To evoke duality to the maximum: Levi Hanson (“Mailbag full of hostility,” Jan. 4) is positively correct; negatively wrong, or positively incorrect; negatively right.
There is one thing obvious, though. A person seeking to attain positive enlightenment in life is not going to acquire it by writing negative letters to the editor with the value of opposing it. Maybe it’s that Zen philosophy being eluded. Or, it has been obtained.
If the S-R selected only letters accentuating positive comments, it wouldn’t be fair and balanced reporting. As an example, if I wrote, “Levi Hanson’s letter was positively and totally on the money,” it would be with pretense and affectation, a lie.
If Hanson truly wanted to suggest being positive, how can this be by selecting words as: “mean-spirited,” “name-calling,” others being “obviously disrespectful” (but being disrespectful to others’ point of view), “disdain,” “hoax,” “negative” news, and needing to take blood pressure medication; was this one, in fact, being truthful or was it metaphorical?
Hanson’s letter was mostly negative but, I assume, honest.
David J. Rosenbeck