Sorry, but I have been out of town for the past two weeks and have been unable to respond to Peggy Purvis’ March 27 letter until now.

First, she states that “slander” only refers to “oral utterance.” The American Heritage Dictionary defines slander as “the utterance of defamatory statements injurious to the reputation or well-being of a person….A malicious statement or report.” So slander is not limited to “oral.” Didn’t think I’d check, did you?

Second, neither Peggy Purvis’ first letter nor my response mentioned Fox News. I was referring to her comments about supporters for Sheriff Joe, his posse, and the Tea Party not being factual, so why did Peggy Purvis spend two paragraphs on Fox News “lies?” Is she seeking to divert the discussion to another subject because she cannot justify her original comments? If Peggy Purvis chooses to respond, she should stick with the subjects of her original allegations!

Third, she implied that I buried my head in the sand since the Sandy Hook shooting. She has no idea what I think about the shooting. This is another statement by her without factual backup. She is also bringing in a new subject again (see above).

Finally, Peggy Purvis stated that “Your (mine) opinions regarding my (your) letter have no facts included to support your (mine) personal opinions.” My only opinion in my letter was that “this was an act of desperation of a person who cannot back up her opinions.” My “facts” were her lack of facts! So, let’s hear her facts for her March 13 letter and we can have a polite discussion.