A little more objectivity in the selection of which letters to the editor you choose to print would be greatly appreciated by your readers.
The maniacal Bush haters seem to be able to have their letter published by you, even though the claims they make are patently erroneous, unsubstantiated and absurd to any rational person.
Case in point, Dave Engleman's letter, which you published last Tuesday. He inferred that the "Daisy Cutter" bomb was used in Iraq -- it wasn't.
He claims 10,000 civilians were killed in the war, but gives no source for that figure. And, as usual, with these agendized zealots, he intimated that there had to have been a vast, but somehow secret, conspiracy behind the war in order to grab Iraq's oil riches.
Do you and your fellow Bush haters have any proof to offer, Mr. Engleman?
It would have been far less expensive, and less complicated, to simply purchase the entire oil output of Iraq for decades to come had oil been the object. The fact is that each and everyone of Engleman's bizarre and flagrant claims can easily be refuted, which makes his letter pointless and silly.
While everyone has a right to his or her opinion, that opinion must be based on fact. Without a factual basis, an opinion is no more than a lie. By printing letters like his, you lend an aura of legitimacy to the societal fringe he and a few others represent. This, in turn, reflects poorly upon your newspaper.
Bill Fork, Payson