Every newspaper dreams of having lots of letters to the editor so they can pick and choose a representative sample of public opinion. Viewed in that context, one must try to run nearly all letters so as not to discourage those who may want to express their opinions in the future. We try to maintain that philosophy, that input from the public is a good thing, even when our own opinions may differ. Given no other choice, I'll be brief.
Representative government is a dicey proposition.
There are points where dissent becomes obstructionism, and we must make judgements as to when meaningful dialog stops and pointless drivel begins. It is especially difficult for the losers in political debate to seize that moment to accept defeat and wait to fight another day. For that reason, many people who are entrenched in civic government often want neither open debate. Their attitude is understandable, but the public's right to express its opinion is unconditional in democracy. It is our responsibility as citizens to make certain that the status quo is the best option, not the simply the most convenient.