MIAMI VALLEY VOICES

Readers offer feedback on editorial, op-ed pages

On April 24, Ellen Belcher, editor of the Dayton Daily News editorial pages, invited readers to give her feedback on the columnists whose work appears on the editorial and op-ed pages. We are sharing some of the responses we received:

For many years we received The Journal Herald, and then our only choice was the liberal Dayton Daily News.

Could we stomach any more ranting and raving from Maureen Dowd, Molly Ivins, Paul Krugman and Gwynne Dyer?

Ellen Belcher's April 24 column said, "We want to have a balance of liberals and conservatives," and, "we try to use at least one bona fide conservative writer almost everyday." How does the second quote equal a balance of liberals and conservatives?

We know lies and distortions when we hear them. If the DDN wants to keep any conservative readers (and there are many of us out here), changes must be made in its editorial policy. — Charlene Detweiler, Tipp City

It certainly is true that the DDN goes out of its way to "? try to use at least one bona fide conservative writer almost every day. Some days there's more than one."

And it is also true that the DDN wants "? to have a balance of liberals and conservatives ?" and "? racial, gender and ethnic diversity ?"

However, it is also true that the majority of DDN readers cannot afford to have its government spend hundreds of billions of tax dollars on non-economically-productive military operations which do not improve any citizen's well-being.

And it is also true that the conservative views seem to have much more public print space available than does the liberal view.

If we get any more conservative in this country and in the DDN readership area, the DDN will find fewer and fewer people who will have the time to read or the money to buy the DDN. — Walter Brewster, Franklin

I enjoyed Ellen Belcher's piece discussing the DDN's new columnist lineup and was particularly pleased to see that it intends to publish bios of each of the columnists.

In this regard, I have a few requests to make. First, I would like for the DDN to do a little homework and write its own bios. Please don't just use the self-serving material that the columnists and their agents provide. Second, it would be a great service to readers if the DDN revealed the warts on this collection and picked at a few scabs. Third, it would be good to know just how closely its conservative columnists hew to the material that Karl Rove's message machine faxes and e-mails daily to his stooges in the media.

For example, it would be good for readers to know that Cal Thomas is a mouthpiece for reactionary right-wing "religious" leaders like Jerry Falwell and his ilk. It would be good for readers to know some of the connections that George Will has. Finally, it would be good for readers to not have to look at that smirking kewpie doll photograph of Charles Krauthammer.

Unfortunately, I don't have suggestions for replacing those right-wing ideologues, but I am grateful that the DDN didn't select anyone even worse than those three, like, perhaps, Ann Coulter. But, here is a thought: The DDN could restore some of the "balance" that you have historically cherished by adding James Ridgeway from The Village Voice as a counterpoint to David Brooks.

Actually I do appreciate the paper's efforts to present a decent lineup of columnists but the effort will be largely wasted on most of the DDN's readers, since a very great many of them regularly, and mistakenly, charge it with being a left-wing rag. If they don't recognize columnists like Thomas, Will, Krauthammer and Brooks as right-wing flacks, there's not much hope of educating them. But, thanks for trying. — Steve Heckart, Yellow Springs

Thanks so much for the useful overview of the DDN columnists. I think Ellen Belcher pegged them pretty well.

I read the liberals regularly, to get the "correct" take on the news, and the conservatives occasionally, to understand the distortions of the kooky right-wing.

Two requests: Could you add columnist Frank Rich to the mix? He's in The New York Times — witty and insightful. And could the DDN do a similar overview of the major media outlets? Which are considered liberal or conservative?

We know about conservative Fox News ("We Distort, You Decide") and the liberal New York Times, but there are others I'm not sure of.

Thanks for a great local paper. I look forward to the columnists' profiles. — Randall K Jewell, Springboro

Gwynne Dyer's military experience and expertise, and his concern for and knowledge of international issues are very important for the DDN's readers.

David Brooks is not particularly good when he pontificates on politics, but does highly useful work when writing from his informal research into cultural matters. A similar argument can be made for George F. Will, who can be maddening when writing as a Republican Party loyalist, and an insightful and sometimes brilliant analyst when he writes as a principled conservative.

Paul Krugman should be retained for his knowledge of economics and his ability to explain economic issues to us layfolk. He may infuriate conservatives, but he doesn't mystify them; so he lays the groundwork for useful arguments. And Molly Ivins is just a national treasure who should be displayed frequently.

Most important, though, the Dayton Daily News and other media should insist that right-wing critics do content analyses of the entire product. Most of a newspaper is solidly conservative in effect: a Business section (not labor), advertising (with each ad endorsing capitalism), Sports and Entertainment (directing people's minds away from electoral politics and mostly avoiding the politics of sports and entertainment). The DDN could run all revolutionaries on its editorial page, and the total thrust of the paper would still be toward retaining the status quo. — Richard D. Erlich, Oxford

There really isn't much new about the DDN's " new" lineup. I see three conservatives, one semi-conservative and 14 liberal-left Democrats. That's balanced reporting? Most are New York Times hard-core liberals with anti-Bush and anti-American bias. — Roger H. Cook, Xenia

Readers must hear both sides of issues so they can sort out the spin from the facts. Since Dayton is basically a one-newspaper town since the demise of The Journal Herald, I feel the Dayton Daily News is obligated to present both sides on issues, but not necessarily on the same day.

A couple of the columnists in the DDN lineup don't present their side on issues, but rather engage in a vitriolic attack on the other side. Molly Ivins does this consistently as does Maureen Dowd. They add nothing to a balanced debate. I like the rest. — Terry Tucker, Washington Twp.

Please continue to print my favorites: Thomas Friedman, Molly Ivins, Paul Krugman and Leonard Pitts Jr. Don't try to be so nonpartisan. There are very few liberal papers out there. Please take a stand for progressive politics. Be brave. To be unrepresented and correct is scary. Millions of Americans need an advocate. Don't abandon the correct left. — Patty Vogt, Piqua

It is common knowledge that many accuse the Dayton Daily News of having a liberal bias. In the April 24 paper, Ellen Belcher says the DDN wants to have a balance of liberals and conservatives, and she makes a good attempt at showing this balance by discussing the editorial columnists and how they are chosen. Yet, despite this attempt, few conservatives will probably be convinced.

Other than the columnists, perhaps a dominant factor in giving the DDN the liberal label are Mike Peters' editorial cartoons. Based on the content of the vast majority of his cartoons, one would certainly consider him to be a hard-core liberal, and his cartoon is the first thing the reader sees.

Interestingly, in the same edition of the DDN, George Will points out that baby boomers consume less journalism than their parents did, and that young people are voracious consumers of media, but not of journalism.

Sadly, might this imply that people (liberals and conservatives) are more likely to look at Mike Peters' editorial cartoons than to read the editorial columns? As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words, and it would be difficult to say there is conservative-liberal balance in DDN editorial cartoons. — Joseph C. Brafford, Beavercreek

I laughed out loud at Ellen Belcher's column in the April 24 Dayton Daily News, "Columnist lineup has new look." Belcher had the audacity to write, "We want to have a balance of liberals and conservatives." By her own calculations, 10 of the columnists mentioned are liberal, and only six are conservative. What "balance."

The DDN is extremely liberal. Its editorial opinions, the number of liberal letters to the editor published versus those written by conservative readers, and the many liberal Speak Up comments all substantiate that fact.

Belcher should take her act to Joker's Comedy Club, where it belongs. — Kris Garrison, Greenville

The DDN says it has a new columnist lineup. My first response is, "What's different?" We have, as the DDN admits, more liberals than conservatives.

Ellen Belcher then says that she has a harder time categorizing David Broder, Thomas Friedman and Leonard Pitts Jr. I can say that they are unabashedly liberals. I will say that they are probably not as mean and nasty and continually Bush-bashing as are Maureen Dowd, Paul Krugman, Molly Ivins and Ellen Goodman. So, as usual, the DDN features 10 liberals to five or six conservatives.

In addition, the DDN needs to realize that the whole paper is liberal. This means that the DDN chooses all stories that it prints. Therefore, the paper prints only those stories that meet its liberal views. The sins of omission tell much. — Marsha Schnippel, Troy

I want to commend the DDN's selection of columnists. I think they are very good and I believe that they provide a good cross section of views. I try to read them all to try and understand the different points of view.

The one exception is Cal Thomas. His columns appear to be nothing more than mere diatribes. I remember when the DDN quit carrying his column in the past, and I was quite pleased with that decision.

I know the DDN constantly gets hammered with the "biased liberal" label, but I think it is by people who don't know the difference between a point of view and a bias. A point of view is an opinion based on facts. A bias is an opinion that ignores the facts.

It appears that in some minds, the only unbiased opinion is a conservative one. Keep up the good work. — Daniel E. Fraga, New Carlisle

I understand the DDN's desire to provide some kind of balance, i.e. conservative view versus liberal view, or perhaps vice versa. But, in my opinion, some of the DDN's choices are ridiculous.

Paul Krugman and Molly Ivins are so vile and so far left they are off the radar screen. Also, I do not like opening my paper only to see Krugman sneering at me. It is all right to present the liberal view but their vitriol is over the top, or perhaps below the bottom.

The DDN could also add Gwynne Dyer to the dump list. I do not know what he writes about, because I never found anything of his I wanted to read.

One addition I would recommend to the DDN is Mona Charen. She would be my choice over Cal Thomas.

The top of the DDN's list, in my view, is easily George Will and Charles Krauthammer. — Donald A. Moeller, Centerville

The DDN has a wonderful lineup of national columnists. My husband and I lean more to the liberal side, and especially enjoy some of those writers, but it is also interesting to see other views. Keep up the good work. — Helen Wiegel, Wilmington

David Brooks is a "sometimes" conservative who would not pass muster at the American Conservative Union.

I only count five out of 17 columnists who are "conservative" as 30 percent, but if the DDN would be so kind as to include Thomas Sowell and drop a liberal, that would help. The more things change the more they stay the same. — Ted Guest, Kettering

Congratulations to the DDN for trying to get some balance on the editorial pages. While the liberal bias in the remainder of the paper is still quite obvious, it is nice to be able to read some writers who are not.

My favorite is Charles Krauthammer. My least-liked and almost-never-read-any-more are Molly Ivins, Maureen Dowd and Gwynne Dyer. Thanks for the listing of liberals and conservatives; at least now I know of others I need not waste my time on. — Jim Silcott, Fairborn

We have had the pleasure of meeting and talking with Mike Peters. He states that his purpose with his cartoons is to make people think. This may be why so many are critical of his work. He is not only an outstanding political cartoonist, he could very well have made it as a standup comic. We enjoyed his stories about his career.

We have not had the opportunity to meet David Broder, Clarence Page, Thomas Friedman, Molly Ivins, Paul Krugman or Leonard Pitts Jr. We do believe that their comments are insightful, researched, and correct. If it were not for people like them, much of the worthwhile news would not be available.

Ivins, like Peters, strikes a nerve very often. We say great work. Whether it is good news or bad news, striking nerves makes people think. I applaud all the comments people make about the editorials; at least they are reading and thinking (whether correctly or incorrectly is another item). — Carolyn and Cecil Pugh, Bellbrook

A good columnist is one who can express a view or an opinion that either reinforces your belief in it or makes you consider its merit, even if you don't share that view. But Paul Krugman and Molly Ivins are just hate-speech writers with nothing but vile coming from their pens. It's pure hate-filled propaganda for their anti-American views. — Mark Slater, Troy

David Broder is the most fair-minded and knowledgeable about politics. Maureen Dowd is too liberal, but such a clever writer. Paul Krugman is an A-1 writer and fair-minded. George Will is too conservative, but he makes you thoughtful and he has great writing skills. Gwynne Dyer is No. 1 in his field. Leonard Pitts Jr. is boring and predictable. Thomas Friedman is a shrewd analyst. — Reo Christenson, Miamisburg

I have recently been enjoying Bruce Kauffmann's column, with his blend of history and human interest. He has a nice style and his topics are in a vein not covered by others in the DDN editorial pages.

I always look for Leonard Pitts Jr. and read him first. As a retired white woman, I am surprised by his ability to connect with my thoughts, from his surely very different experiences. I was a teacher in Dayton schools and thought he would be great to talk with personally. I had so many concerns about teaching young black boys and was sure Pitts would have been great to brainstorm with on that subject. — Patricia Sales, Washington Twp.

I never read Molly Ivins. Some time ago she wrote a column on Catholic schools. Her facts were so far off the mark that I concluded that I could not trust her information and have never read her since. People can have honest differences of opinion based on the same facts, but, at least they should start with the true facts. — Carol Halstead, Tipp City

Regarding the DDN columnists, the best are Maureen Dowd, very well-written and thought out; Molly Ivins, a lot of humor along with her usual on-target analysis; and Paul Krugman, very good on the economic issues, especially Social Security.

Thomas Friedman, Ellen Goodman, Nicholas Kristof and Leonard Pitts Jr. are usually pretty good, too. I don't care for David Brooks, Jonah Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, Cal Thomas and George Will. — Kevin Crisler, Kettering

The columnist I enjoy most is Nicholas Kristof. He is a humanitarian with an uncanny view on global issues. Most of the columnists in the Dayton Daily News express their views on domestic issues, and it is refreshing to read views on global issues every once in a while.

Keep all the liberal columnists and George Will and David Brooks for the conservative side. Will and Brooks make convincing points, at times, for the conservatives while Charles Krauthammer, Jonah Golberg and Cal Thomas are just pitch men for the Bush administration. — Bryan Chen, Fairborn

Love these columnists: Maureen Dowd, Molly Ivins, Thomas Friedman, Ellen Goodman, Clarence Page, Paul Krugman, Leonard Pitts Jr., Nicholas Kristof, even David Brooks.

Sometimes I like David Broder and feel he's good even when I disagree.

Neutral on George Will, Bruce Kauffmann, Jonah Goldberg and Kathleen Parker, but not impressed.

Negative on Gwynne Dyer and Cal Thomas and Charles Krauthammer. Get rid of them. — Sandra Love, Dayton

As a very independent-minded person, I read both the left (liberal), the right (conservative) and the moderate columnists that the Dayton Daily News publishes. I do not always agree with either the liberal or conservative views of any particular columnist. However, I refuse to accept as gospel the views of one side or the other.

I would encourage everyone to read all columns, then use their own intellect to decide where the truth lies. Those with closed minds are easily hoodwinked and usually are oblivious to the facts. — David Gouge, Tipp City

In my opinion, of the commentators cited, Thomas Friedman is the best one. He's grounded in world affairs; he always bases his opinions on well-established resources; and he is the least partisan of all our commentators. I can understand why he has won the Pulitzer Prize three times.

My second choice would be Leonard Pitts Jr. He is diverse in his areas of concern, and intensely interested in human behaviors that are threatening life today. He has won the Pulitzer Prize once. I will surely die if I don't get to read him often.

My opinions on the others:

• David Broder — Very good, especially on world affairs.

• David Brooks — Good but often somewhat giddy.

• Maureen Dowd — Very good, but often too unrestrained.

• Gwynne Dyer — Good.

• Jonah Goldberg — Much too partisan, sometimes almost crude; bases much of his opinion on opinion of others or questionable resources.

• Ellen Goodman — Partisan, but very sound.

• Molly Ivins — Radical left, but intelligent and clever and I love her.

• Bruce Kauffmann — Educational, interesting.

• Charles Krauthammer — Very good, often offers unique and sound opinion to important concerns.

• Nicholas Kristof, Paul Krugman and Clarence Page — All three very good; all have sound opinions.

• Kathleen Parker — Uses way too much jargon to hold my serious interest.

• Cal Thomas — Often too conservative for me and opinions not always based on facts.

• George Will — Very good.

Thanks for giving us this opportunity to voice opinion. — Violet R. Strahler, Harrison Twp.

The only columnists I read on a regular basis are Molly Ivins and Maureen Dowd. No matter how busy I may be, even if it means waiting until I have the time, I will not miss anything they write. The same goes for Ellen Goodman, but my devotion is not quite so emphatic.

Both columnists have a point of view, to say nothing of their devastating sense of humor; something I don't even think exists in George Will's quiver, for example.

Neither appears frequently enough for my taste. — Robert E. Garvin, Waynesville

George Will is my favorite, although sometimes I wish he would say what he means in words that I can readily understand. However, if I could understand the words, I still might not know what he meant! — Bob Duffy, Centerville

As a daily reader of the paper, I read every section, and I do read the editorials if the subject matter is of interest to me.

Of all the columnists that I have read, I would just like to make note of the fact that no matter the topic, I always read every article that is written by Leonard Pitts Jr. I find him to be a very good writer and insightful on many topics. I would surely hope that his work is continued in the Dayton Daily News. — Linda Ratliff, Miamisburg

My wife loves Charles Krauthammer's column. She's usually in agreement with his views and finds him a humane and compassionate man. I also greatly enjoy his column, albeit not with the same white-hot zeal as my wife. We both vote to keep him.

I am delighted you carry Bruce Kauffmann's column. As Ellen Belcher stated, his is not a political column, but I am at the age (an old coot) when history is infinitely more engrossing than some writer's opinion of contemporary events. Also, no doubt teachers throughout the region use his column religiously. His column doesn't take up much space and is worthwhile to young and old. Please keep this one!

Although not a faithful reader of the following, I do occasionally read them and, even when I strongly disagree, they do make me think. I vote for keeping: David Brooks, Gwynne Dyer, Thomas Friedman, George Will and Leonard Pitts Jr. I grant that some of these seem to have their minds adamantly and unswayingly made up, but I do sometimes see some moderation or even an admission of not being infallible in their works. That makes them human to me, and not caricatures.

That leads me to three who seem, at least to me, to deem themselves infallible gods uttering edicts from an unapproachable throne. Anyone who disagrees with them commits an unforgivable blasphemy. Far from being thought-provoking or carriers of the lamp of truth, they just strike me as adolescent, name-calling, shrill, close-minded egomaniacs. I wouldn't mind seeing them go (as you no doubt can tell). They do not express thought-out opinions; they just spew bile. Unlike Krauthammer, I can detect no humanity in their columns. It's not that they disagree with politicians or groups holding a view different from theirs, which is what one expects on the editorial page; it's more as if they have a fanatical and unrelenting hatred for anyone who holds such an opinion. The three columnists are Maureen Dowd, Ellen Goodman and Molly Ivins.

I rather abashedly admit I do not read the other columnists enough to have an opinion. In fact, there are two of them I don't even recall seeing in the paper before.

To show my great age, the paper used to carry humorous opinion writers, I'm specifically referring to Art Buchwald and Art Hoppe. Has no one appeared on the scene who could take their place? — Jeff Potter, Beavercreek

Definite keepers are David Broder, David Brooks (willing to admit mistakes), Maureen Dowd (seems fairly balanced), Thomas Friedman, Ellen Goodman, Molly Ivins (definitely a keeper as long as President George W. Bush is in office), Nicholas Kristof, Paul Krugman, Clarence Page, Leonard Pitts Jr. and George Will.

Get rid of Gwynne Dyer, Cal Thomas (talk about one-sided) and Charles Krauthammer (makes Cal Thomas look like a liberal).

One final comment, I do not agree with your assessment of Bruce Kauffmann. I hope that he is using factual information, and that somebody is checking those sources, but he comes across to me as a conservative. — Jim Woodford, Dayton

I think Molly Ivins should be banned from writing in the DDN; her opinions deface a really decent newspaper. She's nothing but a Bush-basher and I can't imagine what she'd ever think of to write about if he weren't in office.

Dave Hayes, Dayton

No more Jack Klugman ? I mean Paul Krugman. He is just about as un-American as you can get. Lives in a bubble. Has no smarts. Writes like a retired high school guidance counselor. Gwynne Dyer? Who cares? More Thomas Friedman and Charles Krauthammer. Molly Ivins needs to retire. George Will is so boring. Leonard Pitts Jr. gets confused once in awhile. Maureen Dowd is getting wealthier as she bashes America with her pen. I used to read her column, but she is much too depressing. — Rob Rindler, Coldwater

I almost religiously go through each edition of the Fairborn Daily Herald and the Dayton Daily News, although sometimes they stack up for a while when we're out of town. (Makes it tough to catch up when this happens. I wonder if this makes me a bit obsessive?) This attention to the newspaper especially includes the editorial pages. I used to like the editorial pages next best to the comics, which I usually save for last (dessert!). Lately, however, the comics are seeming to be less of a dessert. I don't know if it's the comics or me that's changed.

I have nothing against any of the current columnists. There are some whose opinions I don't particularly care for ? some on a fairly continuous basis. Some almost always. But I think that it's probably a good thing to be exposed to disturbing ideas. And I can always pass them by — which I sometimes do.

However, there are some in the current lineup who I think are particularly valuable, and a couple to whom I truly look forward and would be upset to see dropped.

I think David Broder, Gwynne Dyer and Clarence Page are particularly valuable. And I truly look forward to David Brooks, Thomas Friedman (No. 1 in my opinion), Leonard Pitts Jr. and George Will. — David A. Player, Fairborn

Two people in the DDN lineup are so far off the wall that it is no wonder people are dropping subscriptions. If it weren't for the sports I'd join them. Molly Ivins is the worst of the worst. Talk about name-calling. Opinions are one thing, but name-calling and extremism is quite another. I can think of many names to call her. She belongs in the outhouse. Following close behind is Paul Krugman. Dropping those two just might help the DDN's bottom line. — Dick Rentz, Greenville

I have very strong feelings about Molly Ivins! I have a great aversion to people who never seem to have anything positive to say about anything. Ivins is one of those people; but what is more distasteful is that she has become utterly vitriolic. In most of her columns she simply rants and raves against everything and everyone (but especially President George W. Bush).

She seldom if ever has any constructive comments or suggestions that readers might want to consider. There's enough mudslinging during election times. To have it in daily newspapers is pure torture. The red/blue nonsense is getting trite, but Ivins is beginning to approach simple vulgarity as far as I am concerned. The DDN would do well to scratch her off its roster.

I have noted recently an occasional column by Thomas Sowell. I think he would be an excellent candidate for regular appearances. I have always found his columns intelligent and stimulating. He also has frequently offered very different views on racial issues that one can seldom find from any other black columnist.

Otherwise, I find the DDN's lineup fairly well-balanced so that we can usually get both sides of an issue. Thanks for at least asking for our opinions. — Gerald Z. Demers, Tipp City

The only columnist who I can't abide is Molly Ivins. Her columns are so slanted against President George W. Bush and the good things that he stands for, it's ridiculous. If you don't agree with her agenda, then it's the highway for you. She is much too divisive to be included with the DDN's other columnists. I prefer to never see her picture or column again. — John Arthur, Dayton

To be honest, when reading a Molly Ivins or Maureen Dowd column, I often get the same feeling that I got listening to Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, explain how wonderful it was that Terri Schiavo was being starved to death. If the DDN could rid its pages of these two very-far-left, very dangerous extremists, I would feel very relieved.

I noticed that Cal Thomas is listed as one of the available columnists. I have been a subscriber to the Dayton Daily News since I moved here in 1987. Cal Thomas' column used to show up from time to time years ago, but I can't remember the last time that I had the relaxing pleasure of reading him in the DDN. If possible, please use my subscription money to put his wonderful words back in as often as possible. He is, by far, the best columnist of the ones who were listed. — Jeffrey W. Saler, Bellbrook

Keep an even mixture of reasonable columnists. Of course what I think is reasonable and the next person thinks may vary greatly. I read Thomas Friedman, Ellen Goodman, Molly Ivins, Bruce Kauffmann, Maureen Dowd, Paul Krugman, Clarence Page, Leonard Pitts Jr., Cal Thomas and George Will. — Kathleen Armstrong, Kettering

Our choices for guest spots on the op-ed page: (1) Leonard Pitts Jr., (refreshing, smart, topical, wide-reaching, always interesting); (2) Molly Ivins (you go, girl!); (3) Clarence Page; (4) Gwynne Dyer; (5) Ellen Goodman; (6) Maureen Dowd; (7) Bruce Kauffmann; (8) Thomas Friedman; (9) Jonah Goldberg. — Tom and Connie Lewis, Tipp City

The columnists I always read are Thomas Friedman, David Brooks, Clarence Page, and Leonard Pitts Jr. I especially appreciate Friedman's understanding of the Middle East.

The columnists I make a point of not wasting my time reading are Ellen Goodman and Molly Ivins, having found their opinions useless before.

I have no definite opinion of the others, although I often read at least part of their columns, some more than others. — Robert Manske, Beavercreek

First, let me say that the DDN has a better lineup than do papers such as the Cincinnati Enquirer.

Having said that, there are two columnists that I would suggest the DDN drop, both on the basis of the quality of thought and effort they put into their columns. They are Cal Thomas and George Will.

I don't think Thomas has ever done a particularly good job of researching what he writes, and thinking critically. Will is a different situation. There was a time when he did good research and good writing. Alas, those days stopped several years ago.

Charles Krauthammer is a man whose columns I can't stand, but he is thorough, careful, and does research what he writes.

Among those to definitely keep are Paul Krugman, Ellen Goodman, Molly Ivins, Leonard Pitts Jr., Maureen Dowd and David Broder. I like Gwynne Dyer and Thomas Friedman a lot. Clarence Page is thoughtful, but is definitely not one to make waves. Kathleen Parker is mediocre. David Brooks seems to have lost some of his analytical and research capability, but is still better than Will, his ideological counterpart. — Gene E. Willeke, Oxford

My wife and I would like to recommend the following columnists for the DDN editorial and op-ed pages: George Will, Cal Thomas, Charles Krauthammer, Jonah Goldberg and David Brooks.

We are also embarrassed that "our own" DDN editorial cartoonist, Mike Peters, is seen in 800 other newspapers and magazines over the country. He is one reason we no longer subscribe to the DDN. (We do occasionally buy the Sunday paper, mostly for the ads.) — Reed W. and Margaret Ann Rings, Sugarcreek Twp.

My "first team" of columnists to read includes David Brooks, David Broder, Nicholas Kristof, Clarence Page, Thomas Friedman, and Leonard Pitts Jr.

My "second team" includes George Will (I find his writing to be more predictable and less worth reading than it used to be), Maureen Dowd, Ellen Goodman, Paul Krugman (although I am finding his current series on health care in America to be very good), and Gwynne Dyer.

Under my "don't waste your time" category, I put Jonah Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, Cal Thomas and now Molly Ivins (I used to enjoy her column, but she too has become too predictable). I have not read much of Kathleen Parker; I'll have to give her a try. Finally, I have been enjoying the addition of Bruce Kauffmann's historical perspectives.

Again, thanks for asking. I find the DDN's lineup of columnists to be, overall, interesting and thought-provoking. — Michael A. Kreutzer, Oakwood

I think the DDN has a good mix of liberal and conservative views, but I would get rid of Molly Ivins. She doesn't merely want to express different views; she wants to hurt people and is simply full of hate. — Chuck Biehn, Centerville

If the DDN unloaded Maureen Dowd, Ellen Goodman, Molly Ivins, Charles Krauthammer, Paul Krugman and Clarence Page, its circulation would increase significantly and the blood pressure of thousands of Daytonians would improve.

The best work is done by David Brooks, Thomas Friedman, George Will, David Broder and Cal Thomas.

I hope that when this project is done, we will be able to comment on the comics, the worst of whom, Gary Trudeau and Mike Peters, have never grasped the basic difference between "right and wrong" or "truth and falsehood." Their work should be terminated, along with the columnists mentioned above. — Peter J. Donahue, Dayton

We think the DDN has good balance with the columnists it currently has. My husband and I would like to say, though, that we particularly enjoy Molly Ivins' columns. At this time we need someone who "tells it like it is!" We would be very disappointed if her column were to be "edited" out. — Ralph and Barbara Sailor, Jackson Center

I love the DDN's editorial and op-ed pages.

I think George Will and David Brooks write the best conservative columns.

I think Charles Krauthammer (must have) let the White House buy him lunch in return for promoting White House policies.

I can't live without Paul Krugman.

Thomas Friedman writes and thinks well even when he is wrong.

I admire Clarence Page and Leonard Pitts Jr. for their common sense.

Gwynne Dyer reminds us that there is a world out there beyond the U.S.A.

I wish David Broder would retire, and that Nicholas Kristof would go away.

I think Maureen Dowd afflicts the powerful of all parties which they need.

I would like to see E.J. Dionne on the list, since he reminds us what conscience is.

Thanks for a great lineup. — Enid Goubeaux, Greenville

The DDN's lineup is truly bipartisan. I agree with Ellen Belcher's liberal-conservative assessments, except for David Broder. He is objective and by far the best political columnist in the business. — Bob Daley, Washington Twp.

My wife and I prefer Charles Krauthammer, George Will and Cal Thomas. Hopefully, Krauthammer's columns will be more prevalent than they have been. — Robert George, Beavercreek

I deeply value Leonard Pitts Jr. and Ellen Goodman. My second tier is Molly Ivins and Maureen Dowd. Then Gwynne Dyer, Charles Krauthammer, George Will and Clarence Page.

I do appreciate reading the conservatives so I see what they are thinking. Please run Pitts as a regular because his voice and perspective are unique and, in my view, needed. Thank you. — Cheryl Turner, Oakwood

I vote for Charles Krauthammer as the most worthy columnist to replace William Safire.

His background (medicine and psychiatry) affords excellent analytical training, observation and presentation, which gives a degree of confidence to his opinions. — Weston N. Hammel, Lewisburg

The columnists I would like to see the DDN keep are David Brooks, Thomas Friedman, Molly Ivins, Leonard Pitts Jr. and George Will.

Get rid of Cal Thomas. He is a real nut. — William H. Bent, Yellow Springs

I like David Broder, Maureen Dowd, Gwynne Dyer, Thomas Friedman, Molly Ivins, Nicholas Kristof, Paul Krugman and Clarence Page.

I can't tolerate David Brooks, Ellen Goodman, Bruce Kauffmann, Leonard Pitts Jr. and George Will.

I cannot stand Jonah Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, Kathleen Parker or Cal Thomas.

I am mostly a liberal kind of person. I think David Broder is the most reasonable columnist the DDN has. — Anthony J. Shumaker, Richmond, Ind.

Please keep all seven liberal columnists, especially Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman. I like David Broder and Thomas Friedman, too. — Margo Russell, Sidney