• August 20, 2014

Reader differs with letter on political actions

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Sunday, July 21, 2013 4:30 am

To the Editor:

The recent letter to the editor lecture on electoral vs. legislative politics was interesting if not informative. It exemplifies the vast differences in how citizens see or understand the political theater.

However, I disagree with the conclusion that you must surrender your values, cultural leanings, mores and sometimes ethics as a compromise to get legislation passed on “clean air, education, housing, health and security.”

If there are differences between liberals and conservatives, all political decisions and voting will be partisan, because to vote or act against one’s core values is a violation of the trust constituents have in their elected representatives who campaigned on those values. The most anger and disappointment directed at politicians arises when they vote or express solutions contrary to those previously articulated. For a politician to willfully deceive the voters is not simply immoral, it should be treasonous. 

We are witnessing a “fundamental change” in our country as promised by the president. Unfortunately for those of us who opposed his ideas, we must suffer the inflation, loss of international clout, degradation of our military, destruction of the nuclear family, use of government agencies to attack political opponents, and other abuses defeated people are subjected to by the victors.

Without our few elected officials who represent our deeply held values, and who are without doubt “partisan,” we would have no voice to slow, if not stop the runaway train we call the United States. Spare us some dignity and allow our elected officials to remain partisan on behalf of the conservative minority who remain hopeful this madness will run its course and we as a country can regain our fiscal, moral and spiritual direction. 

We, too, wish good things for the citizens of this once great nation; yet, we believe in personal responsibility.

Don Fender

Killeen

More about

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.

2 comments:

  • wilcfry posted at 10:28 pm on Thu, Jul 25, 2013.

    wilcfry Posts: 93

    Any elected official represents not only the (usually slim) majority that got him/her into office, but also the (usually large) minority that voted for the opponent(s). I think it's very fair when an office holder does work for both sides.

    Additionally, compromise is how this system works. It doesn't mean compromising your values or your ethics, but moving on your positions and policies in order to get *something* done. If you buy into representative democracy, then it IS your ethic and your moral to compromise a bit. If not, then you're saying the government isn't for the (usually large) minority that voted against you, forgetting that the other side is likely to win the next time around.

     
  • Eliza posted at 9:28 am on Sun, Jul 21, 2013.

    Eliza Posts: 707

    @ We are witnessing a “fundamental change” in our country as promised by the president. Unfortunately for those of us who opposed his ideas, we must suffer the inflation, loss of international clout, degradation of our military, destruction of the nuclear family, use of government agencies to attack political opponents, and other abuses defeated people are subjected to by the victors.
    -----------------------

    'As promised by the president', Yes the writer is right, the president did tell us from day 1 what he was about and most of what he was going to do. I guess a majority wasn't able to accept that an American president could, or would, go to the extreme of letting the world know how much the American people disgust him.
    But our president has each time he has bad mouthed Americans to any that will listen. We've always been guilty of wrong doing in his eyes.

    But what many have to understand, It is all American citizens ,not just one race or one group, that were being talked of. He didn't separate the races but included them all in his remarks. When one group is taken down, the rest will follow when there's no longer any call or need for that group..

    I was talking to a French soldier at one time telling him of a humongous group of helicopters which flew into Ft Hood from Ft Campbell to do a demo several years ago. He answered ,'Only the Americans' would be able to do something on such a scale.
    I think that's why so many country's in the world today, are amazed and willing to talk in a de-grading manner about the U.S., we have always been held in a bigger then life picture around the world.
    And it wasn't because of 1 race, or 1 group, but all Americans. We've all been apart of making the country into that bigger then life picture.
    And That's the only way we can make it, As One People.