We have never seen raw arrogance more clearly demonstrated than in John J. Gish's question {letters, July 26}: Why, over the years, has The Post repeatedly denigrated the Grace Commission's recommendations?

Could it be that The Post found the General Accounting Office and the Congressional Budget Office more credible than the Grace Commission when those two agencies found the commission's projected "savings" to be overstated by a factor of three?

Could it be that The Post knew the cuts proposed by the commission were, by and large, cuts in programs not popular in certain ideological circles, rather than curbs on waste and mismanagement?

Could it be that The Post knew the improved management practices recommended by the commission had previously been recommended by the GAO and career civil servants?

Could it be that The Post saw through the absurdity of certain conclusions reached by the commission, particularly in the area of civil service retirement?

Perhaps Mr. Gish, as director of special projects for the Grace Commission, was so close to the forest of ideology that he couldn't see the trees of truth that were so clearly visible to The Post and others. H. T. STEVE MORRISSEY President, National Association of Retired Federal Employees Washington