Day shouldn't have chosen to run vacuous letter

I was sharpening my pencil, readying a response to a letter printed Feb. 23, "Don't believe lies behind Obamanomics," when I noticed that it contained no reference to any of Obama's specific lies, but simply states that the writer has "read and heard various opinions of the State of the Union speech," followed by name-calling. The word "liar," apparently, is "too kind" for our president.

I obviously cannot take this writer to task for misrepresenting the speech, so my defense will have to be modeled after the attack. As a subscriber to the New Yorker and the Atlantic magazines, as well as an occasional reader of the New York Times, I have it on excellent authority that the president's political opponents are bigger, fatter liars. Many of them are corrupt and idiotic, and their own economic solutions have been, and would be, absolutely ruinous for our country.

I hope it's clear that I don't consider this to be a very useful level of discourse. My main complaint is with The Day, for printing a letter so long on vitriol and short on substance.

Hide Comments


Loading comments...
Hide Comments