Dear Editor:

To say I was taken aback by Dan Olejniczak’s “Letter to the Editor” March 5 “Agree with Green letter,” would be a monumental understatement.

Mr. Olejniczak believes that the News-Review is “too good” to print letters from Terrance Moe and myself even though they inarguably are representative of the historic political debate taking place in all media outlets, as well as in every nook and cranny of this country. Yet, by extension, he ironically be­lieves that letters like his containing caustic name calling rises to the journalistic standards that has won the News-Review national recognition.

Quite the contrary, exceptional newspapers achieve top awards partly for being good stewards of the letters section of the opinion page whose basic function is to disseminate the pulse of the people associated with their community.

And that brings me to the obvious question resulting from the journalistic integrity of the News-Review to provide Olejniczak an open public forum to speak his mind and show his style: Do opinion page readers prefer counterproductive disrespect to productive discourse?

In the past number of years Mr. Moe and I have debated:

— Police shootings of African Americans;

— America: Christian or secular nation;

— Bernie Sanders: socialist/communist or democratic socialist;

— Gerrymandering;

— Kavanaugh hearings;

— The real organizers behind Parkland, Fla., school massacre protests;

— The validity of Trump’s “s…hole country” comment;

— Trump/Hitler narrative;

— Trump is a Russian agent narrative;

— Taking a knee and the First Amendment;

— Obamacare;

— Extreme environmentalism;

— Global warming;

— Bioterrorism and the southern border;

— Interpreting the Declaration of Independence;

— Obama’s abuse of power; and

— FBI and DOJ crimes against Trump. 

Frank Gabl 

Prospect Heights, Ill.