. Comments are limited to Facebook character limits. In order for us to reasonably manage this feature we may limit excessive comment entries.
Submit an Article Comment
First Name:
Last Name:
Anti-SPAM Passcode Click here to see a new mix of characters.
This is an anti-SPAM device. It is not case sensitive.

Advanced Search

HSE - We want to hear from you
Find more about Weather in Prescott, AZ
Click for weather forecast

Quick Links
 •  Submit site feedback or questions

 •  Submit your milestone notice

 •  Submit your letter to the editor

 •  Submit a news tip or story idea

 •  Place a classified ad online now

 •  Browse the Yellow Pages

Find It Features Blogs Milestones Extras Submit Other Publications Links
Classifieds | Subscriber Services | Real Estate Search | Galleries | Find Prescott Jobs | e-News | RSS | Site Map | Contact Us
© Copyright 2014 Western News&Info, Inc.® The Daily Courier is the information source for Prescott area communities in Northern Arizona. Original content may not be reprinted or distributed without the written permission of Prescott Newspapers, Inc. Prescott Newspapers Online is a service of Prescott Newspapers Inc. By using the Site, dcourier.com ®, you agree to abide and be bound by the Site's terms of use and Privacy Policy, which prohibit commercial use of any information on the Site. Click here to submit your questions, comments or suggestions. Prescott Newspapers Online is a proud publication of Western News&Info, Inc.® All Rights Reserved.

Software © 1998-2014 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved