I’d suggest that in order to reply to another letter, BND letter writers must actually read and understand what they’re bashing before sending feckless expressions of ignorance to the BND. To those programmed to defy anything that smells “lib’rel” with personal insults, might I suggest a reading comprehension course?
A Dec. 16 letter included a lame attempt to refute one where I wrote “one of the noblest people to ever be president will hand over that office to perhaps the most amoral and dangerous person ever elected.” This referenced the character of one versus the amorality of the other, and nothing more. But that didn’t keep the writer from taking me to task for things of which I didn’t write, like Castro.
A writer earlier this week criticized my use of the term “fascist.” Well, per Webster’s, “fascism” is “a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition,” and is something toward which many fear this nation is headed. I also advised readers to look up its meaning, but apparently that’s just too hard for some.
Look, I’m a big boy, and those who ignore facts are entitled to express opinions, lame as they may be. But how about expending just a little effort besides kneejerk parroting of right-wing radio ... maybe even an original (or mercy me, even factual) thought on occasion?
Kevin J. Gagen, Belleville