« KC Beanstalk Garden | Main | Moderate political void »

September 29, 2011

Truth in politics

Politics is power, nothing more. It does not matter if dealing with the crisis of the national debt, Obamacare or the murder of John F. Kennedy.

Politics is the ultimate power. Truth is the only resource to combat power, as truth possesses a threat to power.

People have to fight power at a risk to themselves. Patriots, like the tea party members, defend the country against the government.

Bureaucrats resist by influencing the media and use their powers as a politician. Read the editorial pages of newspapers like The Star, or watch the national news on ABC, CBS or NBC as proof of political power influence.

The choice of a politician is to “serve the people” or “scare the people.” Fundamentally people want the truth. The difficult question is can they get the truth from power hungry politicians?

Frank E. Loeffler
Leavenworth

Comments

Designer LV

well this blog is great i love reading your articles.

LL

gg...Actually I think you should have taken coach's advise... ;-)

...but on the other hand - I'm aware of the take-down of those terrorists and I DO believe that Obama made the right call!..I DO give him credit for doing so, along with carrying out more drone strikes...

I still don't drink that kool-ade regarding poor blameless Obama involving the economy that you keep ladling out...

Enjoy your week-end!!

ggbridge

Just getting up coach?

coach

Go to bed at 9:00 P.M. and stop drinking!

ggbridge

Here's a little truth in Politics. Obama put the order out on three incredibly effective terrorists and they were all killed this weekend. Bush couldn't make the country safer with two wars, and Obama has managed to do it with a few selective strikes. Can't wait to see how the republican tea party gives Bush the credit for this one.

ggbridge

Oh yeah, I'm hate filled. Mostly for lemon desserts - gack. Sour grapes don't make good wine, so I'm not a fan. You can keep on denying that the tea party didn't originate because they hated the president on whatever grounds he'd accomplished in the first month, MONTH of office, but I know better. You would do better to closely examine the origin of the "party." Good luck with that.

steven klein

Zeno - final comment. The debt ceiling was ultimately raised, as you know, despite the opposition of the core Tea Party caucus led by Bachmann and others. They merely failed to prevail this time (and hopefully in the future).

The phase "with relish" was not a gratuitous remark as you reasonably imply but, I think, pretty accurate based on not only media coverage but comments from the members themselves. My reading of some factions within the Tea Party and related groups is that there hatred of government, particularly at the federal level and their passion to take the country back in time to a golden era that never really existed are so great that they would eagerly embrace a massive financial and social meltdown in the name of advancing their agenda and discrediting existing institutions. You may disagree. Fortunately that faction has not reached sufficient critical mass to accomplish those ends but they seem to "relish" the prospect.

(And to give myself small credit, I think in many of my comments I have been more critical of liberal/progressive failings and the President's mistakes and overreaching than almost any other liberal contributor to this site while I've seen absolutely nothing comparable from the conservative side of the aisle who seem almost robotic in expressing canned talking points on most issues.)

zeno

Thanks GG right on cue! LOL

LL

Good Point Zeno....gg won't give up on the race card... Talk about "hate filled talk"!......I think lately gg's taken the prize - probably because Obama's ratings are falling...sour grapes!

zeno

Final point - It seems to me that the threat made with relish by Tea Party supporters not to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances risked damaging consequences which would have (and still may) imperil the well-being of every moderate and reasonable sole in the nation. Would you disagree?

Posted by: steven klein | September 30, 2011 at 10:54 AM

But they did raise the debt ceiling Steven.

You see Steven the "with relish" comment helps nothing here. It is just a talking point to smear a group who think out of control spending is the real danger.
Did you notice how many of the "establishment repubs" got beaten in primaries because of the tea partiers? Much to the glee of the "MSNBC" types who got to keep the senate because of their convictions. Yeah a couple of bad candidates got nominated, but they stuck to their guns.
Can you show me the same kind of conviction from the left? Of course you can. Just read GG or whispering or TRA or David or LIT etc...

ggbridge

The tea party has been effectively folded into the republican party. This is mostly because they were and are republicans who were angry that a person named Barack Hussein Obama was elected president.

zeno

Steven, my point was that your posts often seem extremely partisan, as do mine. But you allow yourself credit because you believe yourself to be reasonable. And probably are reasonable. As do I think of myself on politics. I imagine most of us would be much more reasonable in person, with some notable and obvious exceptions on both sides.

Good luck trying to engage anyone here. If you stay on here too long you will fall in line.

John S

Every elected official of the Federal government and many of the appointed bureaucrats and all Federal judges take an oath to protect and defend our Constitution. Many fall far short of doing anthing to live by the oath they take.

Yes, politics is about power and when men abuse power a backlash usually occurs.

Enter the Tea Party.

steven klein

Zeno, I think we all battle our own prejudices and preconceptions and I don't exclude myself at all. But I make a very sincere effort to be open to people with other perspectives who have thoughtful things to say, and I do change my mind and over time even some of my formerly most cherished beliefs from my younger days. In the hope of enhancing my own understanding of the issues I've more than once posed a series of genuine questions to the partisan contributors on Unfettered including, e.g., If a person rejects out of hand national healthcare models created in Switzerland or France with heavy government involvement, give me a working example of an existing laissez faire national model which has been able to generate basic, affordable healthcare for all of its citizens? Or - What is the argument that the movement of greater concentrations of national income and wealth into the hands of a shrinking minority of citizens is an economically, socially and politically healthy model and should be further encouraged? There may be good and convincing answers to these questions among others. I simply don't know what they are.

Final point - It seems to me that the threat made with relish by Tea Party supporters not to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances risked damaging consequences which would have (and still may) imperil the well-being of every moderate and reasonable sole in the nation. Would you disagree?

David

defend the country against the gov't?

ggbridge

Right next to Area 51, I think.

solomon

.....where does the Kennedy assassination fit in?

zeno

I see the problem a bit differently - how will citizens with a moderate and sensible view of the world defend themselves against the growing power of the Tea Party bloc before it inflicts too much damage?

Posted by: steven klein | September 29, 2011 at 11:18 PM

Thanks Steven, for proving the point of your opening paragraph of your post.

LL

...The title of this item is an oxymoron...

Seems the whole congress, along with this president, are on a constant campaign for re-election...more promises....

steven klein

Frank, one only has to read contributions to Unfettered Letters for a few days to understand that many people have little desire for any truth unless it reinforces and is consistent with their own view of the world.

In the American political system, the Tea Party does not have to defend the country against the government. The people still are the government, and a majority can make a major change whenever it has the opportunity. A significant majority could eliminate Social Security and Medicare, eliminate the FDA and the EPA or fundamentally alter the Constitution if that was its desire by electing sufficient members of Congress to pursue such an agenda.

I see the problem a bit differently - how will citizens with a moderate and sensible view of the world defend themselves against the growing power of the Tea Party bloc before it inflicts too much damage?

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright