The ‘enablers’
If you voted for President Donald Trump and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott then you are likely thrilled with their recent selfish actions:
>> Trump’s bellicose words and deeds towards Iran, and his foolish action of moving the United States embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
>> Trump’s on-again/off-again military threat towards North Korea.
>> Trump’s war-favoring deeds in cooperation with Saudi Arabia against Yemen — instead of negotiations.
>> And his new attacks on women’s choice and reproductive health in the United States, plus removing various environmental protections.
>> In Texas, the state is trying to remove the Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, in a state with half of the participants.
Quite the actions these past two weeks . But if you backed the president and governor you probably are satisfied, even thrilled.
I am not. I am sad. I am disappointed. But I will speak for justice and compassion until my demise!
But if you didn’t vote for Trump and Abbott — either by participating in or sitting out the two elections — and you are distressed with the two men and their policies, then vote them out of office.
Elections still count and if you don’t participate and you are unhappy, then you have no one else to blame because you’re an enabler.
Eugene “Gene” Novogrodsky, Brownsville
Russian vote influence or hoax?
I would like to hear from anyone who had their 2016 presidential vote influenced by a Russian, the KGB, GRU or any other Soviet agency. I would like to hear how their vote was influenced, either for example via the Internet, or phone call, or letter. Please be specific. I urge any U.S. citizen who voted in the last election to come forward and tell me and the readership of The Monitor how their vote was influenced. I have spoken to at least 100 people in my own non-scientific survey and no one has a clue. They all tell me they voted for their party or candidate at the last presidential election in 2016. Russian collusion hoax or reality, the search goes on and on and on!
Jake Longoria, Mission
‘Pontifical missive’
Ned Sheats’ May 14, letter proclaiming his goal to introduce logic and reason into the ongoing debate over gun control — while full to overflowing with self-righteous “Progressive” hand waving is curiously but not surprisingly lacking in details. We remain in the dark with respect to so many of them.
Which weapons does he believe we should be allowed to possess?
What does he believe an effective arms training program should entail?
What does he believe would constitute an acceptable vetting process?
And finally, if attempting to abolish the Second Amendment is political suicide, what is his plan for getting around it?
I await his next pontifical missive with bated breath.
Ned Pierce,
Edinburg
