Dear Mr Farah,

As you might have guessed, for reasons that completely elude me you have indeed struck a sore point at Commentary magazine. I admire you greatly, so there is a certain pleasure in finding myself in the same boat with you … reflected glory and all that sort of thing.

For myself, I was a subscriber and a donor to Commentary for literally decades … up until 2009. At that time I raised the question of the constitutional qualifications of the current inhabitant of the White House in my response to one of Commentary’s editorial blurbs, and was informed by the editor that the issue was “silly.”. Lt. Col. Terry Lakin had already been imprisoned for his demand that the issue be clarified, and I wrote back to ask in what way was it silly to ask for the basic documents of the current president – silly to try to adhere to the Constitution; silly to demand to know who the president is; silly to know that there is a risk that he has foreign loyalties; silly to support the needs of the military to have secure and legal chain of command; silly for U.S. citizens to tolerate the president’s evasions? The response by the editor was that his answer would be insulting to me. Did I mention that formerly I was a donor?

For myself, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for your work to protect our nation.

Laura T. Gutman

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.