MY TURN: Errors small, facts large

This is relative to three recent letters commenting on Mr. Hamelrath’s My Turn article. Joe Belinc and Joan Strieter praised it (as I do). Then there was Mr. Bourget’s put-down. He selects (cherry picks?) two items from the My Turn article to persuade us that Mr. Hamelrath is not to be believed. I noticed the same two items which caused me to downgrade the article from A+ to A. I approve of Mr. Hamelrath’s point that congress consistently excuses itself from “inconveniences” the rest of us must endure even though he used two erroneous items to emphasize the point. I’m convinced congress corrected these two particular items only as a result of public outcry.

But note the inconsistencies in Mr. Bourget’s letter. He begins by assuming (as I did) that the My Turn article was written before Sholeh Patrick’s column exposing these errors appeared. Then he goes on to say that “Mr. Hamelrath chose not to take her advice on verifying these rumors.” How is this and other comments relating to the subject consistent with the fact that the My Turn article preceded the Patrick column? Clearly they are not. This seems to indicate a less than admirable motivation.

I regret that the My Turn article contained these errors which I feel are minor problems. They are, for instance, like saying “Joe is a liar” and giving a false example when we all know that Joe is indeed a liar.

PHIL MEMBURY

Coeur d’Alene