I think that Sean Reynolds has gone too far by calling President Bush a pathological liar (Readers' Forum, Oct. 9). Does Mr. Reynolds even know what it means to be a pathological liar? Does he even know what the word "pathological" means?
Unless he speaks from a position of knowledge and understanding, he shouldn't use categorical epithets to describe someone. If he disagrees with President Bush, that is his right, but he should restrict his comments to the disagreement.
Barry R. Urry
Salt Lake City