Letters (July 28, 2010)


Carnival will add to kids’ fair memories

Where can you go to experience the excitement and joyful screams of young people riding carnival rides?

The Marion County Fair!

That’s right. The Marion County Fair has a carnival this year. Pride Amusements has committed to providing a collection of carnival rides for both the young and young at heart to enjoy.

The MCF Board is extremely excited about this new development and optimistic that it will provide additional entertainment for families.

Remember the days you were a kid: the excitement of the fair, the smell of popcorn/cotton candy, sounds of children laughing, walking through the livestock barns, seeing the exhibits, the hum of the Ferris wheel and the carnival lights late into the night?

Those days are still here, but we need your support to allow youngsters of today to build memories for tomorrow. Come to the Marion County Fair, spend a day or two, buy some carnival tickets, take in the exhibits and keep the memories of tomorrow alive today.

Stephanie Richmond

MCF manager

 

Passing flyers during church is wrong

We were very surprised and offended to come out of church on Sunday to find a political flyer on our windshield. A place of worship is not an appropriate forum for political campaigning.

Campaigning at a religious institution implies that we as Christians, or even God, align with certain political beliefs. This is not accepted in our congregation, where we welcome and worship with people who hold many different political beliefs.

This candidate wants to cut funding for our schools. During this primary election, we need to remember what Mr. (Bob) Brookens did for our communities and schools. He voted for the funding we need for our schools and nursing homes. The increase in tax is a quality investment in our communities, for today and for the future.

Brent and Pamela Abrahams

Goessel

 

About special-interest input in House race…

I read the James Meier letter to the editor (July 14 issue) and thought I needed to respond. It’s clear he missed the point of the “Open Letter to the District” Rep. Bob Brookens put in the June 30 issue.

Personally, I’d hope the people of this area, as well as any company or political action group who appreciates what Bob Brookens has done for us, will contribute to Bob’s campaign. I think that is quite different from what Bob talked about in his open letter.

Bob Brookens doesn’t appear upset that special-interest groups might contribute to his opponent’s campaign. Bob was alerting us to a much larger issue: those special-interest groups are doing much more. The special-interest groups recruited opposition to any legislators who got in their way last term, and they promised to run those campaigns.

I don’t have a problem with PACs and people contributing to a candidate. I?do have a problem when a special-interest group tries to run the show. We’re not getting post cards and letters about candidates, and we can look to see who is sending them out—the candidate or special-interest group with an agenda of its own.

Want an independent thinker who listens to you and runs his own campaign? Vote for Bob Brookens.

Jim Crofoot

Marion

 

Green is better choice for better government

As my attorney, Bob Brookens helped me through the execution of my father’s estate. He is a remarkable person. However, I cannot support his vote for increased taxes for any reason.

Whenever an entity is spending “someone else’s money” there is waste, fueled by corruption, greed, selfishness and indifference. For an honest, determined political representative, waste is a tough issue to tackle.

Cheryl Green seems fed up and willing. No doubt, Bob is an “independent thinker.” Think­ing and action are two separate activities.

Raising taxes is going along with the norm, taking the easy way out, and avoiding the reason our state has a budget crisis in the first place. Anyone who thinks the state and national budget crises are caused by insufficient taxes is pitifully misguided. People who support such nonsense tend to have plenty of money, or aren’t thinking for themselves.

Bob pretty well admitted voting for the lesser of two evils. Either one was more or less bailing the state out of the budget crisis, at the taxpayers’ expense. Now they can continue to waste someone else’s money till the next vote. Business as usual.

Cheryl Green and her supporters are saying no to business as usual. We want to eliminate the cause of the problem. Period.

At one time in history, a common oath of office for governing officials included “to provide for the general welfare” of the public. If it still is, then most are violating their oath! That meant spending tax dollars on programs that benefited all, or at least a large majority, of the public.

That system has degraded into providing for specific welfare and “special interests.” It’s why towns like Hillsboro can’t afford to keep up street maintenance (general welfare) anymore. Too many ball diamonds, tennis courts, swimming pools, golf courses and airports, breeds too many state grants and more specific welfare programs.

To be fair, shouldn’t our communities have public shooting and archery ranges, dog and skate board parks, walking and cycling paths? That’s what I’d like to see! But not public, then I’d feel greedy and indifferent! Like I’m ripping off the public for my own selfish interests.

Where should we draw the line? Maybe it is already drawn in the oath of office and is being misunderstood or ignored. I thought an oath was serious.

The latter are all cases of specific welfare, as opposed to the general welfare, our officials should have taken oath to provide. They also prevent the private sector from delving into possible markets. Like a private swimming pool for example.

Thank God for Cheryl Green! She understands the principles of responsible government our founding fathers put in place, and is trying to buck the trend.

Thank you, Bob, for setting an excellent example of how to communicate with the constituents. It made me proud to know you, and I’m sorry you’ve lost my vote. If re-elected, I trust you’ll do better. For now, it looks to me like Cheryl will take your integrity one or more steps further!

Kelly Hawkins

Hillsboro

 

Review of facts shows Huelskamp’s edge

In the race for First District Congress, we are told there is little difference between the candidates. Let’s examine the facts.

Fact 1: There is only one proven conservative leader—Tim Huelskamp. Check the facts, i.e. his voting record in the state senate.

Fact 2: Mann and Wasinger claim to be longtime Kansas residents. Check the facts: neither one was registered to vote in Kansas until last year.

Fact 3: Barnett, Wasinger, Mann and Huelskamp are all in favor of repealing Obamacare. Fact: While in the state senate, Barnett supported an initiative akin to the federal health care mandate (check out info on Barnett at Kansas Taxpayers). The only one of these gentlemen with any kind of a record that suggests he would actually stand up against the Obama agenda is Tim Huelskamp.

Check out his voting record with Kansas Taxpayers. Do an independent Internet search and see how much “heat” Huels­kamp has taken for his conservative stances.

I am voting for Tim Huelskamp because we need a proven leader who does not just talk conservative principles, but votes conservative principles, and—fact—never backs down from conservative principles.

James L. Braden

Marion

 

Brookens guided by conscience, logic

Because I am fundamentally opposed to the divisive two-party political system, I refuse to register as a Republican or Democrat just to vote in the August primary election.

But I urge all of you who are registered Republicans and care about Kansas schools to vote to re-elect Bob Brookens to the House of Representatives. Without legislators such as Brookens, who vote their consciences rather than strictly along party lines, our education system would have been devastated this past year.

Unfortunately, the attacks on schools will likely continue in the next year and those to follow. We need to show Bob Brookens that we support clear, logical thinking, rather than purely political rhetoric.

Bob Woelk

Hillsboro

 

Brookens is the one easy choice to make

We have about one week left to listen to all the political ads on television, receive almost hourly phone calls and more mail than usual. I don’t think that we have ever experienced an election as this. It is hard to know what to believe and who to vote for with all the negative campaigning.

Nevertheless, we do need to vote.

The only easy vote for us is in the Kansas House of Repre­sent­atives 70th District race. We will be voting for Bob Brookens. We support Bob in voting for the temporary one-penny sales tax increase for many reasons. If this had not occurred we would have seen property taxes increased. Schools are struggling, and the struggles are genuine. Our child­ren and grand­children are worthy of a good education.

We have known Bob and his family for more than 25 years. Bob is a Christian man who puts God and his family first. His character every day is one of caring, fairness, honesty and doing the right thing in all circumstances.

He has been keeping us in the 70th District informed of what is going on in Topeka and seeking the advice of all of us, every step of the way. In our opinion, Bob is the best person to represent us in Topeka.

Gordon and Shirley Groening

Marion

 

We are fortunate to have Brookens for us

Bob Brookens, our state representative for the 70th District, is a long-time acquaintance. Through the years he has been active in his support of community affairs. He is dedicated, forthright and honest. We are fortunate to have him representing us by carrying the same values to Topeka.

Bob has kept lines of communication open and has been timely in keeping in touch with his constituents. Legislative bills and issues I contacted him about always received a prompt reply. He kept me posted on the subject and reported the outcome immediately following the decision.

Please join me in casting a vote to re-elect Bob Brookens on Tuesday, Aug. 3.

Carol Wiebe

Hillsboro

 

Brookens is the best person for the 70th

I have had the chance to meet with both candidates for the Kansas District 70 House seat, Rep. Bob Brookens and Cheryl Green. Based on those conversations, it’s clear that Bob Brookens is the best person for the position.

Rep. Brookens understands there are no easy solutions to the complex problems facing Kansas and has worked hard to gather information from his constituents.

Rep. Brookens understands that listening to a variety of voices provides the best chance for workable answers.

Rep. Brookens represents all of his constituents, not just those with the loudest voices.

Rep. Brookens is experienced, having served through one of the toughest legislative sessions in recent memory.

Cheryl Green, on the other hand, has no political experience.

She is a member of several extremist right-wing groups.

She offers no workable, long-term solutions, repeating only simple-minded talking points from those groups.

She has run a negative campaign without substance, offering no positive ideas and listening only to those supporting her campaign.

Her site is misleading, suggesting endorsements from the Republican Party. And as someone claiming to support “quality education,” it’s disappointing that one can find misspellings and typos in her materials.

On election day, join other Republicans and vote for Rep. Bob Brookens.

Glenn Wiebe

Hillsboro

 

Green responds to opponent’s claims

I’m writing this letter in response to the rumors and innuendo initiated and perpetuated by my opponent, Bob Brookens. Mr. Brookens has used Capitol Ideas column, interviews and paid advertizements to say I am well-funded and in the pocket of “special Interests.”

This is a fabrication of the truth and it’s time for me to set the record straight.

On the evening of July 3, I personally told Mr. Brookens that I wanted to run a clean campaign based on the truth. I have no personal animosity toward him and only chose to oppose him because his voting record in the House was at odds with the conservative Kansans that he is supposed to be representing.

I also asked him to please stop perpetuating the rumor that I am funded by special interests because it was simply untrue. I told him I would be happy to open my books and show him my list of donors if he felt proof was necessary. Evidently, it is. In a recent interview, he has once again perpetuated the falsehood.

In the past several weeks, I have received e-mails from constituents asking me where my funding was coming from. I am always more than happy to tell anyone who wants to know. My funding is coming from concerned Kansas families that can least afford to donate, Kansans that are disgusted with the irresponsible spending practices of Kansas government and from great personal and family sacrifice.

As of this date, I have received donations from two political action committees, which constitutes less than 8 percent of my funding. You will be able to check this July 27 after we file a campaign finance report. I hope you do check.

At that same time, you’ll also be able to check my opponent’s campaign funding and see who is being funded by special interests and who is not.

I have based my campaign platform on fiscal responsibility, a balanced budget and keeping Kansas government from out- growing the private sector, and not on personal attacks. I’m beginning to wonder if Mr. Brookens is running for office or running from his record in the Kansas House.

Cheryl Green

Rosalia

 

Do we want security or Independence?

Independence. Security. Two words that are at war with each other. Our country, on the receiving end of the laws and governance of England, decided that being dependent upon such was not in the best interests of the people living in America.

A war for independence was fought and won with much sacrifice and not without enemies within who wanted the security of England’s rule.

On June 21, 1788, the Consti­tu­tion became the official rule of law for our new country. On Dec. 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights and the Amendments became an official part of the Constitution.

Fast forward to today. Our fight is not for independence but for security. Think of the “entitlements” and “benefits” that wash over us wave after wave. All in the name of security for one group or another.

Advertisements remind us to turn in our census forms so we can get our share of the loot. Each year another group is formed that clamors for its share of the pie. We’ve got the old versus the young, the rich versus the poor…the list is endless. Why? Because people have decided they know best, and partiality toward one group or another serves the interests of those in office particularly well.

This contradicts God’s impartiality (Acts 10:34-35). As we seek security through human devices—social justice provisions, grants, government programs of all manner—our independence from God must grow as a natural result.

Today we have lawyers, judges and politicians alike obscuring the relationship we are to have with our Creator, who was acknowledged in our Declaration of Independence as the source of our liberties.

When we as a country recognized the source of our liberty coming from God and not a king we became, in short order, the nation to which discouraged and oppressed people from every part of the world came for a new beginning.

Today we are reverting to the old idea of kings and monarchies where, upon the whim of those in power, our rules, therefore lives, are altered. Think not? Consider the “executive order.” We have different rules for different folks.

Think tax codes and exemptions. We have a monetary system based solely upon our faith in the Federal Reserve note rather than gold and silver as described in the Constitution, Article 1:10.

We have piled up a national debt that is inconceivable. Why? It serves those in power at a particular time. Because we can be bought. Because we have politicians and not statesmen in Congress.

I wonder what our country would look like tomorrow if we were the ones who were called upon to sacrifice our fortunes, lives and families, as our founding fathers were. Would there be a Patrick Henry who would declare, “Give me liberty, or give me death”? Or would we be concerned with how our neighbor’s lawn looked or the color of their house?

Do we wish for security or independence? The choice is ours. Actually there is another choice. It is, however, a choice for dependence. That dependence is upon God, the originator of our freedoms.

When the Sanhedrin was trying to decide what to do about Peter and the apostles for their testimony concerning Jesus, a Pharisee gave the Sanhedrin the following advice (Acts 5:38-39): “If their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourself fighting against God.”

This advice serves us all well, from our personal situations all the way to the top. It would do us well to remember that what man is able to give he is able to take. When God gives it is for good!

May our grandchildren and the God of liberty and justice forgive us.

Daryl Enos

Marion


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.