Pitts is a noted liberal columnist; he won a Pulitzer Prize in 2004 for commentary. His essays appear on our page because it’s important to present a wide range of opinion to our readership. But some of our readers don’t like reading his views. Why? Well, the crux of their argument is that he offends the sensibilities of the Panhandle’s conservative majority.

Hmmm.

So, it would be better for these fine folks to read only those opinions with which they agree. What a boring world that would be.

We seek on our Opinion pages to present conservative and liberal views — and opinions that fall somewhere in the vast middle ground. Pitts occasionally gets people’s dander up. Good for him. I guess the fire that flares off the keyboard of some of our more conservative contributors — Michelle Malkin comes to mind — doesn’t offend them. That’s all right with me.

As for me, I actually like reading opinions with which I disagree. I seek out good writing and good thinking wherever I can find it, even if it makes me angry.

I look at these essays as being good for my heart health. My blood gets oxygenated whenever I hyperventilate after reading something that I find truly outrageous.

Indeed, it does irritate me mildly when I read complaints from readers who want us to toss aside a columnist because he or she thinks differently from the vast majority.

But we’re happy to publish them.