Let's All Hope He's Not In The Minority Here

A long-time Fired Up! reader asks a good question about this passage in Jon Rust's inadequate response to the 'repugnant' letter he published about Tommy Sowers from Josh Bill, former chief of staff to the late U.S. Rep. Bill Emerson:

The second point -- the innuendo -- is unfair and inappropriate. I will admit: I don't see that sexual orientation has anything to do with whether a person is qualified for Congress. The same is true about race, sex, religion or national background. Each of these items is part of an individual's identity, but in themselves they are basically meaningless. Whether a person is Sikh, Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, Mormon or atheist, the more important characteristics are their governing philosophy, wisdom, integrity and work ethic.

My guess is that I may be a minority in this position, however, especially in the 8th District, which is what makes the paid election letter repugnant.

Is it really Rust's position that a majority of Eighth District voters are bigots as he indicates in here?  That most of his readers are more concerned about "sexual orientation...race, sex, religion or national background" than candidates' "governing philosophy, wisdom, integrity and work ethic"?   I hope he's wrong. 

Also: Be sure to check out this response to Rust's decision to print the letter in the Southeast Missourian today.  "If you truly thought election campaigns should be about issues, don't you have an ethical obligation to exclude the ads which cross the line, as you said this one did?" asks Carole Vaughn of Dexter.  (h/t JohnCombest.com)