Just proved the point
In John Brummett's column Thursday, while trying to be his usual witty and intelligent self, he described a grocery store with an alarm at the door. He made an excellent point about why border security is needed while trying to mock our president. See, when you use a little common sense, even liberals understand.
Borders are everywhere because they are needed.
Need a secure border
I completely agree with the thoughts brought forward by Mary Ann Vance of Morrilton on your Voices page on Tuesday. To add to her letter I would include that we are told that there are gates in heaven and we must abide by our Lord's rules to be able to enter his gates.
I hope there are many more people who respond to Ms. Vance's letter.
Forbid dicamba use
Driving across the north-central part of our state in the summer of 2014, I stopped at a crossroads to buy vegetables from an elderly gentleman selling produce off the back of his pickup. I asked for tomatoes, but he said his plants were all killed by "what they're spraying on their fields." At the time, I had never heard of dicamba. But now we know.
It is very disheartening to read that Crooked Creek Bee Co. of Jonesboro is yet another in the list of dicamba casualties. I urge the state Plant Board to forbid use of this poison.
America is not Berlin
I should think that a United States senator would know right from wrong. But I am not so sure about ours because they are keeping the federal government shut down, and I think that is wrong.
They support building a Berlin-style border wall. Do you remember the Berlin Wall? Everyone seemed so happy when it came down. I think a Berlin-style border wall is wrong. Our senators support Donald Trump, and he seems to be a bad person. Do they not know the difference between good and bad? Are they going to let the Russians take over our country?
I hope they do the right thing. Open the government. Forget the Berlin-style wall. Stop supporting Donald Trump. Don't let the Russians take over our country.
Where true danger is
Wayne Knowles of Shannon Hills writes that the "Democrat Party is rapidly becoming a Socialist Democrat party" and that socialism is "an enemy of our constitutional republic." He further states that his military service forbids him from supporting Democrats, who he seems to consider "the enemy."
As a liberal Democrat, I could just as easily accuse the current Republican Party as reshaped by Donald Trump of being a neo-Nazi nationalist party that is clearly a threat to our constitutional republic.
I assume Mr. Knowles does not accept Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid or VA benefits and that no one in his immediate family has done so. More than half our federal budget goes to fund these social programs that benefit the great majority of the American people.
Mr. Knowles' outrage at the Democrats seems to have sprung from the way he and other Vietnam veterans were treated by the "liberal left" when they returned home from duty. I participated in anti-war marches during my college days in the '60s but never once insulted returning service men and women. My older brother served bravely in Vietnam and I respect him and his peers for their service.
I could not disagree more with Knowles' contention that the purpose of the military is to kill and destroy "the enemy." The military oath states in pertinent part that it is the oath giver's duty "to support and defend the Constitution ... against all enemies foreign and domestic."
I submit to Mr. Knowles that the greatest threat to our Constitution is not the Democratic Party, or socialism, or women and children seeking asylum at the border--it is the man behind the desk in the Oval Office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. That is where we need to build the wall.
DAVID ELI COCKCROFT
One of Monday's political cartoons depicts Nancy Pelosi in the persona of our favorite nanny, Mary Poppins. She floats earthward while clutching her ubiquitous umbrella and carrying a large suitcase labeled "Nanny government."
Oh, wait. There must be a mistake. The cartoon is cheek-by-jowl with one of the paper's usual repetitive editorials opposing the right to abortion. Regulating what women may do with what is inside their own bodies ... wouldn't that be nanny government?
Editorial on 01/11/2019
Print Headline: Letters