After reading "Ask not what your park can do for you ..." (June 25, Page A-1) about the parks director, I thought how left-wing this paper has gotten to be. When a reporter talks to the Modesto Police Officers Association president, he does not find it newsworthy to put in the paper, only a few comments stuck in another story about how the MPOA won't budge on demands.

But telling how we can help our parks by volunteering or paying for the watering to keep them green, that is front page news. Too bad that the parks are not safe to visit, like the man who got beat up because some idiots thought it would be fun. So let's lay off officers while we pay the parks director $140,000-plus a year. How much of a cut did she take in pay or perks?

I guess we can call her when we get in trouble at the parks, since the officers are laid off to save the city a few bucks so they can throw it out somewhere else, like watering our parks. I guess this makes sense to someone, but sure not to this taxpaying citizen.

I just finished reading that our illustrious House of Representatives has voted "with little comment or opposition" to approve an 8 percent increase in their budget for members' office expenses, to the tune of $51 million (June 20, Page A-5).

Are these promoters of conspicuous consumption really that clueless? When the vast majority of America is struggling to tighten its collective financial belt, these elitists in Washington decide that it's OK to spend more money on travel and other "official" expenses. I suppose the $609 million they already spend on these expenses just wasn't enough.

Am I delusional to believe that these elected officials should lead by example or that 51 million tax dollars could be better spent? So much for the concept of a government "of the people, by the people, for the people."