Seidel: Election system, nation on wrong track

Nov 8, 2012 Full story: Ruidoso News 22

The write-in candidate for Lincoln County sheriff, known for his fevered defense of the U.S. Constitution, warned of the direction he said the country is headed.

Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
dirty work

Ruidoso, NM

#1 Nov 9, 2012
cry baby, cry!!!
And now

United States

#2 Nov 9, 2012
Go out and pick up your damn signs that are littering the landscape.

By the way, my invitation to Mack's going away party must have gotten lost in the mail....when is it?
Hargrave

Capitan, NM

#3 Nov 9, 2012
The “Free Press refutes claims of campaign bias” article is laughable. Just the fact that they have to refute the claim speaks volumes. Sorry Eugene, writing an article saying you are not biased is equivalent to claiming you are a car because you are standing in a garage. It just doesn’t work like that.
This waste of paper has the audacity to plead that they received “non verifiable information, inaccurate facts or circumstances”, then say “which upon discovery are promptly retracted or corrected”.

Let’s be clear: this is about the Free Press’ attempt at character assassination, under the guise of being neutral, while “not endorsing candidates”. While you may not have officially endorsed one candidate (Shepperd), you went way out of your way to make sure any and every rumor and innuendo was published about his opponent (Seidel) while conveniently ignoring rumors and innuendos about Shepperd.

To publish an article without researching the facts is unethical, unprofessional and bordering on libelous. One phone call to Dr. Seidel, whom your paper alleged to have filed the Hatch Act complaint, would have cleared up the question. Any other paper would have called Dr. Seidel “for a comment”. But did the Free Press? Hell, no. You were foaming at the mouth to get the dirt published as soon as you could. Then, to compound the matter, rather than post a retraction, you had the article “corrected”.

Then, you try to excuse your journalistic failures by saying:“Candidates and elected officials should be prepared to embrace the higher level of scrutiny and accountability expected by the public…” Your total, profound lack of inquiry of one candidate while vilifying another IS evidence of your bias.

Unbiased? Why did you remove the public comment postings on your website under the article about Robert Shepperd? Me thinks your partiality wouldn’t permit the 3 to 1 negative postings about your “non-endorsed” golden-boy candidate.

Unbiased? There are three articles on the front page of Nov. 6. Two of those stories (Holloman shines … and Mescalero Army Veteran…) permit public comment posting, while the comment postings on the third,“Free Press refutes claims of campaign bias” are prohibited. What’s the matter? Afraid someone would post something factually inconvenient about the Free Press? It’s editor? Management? Affiliates? Ownership?

Eugene, you need to pull your head out as it is preventing you from clearly seeing the partiality given to one candidate by the (supposed) Free Press. Your protestations are self-incriminating.

PS: You screwed up and didn’t remove the posting link to this article. Let’s see how long this remains online.

Since: Mar 09

Weilburg, Germany

#4 Nov 10, 2012
So obvious, he's running for sheriff with one intention - he is a Tea Party activist and he wants a platform from where he can go with his political ambitions.

Actually it's not a problem he is a political activist. Like everybody else he has a right to believe whatever he wants to believe in and of course he can work for his political movement.

HOWEVER, the position of a sheriff should not be abused for political (or any other!) personal issues.... I know some of you don't like it but this is my opinion about it.

A sheriff is responsible for ALL the citizens in his region - no matter the race, income, lifestyle, gender, religion or political views. How can Dr. Seidel be unbiased and treat every case and every person involved or not in such case EQUALY when his political orientation and his "mission" clearly says what/who goes along with his attitude and who doesn't?

LAW enforcement is about the LAW not about politics. It's never a good thing to not separate these two things.

Dr. Seidel is a politician and maybe even a good one - I don't know. I think he should stick with his "mission" and follow his political path. Let LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS do the LAW ENFORCEMENT JOB.
Just In

Rio Rancho, NM

#5 Nov 10, 2012
I don`t know why he ran as a write in .What was the point of that?
Hargrave

Capitan, NM

#6 Nov 10, 2012
Bavarian Hillbilly wrote:
So obvious, he's running for sheriff with one intention - he is a Tea Party activist and he wants a platform from where he can go with his political ambitions.
Actually it's not a problem he is a political activist. Like everybody else he has a right to believe whatever he wants to believe in and of course he can work for his political movement.
HOWEVER, the position of a sheriff should not be abused for political (or any other!) personal issues.... I know some of you don't like it but this is my opinion about it.
A sheriff is responsible for ALL the citizens in his region - no matter the race, income, lifestyle, gender, religion or political views. How can Dr. Seidel be unbiased and treat every case and every person involved or not in such case EQUALY when his political orientation and his "mission" clearly says what/who goes along with his attitude and who doesn't?
LAW enforcement is about the LAW not about politics. It's never a good thing to not separate these two things.
Dr. Seidel is a politician and maybe even a good one - I don't know. I think he should stick with his "mission" and follow his political path. Let LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS do the LAW ENFORCEMENT JOB.
Seidel is not a Tea Party Activist. To be one, he would have had to attend meetings and participate with the group. It was the other way around. Once it was known he was running and WHY, then some of the local Tea Party gave him their support. However, the local Tea Party NEVER ENDORSED any candidates.
Second, he is not a political activist; he is a physician activist that ran for a political office. Slight wording change, BIG meaning change.

“HOWEVER, the position of a sheriff should not be abused for political (or any other!) personal issues”. On that we agree. But the problem is that for the past 8 years, the department was not operated with the best interest of all of the county residents as a priority. Patrol areas concentrated in less that 2 % of the county, 911 calls not being answered and drug activity operating with impunity. The current Undersheriff has been running the department for the past couple of years and, using that as an indicator, the prospect of change is unrealistic.

Based on your statement about Seidel not able to treat folks fairly, I can only say that you never met him. Otherwise you have realized that his “mission” is based on the U S Constitution, the N M Constitution and then state and federal law. Federal incursion would have been measured by the above constraints, i.e., if the feds show up to confiscate firearms or property without the appropriate steps, the Sheriff’s Office would stand between you and the Feds. In my mind, that is a mission that can be supported.
LAW enforcement is more than knowing just the codes, the officers MUST understand the Constitutions, both US and State, otherwise their Oath of Office is meaningless.

Unfortunately, the role of sheriff and deputy has morphed from “Peace Officer” to “Law Enforcement”. The academy preaches that officers must, at all times, be in control of the situation by domination and intimidation. That should be the exception, not the rule.

Dr. Seidel is a physician that saw an opportunity to bring highly qualified people in to run the department, introduce an understanding of the basis of laws and the encouragement of community involvement by the department.

This campaign was about a concept on how best to run the Sheriff’s Office. It was never about a political path.
Festus

Ruidoso, NM

#7 Nov 10, 2012
Hargrave wrote:
...Eugene, you need to pull your head out as it is preventing you from clearly seeing the partiality given to one candidate by the (supposed) Free Press. Your protestations are self-incriminating.
PS: You screwed up and didn’t remove the posting link to this article. Let’s see how long this remains online.
Shucks, Hargrave, I went to the Free Press and couldn't post on any of the news stories. Something bad wrong going on there I suspect. I would also suspect an editorial upheaval. Is Heathman committing editorial hare kari? I guess he can tell any future employer that he helped suppress free speech and tried to affect the outcome of an election. Always good to have a yes man in a position of power within the media.

Since: Mar 09

Munich, Germany

#8 Nov 11, 2012
Hargrave wrote:
<quoted text>
Seidel is not a Tea Party Activist. To be one, he would have had to attend meetings and participate with the group. It was the other way around. Once it was known he was running and WHY, then some of the local Tea Party gave him their support. However, the local Tea Party NEVER ENDORSED any candidates.
Second, he is not a political activist; he is a physician activist that ran for a political office. Slight wording change, BIG meaning change.
“HOWEVER, the position of a sheriff should not be abused for political (or any other!) personal issues”. On that we agree. But the problem is that for the past 8 years, the department was not operated with the best interest of all of the county residents as a priority. Patrol areas concentrated in less that 2 % of the county, 911 calls not being answered and drug activity operating with impunity. The current Undersheriff has been running the department for the past couple of years and, using that as an indicator, the prospect of change is unrealistic.
Based on your statement about Seidel not able to treat folks fairly, I can only say that you never met him. Otherwise you have realized that his “mission” is based on the U S Constitution, the N M Constitution and then state and federal law. Federal incursion would have been measured by the above constraints, i.e., if the feds show up to confiscate firearms or property without the appropriate steps, the Sheriff’s Office would stand between you and the Feds. In my mind, that is a mission that can be supported.
LAW enforcement is more than knowing just the codes, the officers MUST understand the Constitutions, both US and State, otherwise their Oath of Office is meaningless.
Unfortunately, the role of sheriff and deputy has morphed from “Peace Officer” to “Law Enforcement”. The academy preaches that officers must, at all times, be in control of the situation by domination and intimidation. That should be the exception, not the rule.
Dr. Seidel is a physician that saw an opportunity to bring highly qualified people in to run the department, introduce an understanding of the basis of laws and the encouragement of community involvement by the department.
This campaign was about a concept on how best to run the Sheriff’s Office. It was never about a political path.
You seem to be misinformed. The political path is the only path he has. He has ZERO qualification in LAW ENFORCEMENT - all he does have is his POLITICAL DRIVE and that's deeply connected with the Tea Party Movement.
LibraK

Alto, NM

#9 Nov 11, 2012
Bavarian Hillbilly wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be misinformed. The political path is the only path he has. He has ZERO qualification in LAW ENFORCEMENT - all he does have is his POLITICAL DRIVE and that's deeply connected with the Tea Party Movement.
And Tea Parties are for little girls with imaginary friends.:-)
Hargrave

Capitan, NM

#10 Nov 11, 2012
Bavarian Hillbilly wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be misinformed. The political path is the only path he has. He has ZERO qualification in LAW ENFORCEMENT - all he does have is his POLITICAL DRIVE and that's deeply connected with the Tea Party Movement.
I am not misinformed, you are uninformed.

You are correct in that “the political path was the only path he has”, but you didn’t complete the thought, which should have added “to bring a change to the Sheriff’s Office”.

He never disputed the fact that he has no experience in law enforcement. The Sheriff is similar to a captain of a large ship, there to steer it in the proper direction. Does the captain know how to run the engines, electrical systems, the kitchen, water purification systems, laundry? No, that is why they have competent, experienced people working for him. That is the reason he recruited Richard Mack (with over 20 years) and Minerva Davalos (also with 20 years) to run the day to day operation.

Again, based on your comments, you have never met the man, know nothing about his political drive or his supposed involvement with the local Tea Party.

Finally:

The current President had ZERO qualifications, yet was elected. After 3 ½ years and proving he still had ZERO qualifications, he was re-elected.
Shepperd, with multiple years running the local sheriff’s office and 911 calls not getting responses, deputies patrolling 2% of the county, and the drug activity continuing unabated, still gets elected.
Which proves: Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Really Now

Tularosa, NM

#11 Nov 11, 2012
Hargrave wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not misinformed, you are uninformed.
You are correct in that “the political path was the only path he has”, but you didn’t complete the thought, which should have added “to bring a change to the Sheriff’s Office”.
He never disputed the fact that he has no experience in law enforcement. The Sheriff is similar to a captain of a large ship, there to steer it in the proper direction. Does the captain know how to run the engines, electrical systems, the kitchen, water purification systems, laundry? No, that is why they have competent, experienced people working for him. That is the reason he recruited Richard Mack (with over 20 years) and Minerva Davalos (also with 20 years) to run the day to day operation.
Again, based on your comments, you have never met the man, know nothing about his political drive or his supposed involvement with the local Tea Party.
Finally:
The current President had ZERO qualifications, yet was elected. After 3 ½ years and proving he still had ZERO qualifications, he was re-elected.
Shepperd, with multiple years running the local sheriff’s office and 911 calls not getting responses, deputies patrolling 2% of the county, and the drug activity continuing unabated, still gets elected.
Which proves: Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Actually Mack has a reputation for being a dirty cop. After being caught paying witnesses in Provo he lost his house and went bankrupt. He lost his gig as sheriff of a rural county in a Dem primary race because of his dereliction of duty. 20 years of dereliction and dishonor don't really add up to much which is why his only source of income is selling discredited theories to those that question nothing as long as it supports their world view.
Deputy Dawg

Ruidoso, NM

#12 Nov 12, 2012
Face up and accept it folks. What's done is done. As I stated before, neither candidate was a good choice. The mistake was made at the primaries, when LC overlooked Mr. Garcia. He was the candidate who was a former employee of the State AG's office who really knows a lot about the State and Federal Constitution. He is an attorney that has no ax to grind or favors to pay back.
Maybe in four years those of you who really want LE in this county will approach Mr. Garcia now and come up with a logical plan. Not this half baked campaign by either side and get someone truly qualified!
dawg gone it

Tularosa, NM

#13 Nov 12, 2012
Mr. Garcia (aka Neederstat/Garcia) will never be sheriff and wasnt overlooked just not wanted. Ask anyone in Carrizozo if they would ever want a Neederstat/Garcia as law enforcment. Thats like paying the fox to gaurd the henhouse. Won't happen!
Hargrave

Capitan, NM

#14 Nov 13, 2012
Really Now wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually Mack has a reputation for being a dirty cop. After being caught paying witnesses in Provo he lost his house and went bankrupt. He lost his gig as sheriff of a rural county in a Dem primary race because of his dereliction of duty. 20 years of dereliction and dishonor don't really add up to much which is why his only source of income is selling discredited theories to those that question nothing as long as it supports their world view.
I spent some time trying to find info about your allegations, but haven't found any. Can you post some links to substantiate them?
Thanks!
Hargrave

Capitan, NM

#15 Nov 13, 2012
dawg gone it wrote:
Mr. Garcia (aka Neederstat/Garcia) will never be sheriff and wasnt overlooked just not wanted. Ask anyone in Carrizozo if they would ever want a Neederstat/Garcia as law enforcment. Thats like paying the fox to gaurd the henhouse. Won't happen!
I googled Neederstat adn the only thing that came up was a link to a topix posting about a 3 yr old Ruidoso Boy that was beaten to death. In the posts, it says that Mr Garcia is related to the boy's mother.
I met Mr Garcia while he was running for Sheriff and he seemed knowledgeable, but would like more info.
Can you post some links? Or, maybe elaborate on your post?
Thanks!
Marvin Weiner

Alto, NM

#16 Nov 13, 2012
The fox has been guarding the hen house.
Seidel would have saved us all.
Really Now

Tularosa, NM

#17 Nov 14, 2012
Hargrave wrote:
<quoted text>
I spent some time trying to find info about your allegations, but haven't found any. Can you post some links to substantiate them?
Thanks!
OK, Let's start with this

Assistant Attorney General Thomas Brunker said his office is still investigating the defense claims. At least two former Provo police officers, in affidavits filed earlier this month, said the Tovars received some assistance from the department, including groceries and gifts. But exactly how much was spent on the couple was unclear, the officers said.

Provo police Sgt. Matt Siufanua said last week the department has no documentation showing money was ever given to the Tovars.

Former Provo police officer Richard Mack said he was assigned to "take care" of the Tovars. Mack, in his affidavit, said the entire department was "emotionally involved in this case" because the murder victim was the aunt of then Chief Swen Nielsen, but Mack denied any wrongdoing involving the Tovars.

"I will say emphatically that we were not paying Epifanio and his wife for testimony," he told The Tribune last week. "In a way, we were trying to make sure they were protected. They were major witnesses in a murder trial, a capital case.... We wanted to make sure they were comfortable and they didn't leave town."
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home2/52479698-1...

His own words.
Concerned

Houston, TX

#18 Nov 14, 2012
Really Now wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, Let's start with this
Assistant Attorney General Thomas Brunker said his office is still investigating the defense claims. At least two former Provo police officers, in affidavits filed earlier this month, said the Tovars received some assistance from the department, including groceries and gifts. But exactly how much was spent on the couple was unclear, the officers said.
Provo police Sgt. Matt Siufanua said last week the department has no documentation showing money was ever given to the Tovars.
Former Provo police officer Richard Mack said he was assigned to "take care" of the Tovars. Mack, in his affidavit, said the entire department was "emotionally involved in this case" because the murder victim was the aunt of then Chief Swen Nielsen, but Mack denied any wrongdoing involving the Tovars.
"I will say emphatically that we were not paying Epifanio and his wife for testimony," he told The Tribune last week. "In a way, we were trying to make sure they were protected. They were major witnesses in a murder trial, a capital case.... We wanted to make sure they were comfortable and they didn't leave town."
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home2/52479698-1...
His own words.
Is this the best you have? It's not uncommon for police and the DA's office to protect and even hide key witnesses. It's about getting them to trial, not paying them off.

Come up with something better or sign off. You're losing this argument
low rent diddy

Alamogordo, NM

#20 Nov 15, 2012
Damn. Seidel's good looks and pistol toting bravado didn't
convince the sleepy populace. Shoot. We're Dead !
SSP

Alto, NM

#21 Nov 15, 2012
I would do that Seidel nice and slow..in the museum parking lot...in the shadow of Billy the kid...on the next full moon.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Ruidoso Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Boycott Israel ? 9 min Gorky 80
Hillary for president ? 33 min Jack Hilton 37
Joke of the day 45 min Ralph 64
Immigration 48 min Ralph 46
Amazing 54 min Ralph 51
Becoming clear 56 min Ralph 5
The Cry Babies 1 hr Ralph 20
Ruidoso Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Ruidoso People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 7:44 pm PST

Bleacher Report 7:44PM
FA Targets Worth More Than Their Price Tags
Bleacher Report 4:00 AM
Broncos Final Free-Agency Outlook and Predictions
Bleacher Report 2:27 AM
Fantasy Football Outlook for Cardinals Stars
Bleacher Report 4:00 AM
Weighing the Pros and Cons of Top Free-Agent Targets
NFL 6:28 AM
Visits Tracker: Darnell Dockett meets with 49ers