Skip to Navigation Skip to Main Content

Letters to the editor, July 16

Question of credibility

At times I wonder if the teapot party is a giant reservation for ignorance or if these people have an urge to substitute what they want the meaning of a word to be contrary to its actual meaning.

To either educate or correct James Penton’s interpretation of the word “proof” [DRC, June 28], here is the dictionary meaning: proof — (law in judicial proceedings) Evidence having probative weight.

Please remember I said it has not been proven that President Obama sicced the IRS on conservative groups that oppose him. Watching and listening to congressional scandal hearings does not, as you admit in your letter, constitute proof but as you said yourself “circumstantial evidence.”

It doesn’t matter what Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, you, Eric Mach, Ray Roberts, Hyme Solomon or any other right-wing crackpot wants to call it. There is still no, and I doubt that there will ever be, proof that President Obama sicced the IRS on conservative groups.

According to California Democratic Representative Adam Schiff:

“I wish there was more interest when I raised the same issue during the Bush administration where they [the IRS] audited a progressive church in my district.”

And I can supply other examples of Republican chicanery.

James. I suppose it’s alright with you as long as the Republicans do it. Now where is your credibility?

John Nance Garner,
Denton