People accuse me of being biased. Of course, the label usually sticks to those with whom I might disagree on a subject. People never level the “bias” charge when they agree with you, right?

But then I get notes like the one that came in today. The writer — who has written to us several times over the years — took columnist Leonard Pitts to task. But along with his letter to the editor, he sent along a cover note that accuses the paper of being too liberal in its political slant. Hmmm. Interesting, given that our editorial policy remains conservative. I reminded this person that most of our columnists tilt to the right. We do have a few liberals who comment on our page. Well, he isn’t entirely satisfied with that answer.

His rant is amazing. Why? I have contributors on the other end of the spectrum who accuse this page of tilting too far the right, that we’re too conservative. One of our regular left-leaning contributors came to mind. He accuses us constantly of being toadies for the Republicans. In fact, he cannot submit a letter to the editor without tossing a barb at us for being so biased in favor of conservatives.

What’s up with that?

I talked this morning with one of my colleagues about this and reminded him of the time I interviewed evangelist Franklin Graham, in 2000 when Graham came to Amarillo to preach to the throngs at Dick Bivins Stadium. I asked Graham, “How can the Revs. Jerry Falwell and Jesse Jackson read the same Bible and come to such vastly different conclusions about what it says?” Graham’s answer was that Jackson is more of a politican than Falwell.

I don’t intend to compare the Globe-News with the Bible, but it does amaze that two readers of this paper can draw such vastly different conclusions about the Globe-News political slant.

Both men say we’re biased. One says we tilt too far one way; the other guy says we tilt too far the other way.

The way I see it, bias — like beauty — is in the eyes of the beholder.

One of these days I’m going to bring Mr. Lefty and Mr. Righty together to persuade each other why the paper is biased against their point of view.

Demographers are suggesting the unthinkable.

Texas might become a Democratic state by 2020, researchers and political scientists are predicting. The Lone Star State, so reliably Republican for the past two decades, could become the second-most Democratic state — behind California — by the end of the next decade.

What’s driving the shift? The large influx of Latino residents, who vote as heavily Democratic as rich white guys have voted Republican.

It all goes to show, if the demographers are right, that nothing is permanent in politics.

Democrats used to own virtually every elected office in Texas, even west of I-35, prior to about 1978. Then came Bill Clements to win the governorship for the Republicans. Other GOP candidates began winning statewide office, and Democrats leaving their party for the other side. State Rep. Warren Chisum of Pampa was one of them, in the early 1990s.

Now, every statewide office belongs to the Republicans, and it will take some doing to bust loose that vise grip.

But the state ought to be come a two-party battleground, not one dominated by one party. A healthy two-party system in Texas keeps pols on both sides of the aisle more honest than if they are running the show with no one on the other side watching them every step of the way.

Whatever “debate” is occurring over health care reform, it isn’t occurring at these town hall meetings that are turning into shoutfests and riots.

That likely is part of the reason Panhandle residents aren’t being asked to attend congressional town hall meetings sponsored by Republican U.S. Rep. Mac Thornberry of Clarendon. It’s either that or the fact that Thornberry knows his constituents, agrees with many of their feelings about health care reform — which basically is this: Don’t mess with health care.

It’s probably just as well that we aren’t having these so-called “discussions.”

Travis County residents shouted down Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin. They carried pictures of Doggett with devil’s horns painted on his head. That’s not what I would call reasonable discourse. But that’s just one example of the kind of nonsense we’re witnessing around the country.

I have no idea whether it’s being staged by lobbyists, or whether they’re sincere, spontaneous expressions of displeasure. The Texas Panhandle is so far removed from the political battlefield, I am not qualified to offer anything more than a guess on what’s driving these near-riots.

I do know this: The disturbances that are consuming these town halls do not serve the cause of a free society, which depends on all sides being able to be heard. Let everyone speak their mind — and then let those in power decide which side makes the case.

Members of Congress are getting a snootful from their constituents during their summer break. They’ve been conducting town hall meetings designed to hear voters’ opinions about President Obama’s health care reform plans.

In summary: Americans are unhappy about it and are none too bashful about telling their elected reps what they think.

I mention this in laying down a marker on the value of any town hall meetings that Rep. Mac Thornberry is likely to call in the 13th Congressional District. Thornberry opposes the Democratic plan to reform health care. He’s said so quite publicly. His constituents echo his sentiment. They, too, have been quite vocal. So, what might Thornberry hear if he conducts a town meeting in any Panhandle community?

Sad to say, but he’s likely to hear some insane utterings about whether the president is an actual American, or whether he’s a closet Muslim, or whether he is a socialist who believes the government should take control of every aspect of our lives. Oh, yes. He’ll hear constituents agree with him about health care reform, that it’s too expensive and won’t improve the quality of health care delivery.

I just hope that if these meetings get too nutty — just as they have in many areas across the nation — that Thornberry restores order in a hurry.