Advertisement
Opinion

Letters: Louie Gohmert, Peter Strzok, #MeOnly, Supreme Court

Readers are upset about Rep. Louie Gohmert's actions during hearings with Peter Strzok, express concerns about the Supreme Court and Brett Kavanaugh and emphasize how important it is to vote.

Editor's note: A letter published here by Michael Rice of Dallas on Judge Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court has been removed because the same letter by different people has appeared in several newspapers across the country.

Gohmert is no gentleman ...

Re: "Questions about affair lead to anger, disbelief — Gohmert accuses agent of lying under oath, sparking fiery exchange," Friday news story.

Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert's behavior at the congressional hearing of Peter Strzok made this fourth-generation Texan ashamed to be a Texan. I remember when a "Texas gentleman" was an honorable trait we expected from all our governmental servants.

Advertisement

Louie Gohmert, you sir, are no Texas gentleman! Shame on you!

Opinion

Get smart opinions on the topics North Texans care about.

Or with:

Bert Harris, Irving/Las Colinas

... and a disgrace to our state

Regarding Thursday's hearing with FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok voluntarily testifying and Louie Gohmert making it personal and dragging Strzok's wife into the fray (asking how may times have you lied to your wife), all I can say is he is no gentleman and hopefully he will be censured. He is a disgrace to our state.

Advertisement

Kurt Wolfenbarger, East Dallas

Mangling the truth

Re: "Texas congressman says he's under domestic surveillance — Gohmert claims his efforts to derail Mueller probe made him target," July 4 news story.

Advertisement

As usual, Congressman Louis Gohmert has once again mangled the truth, which has long been his claim to fame. He says he's under domestic surveillance, when in fact he's probably under psychiatric evaluation for obvious reasons.

Tony Torres, Garland

Voting booth is for us all

Despite what many opponents say, Donald Trump is not racist, not anti-woman, not anti-choice, not anti-"Me Too," not pro-gun, not pro-Russia, not the Antichrist.

He's also not a God-appointed political messiah, not pro-religion, not pro-life, etc., hard as some minister supporters try to "preach him into heaven." (Ever been to one of those funerals?)

What he is is pro-Trump. Anything that brings him money, power and attention, he'll do, whether it's feign patriotism, embrace the NRA, use the word "God," quote Scripture (as in "Two Corinthians"), let preachers lay hands on him or pick a Supreme Court justice to curry religious right favor. It's a stroke of ingenious marketing! And folks have the right to buy it.

President John Kennedy once said, "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."

Trump is saying, by sleight of tongue, "Ask what your country can do for me." The Me Only Movement. If you think that's getting you what you want, so be it. All of us have access to the voting booth to keep it going or shut it down.

Advertisement

Jack Bowen, North Fort Worth

Obama criticisms lack specifics

I keep seeing letters and other posts that reference the mess left by President Barack Obama.

When asked what messes Obama left, they usually respond with generalities such as the Affordable Care Act, DACA or that he increased racial tensions. It is extremely rare that these people can, or will, specify exactly what about these or other items Obama did to create this mess.

Advertisement

I understand that many people did not like Obama as the president. Admittedly, the Affordable Care Act had flaws, especially after the Supreme Court ruled against part of the bill. Congress had six years to address the problems. No legislation was introduced to fix any problems, but much was introduced to repeal it.

Why are people in favor of sending children back who are brought here without their knowledge? How did Obama worsen race relations? I would really like to know specifics of how he messed up our country. All I see or hear are generalities and unsupported opinions.

Kevin Webster, Grapevine

Dissent in teen's case telling

Re: "Courting Civility — U.S. deserves fair review of Supreme Court nominee," Wednesday Editorials.

Advertisement

While "it is difficult to predict how individual jurists will rule once they assume the awesome responsibility of deliberating on our nation's highest court," we don't have to look further "to consider whether Kavanaugh ... has a record that demonstrates the right temperament" than his dissent last fall in the Garza vs. Hargan matter. His complete lack of sensitivity to the pregnant 17-year-old's plight shows very clearly that he does not have "the right temperament and qualifications for the job."

That dissent in itself is enough for me to say that Trump should withdraw Kavanaugh's name from consideration. The recent revelations regarding Justice Kennedy's possible involvement in this nomination give us even more pause and reason to ask for such a withdrawal.

Tracy Steinbach, Plano

O'Rourke's objection unclear

Re: "Cruz, O'Rourke quarrel on pick — Trump nomination looms as major factor in Texas Senate race," Thursday news story.

Advertisement

Todd J. Gillman's article on Beto O'Rourke's opinion on Brett Kavanaugh's lack of qualifications —  and I quote from the article, "I don't think the judge's positions on the issues that Texans care most about line up with our values or our interests" — does not tell the reader anything substantive about Kavanaugh or why O'Rourke finds President Trump's pick unworthy.

Even Kavanaugh's Yale professor, who is admittedly liberal, believes he is qualified based on the judge's track record in the courts.

Instead I submit that if O'Rourke is not elected, it will confirm that he's not in line with what Texas voters care about. But then again that may not be a huge surprise since the candidate who says he does not accept outside money has made three fundraising trips to California to garner financial support for his campaign. Maybe he is running in the wrong state.

James Clement, Dallas/Bluffview

Advertisement

Nazism comparison is twaddle

Re: "A stain on our history," by Robert Henderson, June 26 Letters.

Robert Henderson laments Germany's stain of Nazism and fears it will soon be ours to wear. Well, sir, we just returned from a Holocaust Memorial in Prague, Czech Republic, honoring the 80,000 Prague Jews exterminated by the Nazis. Yes, sir, the Nazis separated children from their parents and loaded them onto buses. The engines were started and the exhaust fumes ported inside the bus. The children were gassed. The parents and families were taken into the forest and shot. Subsequent groups buried those, then were shot in turn.

Sir, is that happening on our border? Do you really think that is our future? Get a grip, sir; study some history, because the stain you fear is one you unfairly cast upon your fellow citizens.

Advertisement

Do your part, DMN, and stop honoring such twaddle with publication. Find grace and civility.

Burt E. Ballentine, Keller