It was surprising to see three letters [“A strip too political for the comics”] on the March 22 Free for All page complaining about “Prickly City.” Was this the first week that the writers had read the comics? “Doonesbury” and “Candorville” have been covering politics and politicians for years. So why the umbrage? Could it be that the former strip covers politics with a conservative slant and the latter two take a liberal point of view? Personally, I enjoy all three and am glad we have a variety of views. It’s good to be able to laugh at politics and politicians and not take it and them too seriously.

Jeremiah Barrett, Washington

I read with some bemusement the Free for All comments on “Prickly City.” The comics historically have been a way to discuss the current state of affairs. I chuckle at the clever ways the cartoonists get their points across. As a child learning to read, I read only the comics. It was the political statements embedded in those comics that made me realize there was a whole world out there and things were going on that deserved my attention. Please keep the comics invigorating, be they liberal or conservative, and don’t listen to the affronted. We have met the enemy, and he is us.

Michael G. Frizell, Fairfax

After reading the Free for All letters , I was glad that I’m not the only “Prickly City” hater. I made the mistake of looking at it on March 24. It’s offensive. Attacking schoolteachers who want to earn a decent living, which is what unions are for, was the last straw for me.

Get rid of “Prickly City.” It’s a misguided attempt at political humor.

Fred Reiner, Alexandria

To those letter writers who apparently got the vapors over “Prickly City,” I offer the advice I’ve often heard from folks on their side: “If you don’t like it, don’t read/watch/listen to it!” I’ve taken this counsel to heart and have been much happier since I quit reading “Doonesbury.”

By the way, I’d never bothered to read “Prickly City” until the recent spate of complaints called it to my attention. Thanks, folks, for turning me on to it — I didn’t know what I’d been missing!

Joel Sawyer, Springfield

So some folks are getting all prickly about “Prickly City”? Some of us would say that the strip is doing its job very well and is aptly titled. And by the way, the strip did not call the president a “poopburger,” although, well, never mind. What I might have said might not be permitted, even on the Free for All page.

Paul D. Myers, Silver Spring

I found the Free for All letters regarding “Prickly City” hilarious. It might be worth remembering that The Post features many “political” comics. Subjects in “Doonesbury” in the past year have included marijuana legalization, homosexuality and voter ID laws, which were compared to Jim Crow. “Candorville” likewise is politically liberal, while “Non Sequitur” has made fun of the Bible. I typically do not agree with the messages of these strips, though they sometimes can be funny, which I think is the point. Regardless, I certainly respect the cartoonists’ right to express their opinion, even in the comics, and I hope The Post continues to promote a diversity of opinions in this section.

Casey Chalk, Fairfax

Wait a minute, let me get this straight: Brad Knopf, George Usher and Rodney Brooks are upset because “Prickly City” — a comic strip — “advocated electing to Congress people who would overturn ‘Obamacare,’ ” as Usher put it. “Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to run it on the editorial page?,” he asked.  

Perhaps, but to me, every page of The Post, including the comics pages, on which one finds “Doonesbury,” is the editorial page. Political appropriateness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Terrence H. Scout,

Chestertown, Md.