Just recently, The Citizen printed a letter of mine in which I urged ordinary people to be more outspoken and not be so afraid to put their full names under their letters and e-mails. My letter addressed people who are too timid to speak out politically.

To my surprise, a local community activist left a rant about “liberals” on one of my relative's answering machines because he was angry about my letter.

I know who this man is because the number on my caller ID matches his name in the White Pages and the voice is easily recognizable. I have informed the editor, accordingly.

Why would a person who is already politically active and outspoken take exception to my letter?

Well, perhaps I should say that “if the shoe fits, wear it,” even if it was not meant for you at all.

Now I am wondering if this same man commits a lot of anonymous Internet slander against others - if he were not doing so, why would he be so defensive over a letter that had nothing to do with him?

Whatever respect I may have had for this man as an activist is now a few notches lower because of his inappropriate actions.

Sir, what kind of upbringing did you have?

What kind of lack of propriety and professionalism would lead you to damage your credibility as a public figure by calling the relatives of letter writers and leaving anonymous, ranting phone messages at their houses?

Sorry, your actions not only raise the red flag of “kookdom” in this case but they also raise serious legal issues.

Lisa Backus

Auburn