Today's Paper Search Latest Elections Core values App Traffic Listen Story ideas iPad FAQ Weather Newsletters Obits Puzzles Archive
ADVERTISEMENT

It's easier to complain

In responding to Bob Warner's letter of Friday (decrying "new definitions"): He wrote to chastise Brenda Looper's column last Wednesday. Mr. Warner called Ms. Looper a "never-Trumper" five words in.

Firstly, nowhere in her column (nor others that I recollect) does Ms. Looper allude to her political preference. Does Mr. Warner automatically assume that all media are fervent Democrats because his leader has branded all media (except carefully vetted members of Fox News) as "fake news," "lamestream media," etc.? A positive aspect of our state newspaper is that we have editors and voices from many political viewpoints.

Secondly, with that "insult" of "never-Trumper" thrown into the ring immediately, he identified himself as a member of a population who believes anything a political party representative tells him without using his mind and free will to research, investigate, and formulate his own opinion. It is so much easier to parrot what you've been told. It is so much easier to complain than to accept. It is so much easier to hate than to love.

Mr. Warner, when I first read your letter, it made me angry. Now I just feel sorry for you.

ELIZABETH BARGER

Little Rock

Not hard to imagine

Imagine a trial in which a significant percentage of the jury declares it will collaborate with the defendant on all aspects of the case. Imagine a trial in which the majority of the jury (acting as the judge) refuses to allow the testimony of firsthand witnesses who could establish the guilt or innocence of the defendant. Imagine a country where such a trial could take place while the large majority of the public wishes to hear from those witnesses, but that is not allowed.

Imagine. Now pray for that country.

BILL POLK

Conway

No confidence in it

It seems the Democrat Party put its inability to govern on display in Iowa. I think the lack of oversight and floundering is the first example of how they will govern. How anybody can support them is a mystery. Trying to stage such an event is difficult, but not nearly as difficult as governing the United States. Our government is infinitely more difficult.

If the Democrats blow something like the Iowa caucus, I can only imagine the disarray and incompetence they will exhibit.

WAYNE KNOWLES

Mabelvale

An awful lot of skin

Just curious. Was the halftime show at the Super Bowl meant to be an artistic presentation, or was it actually designed to be an unrestrained sexual exhibition?

YVONNE SAMONS

Little Rock

A charade in Senate

Well, the GOP senators are about to put their loyalty to Trump ahead of their oaths to protect the interests of America. There are so many aspects to this betrayal that it's hard to believe anyone can keep a straight face while defending them.

Some senators like Mitch Mc-Connell and Lindsey Graham publicly stated that they were committed to acquitting Trump early on, and then swore an oath to God that they would be impartial. That was only the beginning.

Trump's lawyers blatantly lied in their statements to the Senate. They complained that GOP House members were not allowed to attend closed depositions of witnesses. Simply not true: They were there, participating in the questioning. To say otherwise is to lie, but the lawyers were not under oath, so I guess that's fair game. They also complained that neither Trump nor his lawyers were allowed to attend the House's impeachment hearings. Another lie. Trump and his lawyers were invited to attend but refused. Then they lied about it.

Some of the GOP senators complained that the articles of impeachment sent over from the House contained no firsthand testimony from witnesses who were in the room when Trump discussed his withholding aid to Ukraine. Then they refused to admit witnesses who had firsthand knowledge--including one whose book on the matter is titled The Room Where It Happened. John Bolton was there when it happened and volunteered to testify under oath in the Senate trial. The GOP refused to let him do so. This completed a long history of the White House refusing to permit witnesses to testify and hiding all documents that would shed light on what happened. "Cover-up" comes to mind.

In the years ahead, high school, college and law school students will read about and wonder over this shameful episode in our national history, as they currently shake their heads over Watergate, Joe McCarthy, and other governmental disgraces. We must remember the names of all those who participated in this charade so they can be appropriately acknowledged in the years to come.

EARL BABBIE

Hot Springs Village

Professionals' advice

Do we believe what top doctors at teaching hospitals tell us to do? Advice that is based on years of training and research?

Do we believe what similarly trained top lawyers, like Harvard University Professor Alan Dershowitz, at law schools tell us to do based on constitutional law? The Constitution is the foundation of the United States of America.

I did not see one constitutional law professor testify that the articles of impeachment met the requirements of the Constitution.

Have we lost the rule of law at the top, where the top lawmaking body cannot interpret the Constitution of the United States?

Are we disintegrating into a non-democracy, and then what? Chaos?

MAC FAULKNER

Little Rock

Editorial on 02/05/2020

Print Headline: Letters

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsor Content

COMMENTS - It looks like you're using Internet Explorer, which isn't compatible with the Democrat-Gazette commenting system. You can join the discussion by using another browser, like Firefox or Google Chrome.
It looks like you're using Microsoft Edge. The Democrat-Gazette commenting system is more compatible with Firefox and Google Chrome.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT