Printed letters, Sept. 16, 2010
The Republican Party is the biggest foe Dan Maes has. The leaders did not get their anointed one on the ballot and have not been able to force Dan off so they could name their choice.
Instead, they are trying to destroy him and have chosen to back the third-party candidate who was appointed after the candidate for that party stepped down to make way for him. This apparently goes up the party chain clear to the top.
Lesson: If you haven’t been with the party and are not controlled by the party you are not their candidate, no matter how many people vote for and support you. They don’t care about “We, the people” or what we want. It is all about the party.
If you support their choice in this gubernatorial race by giving your support to dirty, back-room party deals, you are no better than they are.
Is this the kind of politics we want to continue? Are these the people we want representing us? They are showing us they don’t care about us. It is time to show them how little we care for them.
Money and marketing drive ‘me first’ attitude
The David Brooks column Sept. 12 discusses some of the changes in our culture and how they may have come about. Nowhere does he discuss the prime influence in our culture today, why it exists and where we’re headed. That influence is money and what it can buy in information or propaganda. Take your pick.
Marketing is an important element in a capitalistic economy. Influencing the public to buy something or an idea is a highly honed talent, maybe even science. It works. People can be demonstrably swayed with the right message. We have been “marketed” into the society lamented by Brooks.
There have always been conservatives and progressives or liberals. Barry Goldwater made conservative ideas more publicly accepted. From the time of his candidacy to this day, the message has increasingly been “me first,” and government should be responsible only for those things that people of great means cannot provide for themselves.
Moneyed interests have used marketing techniques to convince the public that we are not social animals of a tribe called the United States, or even humanity, but individuals who are in a life and death competition with each other. The idea of, “I am my brother’s keeper” is anathema and described as “socialism.”
Everybody I know of would rather not pay taxes, or at least keep them to a minimum, but they are necessary. Government should be as efficient as possible, but whatever people desire from government, they should pay for.
Conservative voices, supported financially by those who need the least from government, have convinced and marketed people into believing that this great republic has been built with excess, unnecessary expenditures and it is time to stop funding most of the things that have built the country to what it is.
Until we return to consideration of the well-being of our “brothers” and the opportunities available to them, we’ll continue the decline Brooks seems to lament.
Rep. Salazar is like Rangel in a cowboy hat
Rep. John Salazar receives $40,000 in campaign contributions from Bill Koch. He goes elk hunting on his land, on which private citizens are not allowed. No doubt he does not have to pay any fee for his hunting access.
Then he introduces a bill for the government to swap property with Koch. Sounds like to me, Salazar is Charles Rangel in a cowboy hat.