To the editor:

Recent letters in the Call have illustrated two popular political trends.

One is to demean the easily attackable, such as school teachers.

The other is to defend those who have accumulated superfluous wealth.

The former is shown by Mr. Hilmer’s cheap shot at teacher’s middle-class pensions; the latter by Mrs. Yeckel’s defense of the oil-and-gas profiteers.

These politicians reflect what I hear often on conservative talk shows: Repeat unprovable phraseology often so that fantasy is accepted as possible fact.

Examples: Individuals and corporations prosper due to exceptional hard work and sacrifice. Also, the purpose of taxation is to redistribute wealth.

Who typically possesses said wealth? The school teacher who publicly supervises 20 to 50 youngsters who are continually observing and judging? Or the suit, who in the privacy of his cubicle, can undisturbingly test the boundaries of ethics and greed?

Why are the wealthy so defended? Why, when money is needed for the common good, is every source scrutinized except where wealth was accumulated with the least real effort — and where monetary sacrifice will least impact lifestyle.

Yes, Tea-Partiers, I am showing class envy. Forgive me for treading on you, defenders of the elite. The popularity of your movement has shown that we are all failing in character education.

Joseph A. Frank

Affton