I wrote to the Post about Broder's idiocy.  I write angry letters to them maybe every other month if that often.  Yesterday I got an email that they might print it, and they wanted to know several things:  did I use my real name (yes), did I write the letter myself (yes), had I offered it to any other publication OR BLOG (!), was I connected to any military support group or encouraged by them to write the letter (no to all that).

My letter was way shorter and much less intellectual than yours, I just basically said Broder had his nerve, that we sure as hell sympathize with troops made to fight this idiotic war.

I had been tempted to post it here but never did; if I had I guess they wouldn't print it.

I'm curious about the question about being connected to a military support group - would that disqualify a letter?  would that just mean you'd state the connection with the signature?  Do they want to know what groups may be operating out here?

I barely read the readers' letters in the Post and I don't know how much attention anyone pays to them.  But I do believe push-back is worth the effort.  I believe it was on "On the Media" one time, I heard some op-ed writer say that writers actually do feel intimidated by critics (these were right-wing critics) and could be affected by reader reaction.  In his case I believe he actually felt physically threatened at times.  Obviously that stinks.  But we can put moral pressure on them to at least be accurate and careful, which Broder so clearly was not.