A pair of writers responded to Jon's editorial, basically accusing him of being racist. About the only thing they didn't do is ask for a copy of his membership card in the KKK.
Here was my response, in its entirety.
These two writers are basically taking issue with Jon's opinion, which is fine. I can see where airport improvements could be vital, especially for health care.
What I take issue with is the way they sling around the term "Racism". What? Because he points out some strong issues that are still on the reservations? Because they have nothing better to criticize him with, so they hang the "Racist" pejorative on him?
"Racism" or calling someone "Racist" with no good evidence to support it is cheap criticism. It's the label for people who feel they can't win an argument any other way. It cheapens the term, when so much legitimate examples of racism still exist in the world... the attack in Washington D.C. this week is prime example of that.
Bringing up legitimate concerns is not racism... these writers are being intellectually lazy at best... knee-jerk reactionaries at worst.
So in other words... bring up your concerns about racially sensitive issues, get ready to be called a racist. All part of sacrificing honest, intellectual debate at the altar of political correctness.