A strong criticism from an anonymous caller about Sunday's essay by Yale University professor and author David W. Blight. In particular, the caller took exception to Blight's comparing actions such as wiring the country for electricity and desegregation with the literally thousands of new rules and regulations that have been enacted since that time. In part:

"I'm not questioning his knowledge or authority at all," said the caller. "But I would expect a scholar of history to be a little more informed about how many more tentacles the federal government has in everyone's lives today than during the Civil War. He's letting his personal politics make him oblivious to an obvious fact, and I don't care if you want to dismiss that as a tea party thing or not. ... The political commentary was unneeded in an otherwise excellent package of information, and I think it showed (The Star's) bias to print it."

UPDATE: Another reader emails: "Why did The Star feel that his view was so important that if be featured in the front section and not in the editorials where it belonged? I think in the interest of fairness, it was improperly placed. I also think that a conservative academic with an understanding of history different from that of Mr. Blight would not be placed in such prominence in the Star."