Letter Excerpt:No big deal really. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I for one thought the author expressed his thoughts quite well, as imbalanced, mean-spirited and short on details as they were.
Will old people frightened into voting for Obama get to meet Terry Schiavo sooner rather than later?
But last week, the Gazette opinion editor felt it was necessary to contradict a letter writer who thought Rep. Paul Ryan wanted to take Social Security checks and "invest" them with some of his banker friends on Wall Street. That particular letter did not devolve into a name-calling personal attack against Ryan. Yet, it was followed by an "editor's note" regurgitating one of Ryan's talking points from his roadmap plan. In a later blog post, the editor explained he thought it was appropriate to post Ryan’s policy statements "to balance the letter writer's right to express himself with our desire to provide accurate information and perspective."
Not to rehash this into something it's not, but the editor was apparently satisfied with the nasty name-calling trash talk letter against Obama. There was no "editor's note" to provide accurate information or balance.
In my view, the op-ed editor made poor judgment calls on both letters. Although both were strongly worded personal viewpoints, the Ryan/policy letter should have been left to stand on it's own accord without an editor's rebuttal, while the Obama/personal letter should have not been allowed to stand at all. It should have never been published.