Barton Offered Facts

Advertisement

Editor:

I petition you as editor of the only “free press” available to the people of Payson, to publish my thoughts regarding the comments of Rep. Barton, as well as opposing comments from I assume you the editor in “Our View.”

The basis of my comments regard the fact that Rep. Barton expressed her constitutional right to expression of “free speech,” arguably as you did.

I believe that President Obama was not maligned by direct insult, perhaps by association.

The response, of course, was a direct attack on the representative in a proven fashion in order to discredit her personally. Reading your article, I could only discern from the comments that she is “crazy,” that she is paranoid, overstates the issue, is extreme in her views or that her comments are intended to pose a “malignant” threat to the people of Payson.

You suggest that her opinion as an elected official is “destructive intransigence” and hateful. Yet I did not see a factual repudiation of her statements, nor the obvious corollary she offered in her remarks (defined as a proposition that follows with little or no proof required from one already proven).

She offered factual statements to prove her points. Such as a definition of the words “Fuhrer” a tyrannical leader, who would direct his troops to blindly follow his orders to “foist” those tyrannical orders upon the people.

Then she followed up with evidentiary facts to prove her point that unless we make a change in our government’s approach to governing, it could well lead us to a path similar to those extracted by other tyrants around the world.

Why is that our president has been allowed to circumvent the Constitution as she stated, using as an example, the ACA. This legislation set new revenues without the approvals of the House of Representatives. Or that the president then circumvented his own law by granting waivers to that law to some of “the people” and not to all of the people? Even to those who made the law.

She pointed out the environment created and foisted upon the people allowed for use of the IRS against his “enemies,” spying on the American people through the NSA, arresting veterans, prohibiting religious freedoms. All of which are in violation of many of the constitutional rights of the people, much as any “tyrant” would do.

She also correctly quoted the Declaration of Independence.

I see “your view” as using the same vitriol to marginalize Rep. Barton as you accuse her of. Yet in order to discredit her, you must disprove each of her assertions that the actions taken by our government today (specifically President Obama) are outside of the U.S. Constitution, are not true in fact. Using supposition or vitriol to prove your point is to lose the entire argument.

Closing, I suggest that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it might just be evidence of a duck! Unless proven otherwise.

Ric Gabbert

Comments

H. Wm. Rhea III 1 year, 1 month ago

So you're saying President Obama is a duck?? That was a joke on my part. The truth is President Obama is the south bound end of a north bound horse. Rep. Barton was correct as you point out and should be congratulated for telling the truth.

0

Mel Mevis 1 year, 1 month ago

The only thing I guess I agree with is your comment " if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it might just be evidence of a duck! Unless proven otherwise."

I have seen a lot of racists in my life and Ms Barton sure looks like a duck .......

0

don evans 1 year, 1 month ago

Hey, keep throwin that "R" word around because it is so meaningless in todays context. Only a Loon (a lake bird) would identify a Hawk as a Duck and try to attack it.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.