Sandy Pettit has it right in interpreting The Mirror’s anti-mayor article as showing a “shameful lack of discretion and integrity” on the part of the paper.

Yes, community newspapers can present both positive and negative aspects of a city’s news. Professional papers can do that, as Sandy says, to help communities “pull together, not tear apart.”

Bob Roegner’s weekly editorial can always be counted on to drum up the negative about any given issue. So naturally, Mr. Roegner jumped all over the article about the mayor. He advises the casual reader “not to jump to conclusions because you happen to know either party” and concedes that “rumors abound.” Then he jumps in with both feet and starts suggesting things that only inflame the very tendency to start rumors.

“Priest was ‘likely’ trying to get ahead of a story,” said Roegner. “Likely” means Roegner doesn’t know. So why posit that as a suggestion? “We don’t know what direction was given to the investigator,” stated Roegner. Then he goes on to ask no less than four questions that only feed into second-guessing.

What happened to not jumping to conclusions? He wraps up by supposing the possibility of sanctions and discipline and public pressure and censure. You can almost sense his clapping his hands in delight over sticking it to the mayor. Never once did he even raise a question on Councilmember Kelly Maloney’s side, such as, “If you’re in a conversation and it’s not going well, why stay until things deteriorate? Why not get up and leave?”

Oh, that’s right, that’s not mayor bashing…not relevant. Yep, this is bottom-feeding, all right. Politics doesn’t always have to have a negative twist. Unfortunately that is Mr. Roegner’s typical slant on things.

Linda Purlee, Federal Way