Today's Paper Search Latest Core values App Traffic #Gazette200 Listen Story ideas iPad FAQ Weather Newsletters Obits Puzzles Archive

Rebalance of power

This week, there will be a new proposal to require our president to wage war only with the advice and consent of our democratically elected representatives. In June, it failed in the Senate with a 50-40 vote.

If you question the wisdom of the timing, the nature, or the manner of action we have just taken in Iraq against Iran, please realize that this measure could have prevented it. The repercussions are all unfavorable to us so far, and President Trump has twice stated an intent to commit specific war crimes. I believe he needs oversight and I believe the tweet suggesting he has now given appropriate legal notice to all parties is nothing more than an attempt to secure his right to do absolutely anything he pleases at any time and anywhere.

I believe at this point, whether one supports other actions or policies of the White House, this is an extremely insulting and dangerous position for one man to take. No proof of an imminent attack has been offered, and there are hints that it could be deemed unnecessary, which is completely wrong and inappropriate to the sense of the War Powers Act itself. For the sake of the United States of America, French Hill, Tom Cotton and John Boozman must vote to support any initiative to re-establish congressional control and balance of powers.


Little Rock

The dog wags back

It's interesting how the allegedly anti-Trump mass media has made no mention of the possibility of Trump's "wag the dog" scenario in progress. That is to say, in order to deflect American voters starting to notice the onslaught of continued revelations of Trump's misdeeds in the Ukraine affair, Trump decided to change the national focus, that is, to eliminate an Iranian villain. So there! Any thoughts of possible Iranian retaliation apparently did not enter the mind of our dear leader.

Iran is a country that has been around a few centuries longer than the U.S., and it has not been fond of its American encounters, especially starting in 1953, when U.S. interests overthrew the democratically elected government so as to install a dictator more in line with American corporate desires. The Iranian masses did not forget this affront, needless to say. Probably most Americans had not heard of Iran until the seizure of American embassy staff took place in 1979. Memories of that incident are long on both sides.

As Politico reported Jan. 3, "in October, Microsoft announced that hackers linked to the Iranian government have targeted the campaign of at least one 2020 White House contender, which Reuters reported was President Donald Trump."

Maybe the Iranians' master hackers have collected materials such as emails among Trump's true believers that would be damaging to Trump (whose grasp of technology reportedly extends only to tweeting, not to emailing).



Let evidence be seen

To our distinguished senators from Arkansas: Please vote to allow documents and witnesses blocked by President Trump in the coming Senate trial. The American people can handle the truth. What they cannot handle is hiding the truth.



On usage of position

I find it interesting that congressional Democrats are working to impeach President Trump. One of two articles that have passed with an absolute partisan vote deals with the fact that President Trump asked the newly elected Ukrainian President to have people of his country look into the quid pro quo concerning Joe Biden, as the elected U.S. vice president, demanding that a particular investigator be fired. The claim of Democrats is that President Trump is doing this in an effort to eliminate Biden as potential opposition in the coming presidential election.

The question I have is this: Should Democrat primary candidates Senators Warren, Booker, Sanders, etc., vote to convict, would they themselves not be guilty of using their position as U.S. senators to hopefully eliminate Donald Trump as a potential opposing candidate in an election that they are themselves running in? Would it not be more practical, if not protocol, for these particular senators to recuse themselves from any position of determination?



Saw this one coming

Told you so ... From my June 18, 2019 letter to Voices: "What to do? Well, a nice war would be just the thing to rally the base, silence all the critics and get re-elected. Unpatriotic to attack a 'war president,' don't you see? And if stepping up the pressure on Iran doesn't cause the ayatollahs to do something rash, one can always fabricate an incident (Gulf of Tonkin) or declare an imminent danger (weapons of mass destruction). Lies are the new truth, after all--an alternate reality, crafted daily by our Supreme Leader. And real wars, like trade wars, are easy to win, right? Just need a catchy name. Operation Iranian Freedom, anyone?"

The poet e.e. cummings wrote a poem about the price of war. It begins: "plato told him: he couldn't believe it (jesus told him; he wouldn't believe it) ..." It ends: "it took a nipponized bit of the old sixth avenue el; in the top of his head: to tell him." Reality has a way of re-asserting itself in the wake of all the cheap propaganda and political spin. It's a shame too few listen before it's too late.



Editorial on 01/08/2020

Print Headline: Letters


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.