As an engineer I had to cite only facts and data to make my living. I try very hard at applying this to discipline to my personal life, sometimes I fail. Forming opinions on lies and/or untruths is not what a wise person does. As letter submitters, we should be absolutely accurate in our citations. In two letters arguing for Barr, the writers misrepresent my positions.

The first, insinuates that my opinion on the Barr’s actions was formed decades later. My opinion was formed contemporaneously at my first exposure to the full pardon story (I never trusted Bush or Barr). The second states a fact “only Presidents can pardon.” I stated Barr “suggested to Bush pardons for critical witnesses.” It appears that the reader did not care to read nor understand the letter completely.

Of interest, neither writer argued the facts I quoted. One made a subtle statement about my PC filter, being reset recently. The other opined with the trite argument of “What about Obama

Jeff Rayner


Disclaimer: As submitted to the Arizona Daily Star.

Comments may be used in print.

Load comments