Last week, a reader of the News called the office and DEMANDED to know why we printed "the patriotic rant" in letters to the editor from Thomas A. Middleton who was a combat medic in Radadi, Iraq.

The caller wanted us to stop printing what she called "propaganda letters" in the paper.

I note that the caller did not call a column in the same issue supporting President Obama's award of the Nobel Prize by columnist Don Williams propaganda nor did the caller fret about the clever letter from Claire Chomentowski that gave praise to the Michael Moore movie, "Capitalism: A Love Story" after I had expressed a different opinion of the movie the previous week in an editorial.

The policy of the Northfield News has been for some time and continues to be that we will print all opinions because "it's a free country - opinions differ - all count."

I note of late that progressives, including even the President himself, last week pounced on Fox News for what Rahm Emanuel called "not being a news organization." The clear implication was that because opinion makers such as Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity do not agree with the White House agenda, the network should be shunned.

Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman said recently that you know what Fox News is all about if you watch at 5 p.m. or 9 p.m.

Glenn Beck has a fiercely independent streak with a clearly right wing bent that appears at 5 p.m. while Sean Hannity is a confessed Republican and supporter of Republican causes whose show is at 9 p.m.

There are some who believe that Fox News should not be able to have reporters at White House news conferences and should be banned from speaking out if their opinion is contrary to the White House agenda.

In fact, just last week, at a news conference for the President's Payment Czar, the White House attempted to eliminate Fox News from the pool of network reporters until the other networks balked and said they wouldn't conduct the interview if Fox were excluded. The White House backed off and Fox was allowed to participate.

This smells strongly of the beginning of a Nixon enemies list which ended up wrecking the Nixon administration when he banned any White House spokes people from talking to the Washington Post and other left leaning media at the time.

It appears that there is a growing contingent of people who don't care about freedom of the press which is guaranteed by the First Amendment to our Constitution. It is more important that only people who agree with the "politically correct" agenda be allowed to voice their opinion.

Thus, the News should not print what some consider a "patriotic rant" while others may think that the writer of the letter voices a valid opinion. The important thing is that the writer has the right to express his opinion whether it fits one side's agenda or not.

This has been and so far as I know, continues to be the bedrock of American society.

You have the right to your opinion and I have the right to disagree with it. I have the right to express my opinion and you have the right to disagree with it.

I have actually heard people here locally say that anyone who does not agree with the theory of human caused global warming is stupid and should not be allowed to express a contrary opinion.

Recently, a man was met by security and hauled out of an Al Gore town hall when he asked if Mr. Gore intended to change his movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" to comply with the British Court judgment that concluded that there were 9 untruths in the film which needed to be changed if the film was going to be shown to school children in Britain. The question was never answered.

Earlier this year Mr. Gore's movie had been distributed to all secondary schools in England. In October, the court ruled the movie unfit for viewing by students. The United Kingdom High Court ruling found the film as "representing partisan political views," a conclusion which means it can legally only be shown if accompanied by a warning about political indoctrination.

The case was brought by Kent school governor Stewart Dimmock, who claimed the film was politically partisan, and contained serious scientific inaccuracies.

Mr. Dimmock's lawyers argued that showing the film was an attempt at "political brainwashing" of pupils and was in breach of the 2002 Education Act.

After hearing testimony from both sides, the High Court agreed, calling the film "alarmist and exaggerated". The ruling labeled nine specific points as factual errors in the documentary:

1. Sea levels may rise "up to 20 feet" in the near future.

2. Low-lying Pacific Atolls have already been evacuated.

3. There is an exact fit between CO2 rises and past increases in the Earth's temperature.

4. The Gulf Stream will shut down due to global warming. 5. Climate Change is causing Lake Chad to dry up.

6. The snow on Mt. Kilimanjaro is disappearing due to Global Warming.

7. Climate change is causing widespread bleaching of coral reefs.

8. Hurricane Katrina blamed on Global Warming.

9. Polar bears are drowning due to inability to find arctic ice.

Yet, Mr. Gore has the right to express his opinion and his opponents have the right to express theirs as well. As the British court said, if you're going to show propaganda to the kids, show both sides.

Just this week, Sarah Palin will be coming out with a new book called "Going Rogue" and at the same time someone has penned and is publishing a competitive book "Going Rouge." More power to both of them. Just make sure that if you go to the store to buy one of them, you get the one you want.

There is a very serious move afoot in Congress to shut down talk radio unless the station gives equal time to a contrary view. Those who are supporting this initiative believe that it will put Rush Limbaugh and others of his ilk off the air and "clean up radio."

Does this also mean that cable TV should also be cleaned up by taking Fox News off the air?

I'm wondering if this new law would silence the progressive opinion meisters on MSNBC and HBO as well. Trying to bring back the so called "fairness doctrine" in this new age of media could well backfire.

Perhaps the best way to proceed is to leave it all alone and let anyone who wants to express an opinion do so.

Unless a letter to the editor is libelous or is meant to hurt an individual or group unfairly, we'll generally print it.

There was a time in this country when the left was villainized, people lost their jobs and were banned from Hollywood because they had attended a Communist political meeting and others were thrown out of the military for having Communist leanings. When it occurred, it was a travesty. What is beginning to happen again is just as tragic.

This time, it's the right that is being pilloried. As yet, nothing has gone as far as Senator McCarthy did in the early 1950's and hopefully it never will.

My opinion is that it's a lot more fun when all opinions are heard. It gives us a lot more to talk about then if only the predominant view can be heard and all others are silenced.

Personally, I watch Glenn Beck on Fox News and the Lehrer Report on VPT. I also watch CNN and MSNBC as well as never failing to miss Bill Maher on HBO.

I think that the diverse opinions expressed keep one's mind alive and engaged.

How about you? Want to listen to both sides for a change?