Could be great, but …

Is it just me? Or are there others that sense the fundamental change in this paper’s editorial section?

For many, many years I looked forward daily to reading every sentence of every item, column, and op-ed letter; however, since the staff changes, I now take a deep breath before I open the section. I am finding an overwhelming number of the featured columns offensive; however, for lack of space, today I will write about Philip Martin, who has been a disappointment to me.

Whereas I previously looked forward to reading his earlier articles (not for the content, but for the way he seemed to have mastered the art of turning a phrase), I now have to make a mental decision to give it a try. Is there any doubt in anyone’s mind that he loathes Donald Trump? It seems to me a bit ridiculous how a man who only a few months ago was a movie critic has gained the personal insight and access to information that allows him to call POTUS a “pimp,” among other unsavory descriptions. It is also rather humorous that a writer who loves to tease us with obscure, multisyllable words that require a dictionary must revert to street talk.

Why are we now subjected to Martin’s dog stories, and on the editorial page, no less? I love a good dog story as much, or more, than most, but this belongs in the Style section.

And finally, the column “Up to a point, sir” absolutely left me cold as I would bet it left the vast majority of the readers. It was rather reminiscent of what I read in the New Yorker years ago before I tired of its snobbery and pretensions.

I think Mr. Martin could be a good writer, perhaps even a great one, but he needs to find his groove somewhere outside of politics.

ROBERT W. BEST Greers Ferry