Letters to the editor: One party rule, Brownback as the state’s stern father
06/03/2014 5:02 PM
06/03/2014 5:02 PM
James DeMint, former conservative U.S. senator and now president of the Heritage Foundation, speaking on the book channel declared that legislative compromise was a sham, leading to corruption and that the only true way for laws to be formed is by one party making them or by totally blocking the other party’s attempts.
This speaks of either a singular voice dominating the federal government with no avenue of redress or the demise of our system of legislation. As he was addressing members of the tea party and radical Republicans, he failed to see that neither group should acquire such power, as it verges on a unilateral state.
Perspective is a very weighty word. We all know what it means: Subjective evaluation of a situation based on factors that dispose you to that conclusion.
Your life experiences, your income, your job, your cultural background, your education, the list goes on and on as to how and why people arrive at their particular perspective on various issues. I think most people would agree young children usually base their perspective on “what is going to make me happy”… period. Not “what is good for the family” or “what is necessary for our families existence.”
These questions seldom enter their young, immature minds because their perspective is based solely on what brings them joy and happiness. Dad’s decision to sell the second car, end summer vacation, delay dance lessons is going to be perceived as “mean and cruel” to that family member who loses that which he enjoyed.
Little regard or knowledge of what must be done to balance the family budget is given by the child who loses his privilege. So yes, Gov. Sam Brownback may in fact be perceived as the “cruel father” by some who do not see the necessity of cutbacks for the greater good of the family.
It all depends on perspective.
In primary elections last month, Republicans were challenged by tea party candidates who thought the GOP incumbents weren’t conservative enough. In order to win their primaries, mainstream Republicans moved far to the right.
In other words, many of them said whatever it took. My question is this, if these politicians so easily changed their position to win, where do they really stand?
Do they get a pass from voters by doing whatever it takes, or do voters hold them accountable on switching positions in the midterms to appeal to more voters? Is this what we really want in our elected officials?
Are we supposed to just believe that they didn’t mean what they said to survive a primary and really feel a different way? What does this say about the integrity of that person?
Is your elected official more worried about fighting to keep his job or actually fighting for you? Don’t we deserve better than that?
Don’t we deserve someone who actually fights for what they believe, not just winning at any cost?
Recently, House Republicans ordered another investigation of the Sept. 11, 2012, assault on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Libya. This will be the eighth Benghazi probe.
Obviously, this is the GOP’s latest witch hunt to smear former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the front-runner in the 2016 presidential election. Shamefully, Republicans are using this eighth Benghazi probe as a political ploy to raise campaign cash and motivate voters in this year’s midterm elections.
While Congress should be addressing important issues such as immigration, gun control and jobs, Republicans are wasting time and taxpayer money on another needless Benghazi investigation.
The stock market has doubled, a world economic depression has been averted, millions of new jobs have been created and more illegal immigrants have been deported. Housing starts are up, and the price of gasoline has dropped.
The war in Iraq has ended, and the war in Afghanistan is to be over this year. A health care law was enacted, and U.S. military forces killed Osama bin Laden. Yep, conservatives have had it really tough these past six years.
Capitol under water
I recently saw a depiction of our nation’s Capitol and surrounding monuments all flooded by water. The images were all photoshopped.
The headline was, “Climate change is not if, but when.” The images were all to show what Washington, D.C., would look like when the oceans rise.
I will only believe in climate change, or global warming or global cooling or whatever the flavor of the day is when the politicians in Washington seriously make plans to move the government out of the capital. Sorry, but it isn’t going to happen.
During a recent trip to San Francisco I noticed how well the many choices of public transportation all worked. Meanwhile in Kansas City the town is fighting against ride-sharing programs like Lyft and Uber.
Recently while driving on Interstate 70 I noticed a sign that said “Ride Sharing Information. Ridesharekc.org.”
Can someone please offer a truthful explanation of why the city fights these programs but advertises a website supporting ride-sharing? Also, if these programs are so bad why haven’t we heard about medical transportation firms and welfare ride firms getting the same treatment?
It seems unfair that those responsible for scheduling have forced the Kansas City Royals to face Cy Young almost every day.
To send letters
Visit the Letters website at kansascity.com/letters to submit your letter to the editor for 913. The website form, with helpful reminders on required information replaces an email address for online submissions. You may also mail letters of up to 300 words to 913 Letters, The Kansas City Star, 1729 Grand Blvd. Kansas City, MO, 64108. Online letters are preferred.