Trump’s tweet
Re: “Trump attacks Gillibrand, blames Democrats for women’s claims,” Nation & World, Dec. 13:
By only partially quoting the president’s tweet about Kirsten Gillibrand, the EN minimizes the obvious sexual intent of the original tweet.
USA Today got it right with its editorial.
Francille Radmann
Action futile
Re: “Lack of action on climate risk to credit,” Editorial, Dec. 13:
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but climate change or no climate change, if even Hurricane Fru Fru hits, we are all going swimming. Has no one told you that this city is shaped like a bowl? I am old enough to remember the urgency of the 1970s when all eminent scientists assured us we were in for a new ice age.
Penelope Talley
Alas, poor birds
A statue was removed in Travis Park, the most important part of which was the hat. I speak on behalf of all of the pigeons who lost their commode atop that piece of stone. The Christmas tree is beautiful, but just try to imagine a pigeon trying to use it on a bristly limb or a hot light as the commodious hat had so served birds for generations. And bats, too, have been poorly treated in this great city. There were numerous bat roosts throughout the city many years past, for mosquito control, so that they didn’t have to roost under bridges and such, more vulnerable to their predators. So please, fathers of the city and county, pause to consider the effect of your statue politics on our creatures as you shift things around to placate the citizens who sometimes get lost in the past over carved stone, both sides, of course.
George Cooper, Boerne
Value of history
Re: “Soldiers’ hanging brought outcry; Executions led to change in Army’s justice system,” front page, Dec. 11:
Thank you, Sig Christenson, for the Tricentennial article on the 1917 Fort Sam execution of 13 black soldiers and its effects on the U.S. Army.
Today, we must remember our history: “Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Janice Clayton
No justification
Democratic hypocrisy exists. But to be clear, Bill Clinton was impeached not for having sex with Monica Lewinsky but for lying about it. Roy Moore and Donald Trump are lying their heads off. Further, Lewinsky does not appear to have been coerced, and she was of age when the incident occurred.
If Bill Clinton coerced sex from other women, as some have alleged, that was a terrible thing and maybe he should never have been elected president. But he was, and that is water under the bridge. But for the Republicans to point at him and say, “Billy did it first,” is a justification appropriate to a grade-school playground. What Bill Clinton did or did not do has nothing to do with what Moore and Trump have done. One bad deed does not justify another.
Grow up, people.
Bob Ross
Prayer the answer?
Seems each week another national politician hits the ground (or lower) with an admission of sexual harassment. That leaves the executive branch, presently occupied by an admitted and even proud abuser. Maybe he will be next, but don’t hold your breath.
He has a history of survival, but wait, I am trying PRAYER.
Herman I. Morris, Plano
No input
Re: “The ‘80s were cool,” Your Turn, Monday:
The letter writer will not get an argument from me about how cool the ’80s were, especially when it comes to the music.
The article about Benavides, however, was more about how he came about getting the acts without any input from his board of directors. The board didn’t even know what he was doing.
Yes, REO Speedwagon and Pat Benatar are good choices, considering other acts in past years cannot even be remembered for ringing in the new year downtown. Don’t you think, though, that starting off the year would have been better with input from the board. The wish list included the likes of Madonna, Duran Duran and Shakira, to name a few who were leaked out previously.
Makes one think if he was trying to run the organization much as his mentor runs the city. Hmmm. She did handpick him after all.
Paul Resendez
Threat of tyranny
Is it President Trump or President Bannon? Just joking. One is enough. The first is the elected one (by an antiquated electoral college). The second plays the role of the president’s whisperer. Both seem to aspire to a more dominant executive branch. (It should be noted that Bannon is no longer on Trump’s staff, although he freely speaks for Trump.) But we need to ask both of them — are they referring to an executive branch that would place the legislative and judicial branches in a secondary role? It could be.
Trump has publicly stated (more than once) that he admires strong global leaders, which is disturbing to this citizen. He is talking about leaders like that of Putin in Russia. Does Trump favor a form of autocracy over the restraining democracy that confronts (irritates) him now? Is that Bannon whispering in his ear — over and over?
The two of them need to heed the precept that the Constitution is structured to block the rise of a tyrant. If we forget, well, we will pay the price.
Robert Paul