How do you report a $500 million hijacking in Arlington?
There are several suspects, including the two billionaire owners of the Texas Rangers and their accomplices, the mayor and eight City Council members.
This group came up with the insane idea of possibly tearing down our beautiful Globe Life Park and building a new billion-dollar, air-conditioned stadium with a retractable roof.
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to the Star-Telegram
Somewhat like the “snake oil” salesmen of yesteryear saying their medicines would cure anything that ailed you, they are telling the people of Arlington there will be no new taxes.
But what they aren’t telling you is that they will be extending the tax currently being used to pay off the Cowboys’ AT&T Stadium an additional 30 years.
Ron Hiett, Arlington
A “yes” vote is what is needed to keep the Texas Rangers in Arlington.
We are voting to extend an existing tax, so essentially nothing changes. Arlington will continue the same tax structure until our portion of the new stadium is paid off.
In order to debunk some peoples’ belief that Dallas really can’t afford the stadium I will say this: A handful of extremely wealthy Dallas families could come together to make it happen.
Bottom line, folks: A “no” vote is a vote to see the Texas Rangers leave Arlington for another town. A “yes” vote will ensure that the Texas Rangers will remain in Arlington until 2054.
The new stadium, along with Texas Live!, will generate a tremendous amount of revenue for our local economy.
Nick Stanley, Arlington
For those of us not happy with the presidential choices offered by the usual parties, I think the Libertarian candidates, Gary Johnson and Bill Weld, are a viable option.
I do not agree with all of the Libertarian platform, nor have I voted Libertarian in the past, but you might be surprised how much you agree if you visit the candidates’ web sites.
If enough of us vote Libertarian, I hope it sends a message to both major parties that they owe it to their party members to provide candidates with less drama and more substance and credibility.
Given the options, I would rather have Johnson/Weld in the White House than the other choices. We might even rediscover what bipartisan means if Congress works with a president from neither major party.
North Richland Hills
No to Trump
I don’t understand why Christians are voting for Donald Trump. He is not your typical family values candidate. Just compare him to George W. and Laura Bush, George H.W. and Barbara Bush or Ronald and Nancy Reagan.
Trump is a pathological liar, promoter of gambling, inciter if violence and abuser of women (both verbally and physically). He has groped women, has called women horrible names and has had waitresses fired for not being pretty enough.
His wealth doesn’t prove he is a Christian. You can be a heathen and be wealthy.
He has reneged on written contracts with sub-contractors and has taken large sums of money out of casinos that were losing money.
Karl Irvin, Arlington
No to Clinton
With biased media, corruption of government, questionable payments to a foundation, misuse of classified emails, arrogant abuse of a cabinet position and a vanishing American middle class, we must vote for ABH — Anybody But Hillary!
If you can’t stomach Trump, write in another Republican candidate.
Staying home is a disservice to our country.
Hillary Clinton has done absolutely nothing toward creating better lives for all Americans. She has no positive record.
America is in danger of tilting toward socialism. Clinton’s election will accelerate this radical change in our democracy.
Russ Bloxom, Arlington