Check facts and provide more in-depth report

To the Editor:

In your editorial of Feb. 2, you emphasized your view that “if those voters are to make informed decisions, they should have the information upon which to base their decisions.” I agree with you, and felt your editorial intent was right on. It would be hard to argue against the logic of “less inflammatory rhetoric and more substantive information” as a means to getting to solutions to our nations problems.

You stated that President Barack Obama accused the Republicans of being Bolsheviks. If you had done some fact checking you would have found that in talking about the health care debate, he said: “If you were to listen to the debate and, frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you’d think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot.” He didn’t call the Republicans Bolsheviks but rather that they went after his health care proposal as if it were a Bolshevik plot. I don’t think the word Bolshevik was used at any other time. But don’t take my word for it; you can find the complete discussion on the Web.

It’s kind of amazing that you would write an editorial on the importance of informed decisions, reporting on the president’s meeting with Republican congressman, relying on “observers say” information.

I agree with you that the voters need more information about different proposals. However, you seem to excuse the role of the press in providing such information. It would be nice to see the paper provide more information, more fact-checking and less opinion regarding matters. I think we can agree that more in-depth analysis and less syndicated talking points on both sides would be better for our country.

Jim McCormick
Seymour, Ind.