I am astounded at the level of ignorance and narrow-mindedness that exists in some people.

Yes, I know it’s not an uncommon trait. Ignorance has existed since the beginning of time. It becomes everyone’s business, though, when the media distribute people’s alleged “thoughts” for the rest of us to read.

I present to you one Eddie McMurray, an Amarillo resident and occasional contributor to the local newspaper in Amarillo. I’ve had a casual acquaintance with McMurray for many years, during my time as editorial page editor of the paper.

The newspaper published this letter today:

http://amarillo.com/opinion/letters-editor/2013-10-27/letter-columnist-should-stay-dc

Where do I start? McMurray disputes a column from Washington Post columnist Colbert King, whose column ran in the paper on Oct. 19. Seems that McMurray doesn’t much like Colbert’s liberal thinking. Then he hangs an exceedingly nasty label on him. “King is either a traitor or influenced by ignorance of this country,” McMurray writes. “I vote both.”

There, he did it. He hurled the traitor accusation at someone who simply has a different world view than his own.

This, I submit, is precisely what is wrong with the nature of what used to be called political debate in this country. Our fellow Americans on the far right fringe have taken to challenging the patriotism of those who disagree with them.

It is reprehensible on its face.

McMurray wonders why the paper is seeking “to find liberal media in an attempt to change thinking in the Panhandle. I would not trade the ground in my tomato garden for any liberal state in the country.”

Good for him. He is entitled to stand by what passes for his principles. But the media don’t seek to “change thinking” of a region. It’s not true of conservative media nestled in liberal bastions. It surely isn’t true of liberal media doing business in conservative enclaves.

What responsible media always should do is search for wide-ranging opinion to share with its readers. Let the readers be the judge. Readers can determine for themselves whether someone from the “other side” has a reasonable argument in defense of his or her position. Then we can argue the point intelligently — and with a civil tongue.

Calling someone a traitor merely because he or she is one of them stinkin’ liberals nullifies whatever point the name-caller is trying to make.