My congratulations to G. Newman, whose letter was printed in a timely manner and positioned in an advantage position for viewing.
In response, the first point that must be clarified is that the title of my letter, which was added by the editor, was misleading. My letter was in response to another letter published Jan. 17, and was not a direct response to the election. If the quotations marks around the words “informed and engaged,” which were used in the Jan. 17 letter, had not been edited out, perhaps that phrase would have been less misleading as well.
I understand the position of G. Newman, because it is similar to where I was coming from after I read the letter Jan. 17. My goal was to defend Mr. Harper and conservative people in general from a vicious attack, which used the “pervasive rhetoric” tactic, and to put the situation in perspective by dealing with it objectively rather than subjectively.
I am not surprised, though, that it struck a subjective nerve and rallied a vindictive response. I do wonder whether if the proper perspective and reason were known, the response might have been a little less emotional.
An “entire generation” was not “dismissed.” Only those who allow others to form their thinking, without seeking varied sources of information and using objective reasoning, were criticized – and such people are not unique to any particular generation.
It is a commonly known fact that much of the media is no longer as objective as it was, or should be, when informing (or forming) the public. Case in point, when the newly elected prime minister follows through on an election promise and adds $150 million more to the annual $1 billion taxpayer subsidy for CBC, what party do you think the CBC is beholden to? As for “privileged white men,” that good old left-wing staple, I am not one of them. But Mr. Trudeau is.
I presume that, “keep up the good work” is meant to be sarcastic.
However, I will continue to do my best and try to do my part in striving for the common good.