I wake up every morning, wondering:
Who will he bully today?
What good thing will he start to erode?
What lie will he throw into the international atmosphere?
Who will he hurt or demean?
What will he misspell?
Which law will he evade or ignore?
Which clean air, clean water or safety rule will he weaken?
What embarrassing tweet will he chirp?
Which part of the Constitution will he ignore?
Lord, I’m going back to bed.
The lesson here
Did Journal columnist Scott Sexton really just call out another human being for being “fat” (“Democracy, even in gun debates, can still work,” Jan. 9)? Then, to further disparage the man, point out that he’s “bald”? My favorite was when he said the man was “smirking.” The photographer got what the photographer wanted, unless he expects us to believe the gun advocate is always smirking. (For the record, I didn’t see “smirking.”)
Perhaps the lesson here is that it doesn’t help your case when you resort to personal insults when (in my opinion) your case is weak? I’m ashamed that Sexton took (and the Journal allowed him) a complete stranger’s photo and proceeded to ridicule and insult him.
God help us!
The writer of the Jan. 10 letter “Nullified the votes” complains about nonexistent voter fraud, complains about an unelected judge and complains about the media (for some reason) and majority rule. But he can’t question the evidence presented to the judge, on which she made her ruling: Voter ID was intended to nullify the votes of minority voters who would likely vote for Democrats. These are the votes our predecessors died to ensure.
I agree with your Jan. 5 editorial, “Voter ID stumbles again.” Both parties should be working to appeal to and register voters. But the Republican Party is becoming increasingly marginalized because of its reluctance to reach beyond its narrow demographic borders. Instead, it invests in gerrymandering, voter suppression and more extreme right-wing ideology. Those investments will someday fail to return a profit. At some point the diminished returns will cost them any leadership roles, unless they stop whining about photo IDs, open their hearts and broaden their views.
Beverly M. Burton
Rhetoric or rational thought?
“If someone died for me to have the right to do something I should be required to prove that I am eligible to do it,” says the writer of the Jan. 10 letter “Nullified the votes.”
I agree. But it doesn’t necessarily follow that photo ID is the way to do that. We’ve had no trouble with proof of identity at the voting booth. Photo ID was always a solution in search of a problem — and one that is proved to disenfranchise some voters.
“The Democratic Party and its cohorts in the leftist media began to shop for a federal judge in North Carolina who would stop this law …” he writes. Exactly how could any media company “shop” for a judge?
“It was tyranny at its best as an unelected government official thwarted the will of her fellow citizens of the Old North State,” he adds. I’ll take “clichés” for $100, Alex. Judges should be appointed rather than elected so that their loyalty is to the law rather than an uninformed, prejudiced mob. The letter writer might feel differently about “unelected government officials” if they “thwarted” the people on an issue in which he was in the minority.
All this to say that sometimes rhetoric gets ahead of rational thought. We should all watch for that.
Please submit letters online, with full name, address and telephone number, to Letters@wsjournal.com or mail letters to: The Readers’ Forum, 418 N. Marshall St., Winston-Salem, NC 27101. Letters are subject to editing and are limited to 250 words. For more guidelines and advice on writing letters, go to journalnow.com/site/forms/online_services/letter/