I read Michelle Malkin’s fresh “take” on many subjects and consider her helpful in balancing much of what else is being expressed in our Peninsula Daily News.
I have also read the many letters both for and against her way of telling us what she has found out about various important and timely subjects.
I, for one, am very glad we are still hearing from Ms. Malkin.
In the latest anti-Malkin letter (June 3, 2018, “Find Another Voice”), about 17 percent of the writer’s allotted 250 words were in the same vein she was accusing Ms. Malkin of using: “vitriolic rants, vicious attacks, reprehensible rhetoric, trash talk, hateful outrage, pillorying, stoking fear, outrage and anger and stench.”
I felt more of these things coming from this writer than I have ever felt from Ms. Malkin.
Why do you think this writer felt it necessary to give us a “dose of hateful outrage and anger” against the journalist?
To “stoke outrage and anger?”
As she said herself, “reasonable options exist.”
There was neither helpful information nor food for thought, just a vicious attack using reprehensible rhetoric to pollute our public forum with hateful outrage and vitriolic ranting.
I’ll take an outspoken and informed journalist with a tart tongue and something to say any day.
Thank you, PDN.
Cindy Mackay,
Sequim