WINGNUTS DEFEND COULTER

I was hoping there wouldn't be any letters in support of her but I was disappointed. These are from the 9/3/05 edition of the Tucson Daily Star:

Recently, I received a call from a telemarketer trying to sell me a subscription to the Star.
I also recently learned the Star canceled Ann Coulter's column ("Opinion pages get a makeover" Aug. 28).
Gee, why don't I subscribe to the Star? Could it be their liberal bias?

Tom Pyzdek
Tucson

Another disappointing decision by the liberal left-leaning Star on dropping columnist Ann Coulter ("Opinion pages get a makeover" Aug. 28).
The only interesting reading seems to come from the conservative writers: Coulter, Michelle Malkin and William Safire; and on the liberal side, Thomas Friedman.
We assume the Star is considering dropping the boring Molly Ivins, Maureen Dowd, Ellen Goodman and Paul Krugman.
Perhaps these decisions are the reasons we find very few people who think highly of the Star. We are starting to seriously consider canceling our subscription. What Tucson needs is a real newspaper.

Gus Schillizzi
Retired union refrigeration service engineer, Tucson

In response to the Aug. 28 opinion "Opinion pages get a makeover."
Liberals can dish it out, but they can't take it. They whine Ann Coulter is "shrill, bombastic and mean-spirited," but they positively adore Maureen Dowd and Molly Ivins.
Are there any columnists more shrill, more bombastic and more mean-spirited than these two? OK, maybe Paul Krugman, but no problem, right? I mean, all three are bashing Bush, right?

Richard J. Jacobs
Writer, Tucson

The Star bases a decision to remove Ann Coulter's column because several people have read it and thought it was shrill?
Maybe they should read something else and leave reading it to me, someone who enjoys it. Censorship at its worst!

Joe Wypych
Instructional designer, Tucson