How about a third party?
Re: “It’s time for the exhausted quiet majority to act — We have allowed soundbites and personal attacks to replace statesmanship and leadership,” by Patrick Payton, Monday Opinion.
Payton’s piece speaks volumes for those of us feeling we have no representation at almost any level of politics. Unfortunately, his opinion that the voices of the middle majority matter is wrong.
Our two-party system of selecting our leaders has failed miserably. Political parties have devolved into, as he put it, “actions of soundbites and personal attacks rather than statesmanship and leadership.” I couldn’t agree more.
But, as long as this culture produces a winning formula, the two parties will have no incentive to return to the civil discourse that we should demand of our leadership.
Opinion
We wield no power to fight this bipolar culture when the only options offered at the polls represent extremes of both sides.
The only solution I see would be to form a legitimate third party of like-minded, respectable individuals who would put on ballots mature, intelligent candidates espousing platforms and leadership behaviors of which we could be proud.
It will still be an uphill battle to entice thoughtful people to enter this muddy battleground. No one wants to expose themselves and their families to the insults and attacks that characterize running for office now.
Gary Strong, Fort Worth
Voting questions
I don’t mind if people see which party I am voting for. I can defend my position quite easily.
What I believe to be a problem is that with early voting, you can go to any precinct to cast your ballot. If you wait until Tuesday, you have to vote at the designated precinct on your voter registration card.
I would like to hear the reasoning behind that decision. Are they trying to confuse us or make it more difficult to cast your vote?
As it stands, a large percentage of eligible voters do not vote. That I also do not understand. Do you not care enough about your country or who is in office and how they will legislate that you don’t have 20 to 30 minutes to cast your vote?
What’s wrong with that scenario? That means the winners are elected by the few. That’s a problem we need to rectify.
Doug Moore, Grand Prairie
Tips for judges
Judge Amber Givens apparently exercised poor judgment during her service. The list of alleged transgressions reveals someone serving our judiciary who just didn’t understand the rules. As if we needed further evidence of her not “getting it,” Givens appealed a reprimand from a state commission, forcing a public trial of a matter that could have been buried under the public rug.
Here’s a little-known secret. Serving on the bench is not that hard. I know because I did it! I was 29 years old when Gov. Mark White appointed me to a district bench. All lawyers in town immediately became obsequious. Suddenly, all of my jokes were funny. The entire experience was both thrilling and disturbing.
Five rules for enjoying a career of judicial service: 1. be prepared each morning (lawyers love it when the judge has actually read the motions and briefs on file); 2. rule and move on (don’t take decisions under advisement — it clogs your docket and drives lawyers crazy); 3. maintain a sense of humor, always; 4. never embarrass a lawyer in front of his or her client; and 5. belong to whichever political party controls the courthouse.
Will Pryor, Downtown Dallas
Explaining DEI
The MAGA crowd would have us believe that DEI, woke and liberal are radical concepts. Let us review.
Diversity, which gives us the benefit of multiple points of view and experiences, is a foundational characteristic of our society that makes us the greatest nation on earth. Equity, by definition, is the quality of being fair and just. Inclusion, as in bringing people together, is the opposite of discrimination.
Woke is the awareness of historic systematic discrimination and inequality (i.e., slavery, Jim Crow laws, etc.) and efforts to avoid them being repeated.
Liberal comes from the Latin word liber, which means free, as in freedom.
No, these are certainly not radical ideas. They are simply characteristics of being a decent human being.
Jim Brady, Dallas
What about the Dallas Stars?
As discussions intensify around the future of the Dallas Mavericks and the Dallas Stars at the American Airlines Center, one question continues to stand out: Why does it appear that Dallas city leaders are moving mountains to keep one franchise while showing relative indifference toward the other?
Both teams have called downtown home for more than two decades. Both drive significant economic activity, fill restaurants and hotels, generate tax revenue, and contribute to the city’s national profile. Both have delivered winning seasons and championship appearances that brought pride to Dallas. Yet, the public tone from City Hall suggests urgency in retaining the Mavericks, while the Stars’ potential relocation to Plano is met with a collective shrug.
If there are substantive economic, contractual or strategic differences that justify this disparity in effort, the public deserves a clear explanation. If there are not, then city leadership should make equally visible and vigorous efforts to retain both teams — or candidly acknowledge that professional hockey is somehow viewed as expendable in Dallas.
Public trust depends on transparency and consistency. Dallas should not appear to be playing favorites with institutions that have both invested heavily in our city and its identity.
Bill Rogge, Dallas
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here.
If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at letters@dallasnews.com