Periodically, the content of the “Mallard Fillmore” strip on the comics pages sparks a run of letters from readers asking why “Mallard” is on the comics pages and “Doonesbury” on the Other Opinion page.

“Mallard” arrived at The N&O when our features department was revamping the comics pages, and the initial decision to add the strip to The N&O was made there. Later, when the department again was tweaking the comics, readers were allowed to vote on their favorites, and “Mallard” showed enough of a loyal following to warrant inclusion.

When readers began complaining about the strip, specifically that “Mallard” was in the comics while “Doonesbury” was on the op-ed page, The N&O’s former public editor Ted Vaden wrote two columns about it. In the first in January 2008, Vaden came down on the side of keeping the arrangement, saying, “The main argument for putting the two strips under the same roof is that treating two political strips separately is inconsistent. This is the place to trot out the old Emerson aphorism: ‘A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.’ There are in comics several other strips with political commentary — ‘Candorville,’ for just one example.”

In an August 2008 column, once the election campaign was in full swing, Vaden decided The N&O should “pluck the duck,” saying  “[Bruce] Tinsley’s cartoon has morphed from political satire to political propaganda, and the prospect is that it will get more partisan as the presidential campaign intensifies.”

In an October 2008 column, after readers voted on the comics, Executive Editor John Drescher took up the issue again, saying: “While some of you have viewed this as one of the great journalistic issues of our era, I don’t see it that way. I think each strip should run in The N&O, and it doesn’t matter that much that they run in different places.

“ ‘Mallard’ has earned its place in The N&O. Tinsley enjoys tweaking liberals and the media (he would say they are one and the same). That’s OK by me.

“When it comes to working in the public arena, he and I share the same philosophy. He doesn’t want to have a nice, quiet comic strip. And I don't want to have a nice, quiet newspaper. The more voices, the better. Let the duck quack and quack and quack.”

Click read more to read recent letters on the subject.

 "Pluck the Duck" - that was the headline on my column Sunday urging The News & Observer to get rid of the "Mallard Fillmore" comic strip. The comic had become stridently anti-Obama - 15 strips in the month of August - and that isn't fair in the context of the political campaign, I argued. Here's the column.

But after reading that, a lot of readers wanted to tar and feather me. Here are some examples:

• "While The Duck may have become overtly political in recent weeks, he is not always this way, and will not be this way three months from now when all the campaigning is over and done with. Should you opt to cancel 'Mallard Fillmore,' you will have capitulated to the whinings of the left over a temporary situation while eliminating a strip that, by your own admission, has among the highest positive votes among readers."

A cartoon duck has been skewering Barack Obama lately, and Obama partisans don't think it's funny.

The "Mallard Fillmore" strip by Bruce Tinsley has been lambasting Obama for flip-flopping, his celebrity image and other ills perceived by Republicans. N&O readers don't think it's fair that the partisan strips run on the comics page with non-political cartoons. Better to put it on the op-ed page with "Doonesbury," they say. Or don't run it.

 "When Mallard Fillmore continually - week in and week out - demeans and ridicules Barack Obama ... its placement in your comics pages implicitly frames those sentiments as mainstream humor - and not political opinion in the same way as Doonesbury or your editorial cartoon are called out as political opinion," wrote Peter Orton, of Hillsborough.

Judith Fertitta, of Durham, writes: "Can't you see how tremendously unfair this is - in this election year -  to allow one-sided attacks on only the Democratic presidential candidate?"

This is an ongoing controversy that's bothered readers since we introduced the Fillmore strip last year. Here's a column I wrote in January.

It's a tougher question now because of the election season context, and I agree that the complainants have a good point. Debra Boyette, features editor who oversees comics, says individual strips are alway up for review, and you can leave your opinion at forums.triangle.com or e-mail us directly at comics@newsobserver.com.