Jan. 31--Editors and their readers sometimes have to agree to disagree.

Even then, they often aren't so far apart.

"Despite how you may feel about Gov. Blagojevich (and I am certainly no fan of his) I am offended by your continued reference to him as 'Blago,'" read a recent e-mail to the editor.

"This has been going on even before his current offenses, and it does no credit to your sought-after credentials as a responsible publication, striving for excellence.

"Would you please explain to me (or in your column) just why?"

We returned an e-mail.

"The answer to your question is, 'I'm not sure,'" the editor responded. "Seems that 'Blago' is a Chicago thing, started by the Sun-Times to accommodate its headline squeeze in the tabloid format. Headline writers are always looking for acceptable shortcuts. Because yours is the first complaint I have received on the matter, the term must be acceptable for most readers.

"... Maybe it's just newspapers' way of dealing with a four-syllable name in a world of one- and two-syllable words for an increasingly impatient readership.

"I'm sorry that the use offends you. I guess I'm not really sure why it should. I have mentioned the matter to our editors, but have not prohibited its use. As I said, it's a useful crutch for a desperate headline writer.

"Thank you for taking the time to write."

HE WASN'T satisfied.

"Sir, you have used it repeatedly in headlines. Show me instances where a name has ever been used that way before.

"... The Governor, bad as he is, is still the governor, and deserves respect to his name. It is not my business to tell you how to run your newspaper, Mr. Lough. I am sorry that you do not agree with me."

Best we could do was to remind him of another four-syllable politician, one who frequently showed up in newspaper headlines as "Ike" -- President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

But "Ike" was a word we uttered with fondness.

"Blago" sounds like a sneer.

Maybe he had a point.

BUT IT WAS the "Despite how you may feel about Gov. Blagojevich ..." line that stuck.

Because, frankly, we think the governor was right.

About a lot of things.

He got a raw deal from a vindictive Illinois House.

The Senate heard no evidence that warranted his removal.

And his impeachment and conviction were a terrible precedent.

Yeah, he was a bad governor.

But he was a bad governor who had twice been elected by the voters of Illinois -- the latter time barely 2 years ago.

Voiding the will of the electorate is not something that should be taken lightly -- or done easily.