Thank you for the opportunity to answer the assumptions and perhaps we could say misunderstandings of some of those who have commented on yours and my back and forth about my answer to the Daily Times question, “What does the Hobby Lobby ruling mean?”
Some complainers said I previously wrote too many words for them to read. Some used the term windbag in referring to me. Warning: this is longer. The good thing is this is not school and this is not required reading so skip it if you are not interested or it is too long for you to read.
Some folks are upset because my answers to Joe did not deal with the Hobby Lobby case. The reason they did not is my answers dealt with Joe’s assumptions and comments. He was more interested in why the answer did not name SBY News, why I sent it to the paper instead of to him, why I didn’t know that every day he prints material he does not agree with, and that the quote in question was submitted by a woman. Therefore it was these issues I addressed.
As to the Hobby Lobby case itself, while I stand behind what I wrote in my answer, the case is complicated and debate would run into tens of thousands of words on both sides. They have already debated this in court and a decision was made. I have no interest in debating each nuance nor do I have any interest in trying to convince others they are wrong. Each of us is allowed to believe what we think is right about the case based on the facts as we see them.
There are some who question who I am. This seems to be the first question that often comes up on a blog that specializes in anonymity where “you don’t know me but I have a right to know you mentality” seems to rule. I don’t intend to tell those who don’t know me, any more than they know now. There are unspoken friends and acquaintances on here. We know each other in the real world. We may not always agree on the issues but I believe we respect each other. The assumption I am the George Mason who taught school in Wicomico County is wrong. Although I have met him twice he is not a relative or friend. I never thought of him as a liberal as one person here believed him to be in the 1970’s. I have not spoken to him for many years and while I believe he is still living he must be a very old man now.
I have spoken to Laura Mitchell once as any citizen might and I don’t know Josh Hastings or Chuck Cook.
Anonymous makes fun of the writing contest I mentioned. I am sure for some people it is more than a contest. They have an interest in convincing others of their point of view just as many of you anonymous people here. Years ago, I did write and I got paid for it. But I enjoy writing, the same as some others enjoy crossword puzzles, word finds, and other similar activities. I find puzzles extremely boring but good for those who enjoy them. I don’t need to be paid for my writing and apparently neither do any of you.
To call the Daily Times a liberal rag and insist that they only print the liberal view is popular among some people. But it is a myth. I would classify the Hobby Lobby answers on Delmarvanow as two liberal, three conservative and two in the middle. One of each got printed in the paper. There were five question answers this past Sunday: one liberal, three conservative, and one in the middle. Two conservatives and mine, the only opposing view, got published this past Sunday. The local column was conservative this Sunday. I liked the column writer’s ending, not because I agreed but because it was well done. Ben Carson appears every Sunday too. He’s another know-it-all maybe like me.
Anonymous complains, if you read the Times you see the same faces over and over. This is because these are the local people willing to write and willing to expose themselves to public scrutiny. The editor is always looking for other writers. Anonymous, you will have to use your real name.
There was a complaint about when I said, “You put too much importance on you and your blog” to Joe. It was snarky they said. But it is true when read in context. Joe never talked about Hobby Lobby just about the quote and the blog. When I described anonymous internet trolls it was not snarky or uncivil. I was speaking the truth. If you write here and are civil in the way you do it then you are not a troll.
Anonymous says, “Mr. Mason puts too much importance on the Daily Times.” I enjoy The Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal more. But I recognize the Daily Times is our local community daily paper. It is a shadow of its former self, but better today than a few months ago in the amount of content. It continues to carry the most local news and stories. Joe’s SBY News has something to offer too and I find myself reading both.
Thank you to all the civil people who have sincerely called my writing on here a class act. You all are valuable people in our community no matter what your political persuasions. I cannot say enough about your fair mindedness. For the others you should know I have not written comments on blogs like this one for about eight years. Blogging became meaningless to me. I did not write any one of the 64 comments that were here when I wrote this response and you can be sure I will not write a comment in the future.
I do want to speak to a late comment that came on the first thread although I am not sure how it applies to me. I am sorry for the medical- health-insurance-situation you apparently find yourself in. You sound desperate. I have no more power to change the world than you. Your concern appears to be about how Obama care has messed with your ability to get certain drugs. I have read that for some people Obama care is a life saver and for others no help, but instead one that reduces coverage and increases cost.
I have my own insurance issues. Unfortunately employers, insurance and drug availability is not the same for all Americans even with Obama care. But there was never any reason to think Obama care would be good for all.
Again, as one human to another, I am sorry for whatever difficulty you find yourself in and hope you the very best.
Joe, I am a small fish in a small pond that got thrown from my usual pond into your pond. But thank you again for allowing me to address your followers online. Only by communication will we come to know and understand each other better.
Sincerely yours,
George T. Mason
29 comments:
Thanks Mr. Mason, nice to see some sincere civility on this blog.
Still....a windbag!
Fabulous! Thank you, Mr. Mason.
This clown commented that people complained that his first letter was to many words to read and now it looks like he doubled what he wrote. I didn't make those complaints but I can now. This is way to much to read. What a goof ball.
Very well written.
Complainers about the length of the post must not have ever read book. Gansler's settlement with Apple over E-books must be for people on the other side of the Bay.
Mr Mason assumes too much. He refers to the comments about not only women, but men and children who are now limited in their choice of drugs (as well as doctors & health care facilities) as coming from someone who is going though this experience.
Nothing could be further from the truth, nor did any of the comments even hint to a personal experience. I made one comment concerning this. While I have had my own private insurance my whole life, insurance isn't even an issue, since I have been blessed, and there isn't an illness I couldn't pay for out of my pocket that would cause me any financial hardship whatsoever.
The point was, those crying the loudest over the ruling are mute to the limited choices when it's not part of their agenda, that being some imagined war against women.
Of course Mr Mason refuses to comment on blogs. He's a coward as are most liberals. He runs and hides from back and forth debates because he knows he has no answers and his hypocrisy would shine through.
"Unfortunately employers, insurance and drug availability is not the same for all Americans even with Obama care. But there was never any reason to think Obama care would be good for all."
What are you simple or something? "There was never any reason to think Obama care would be good for all."
Yes there was! I'll start with if you like your plan you can keep it!
Then everyone was supposed to see a few 1000 dollar decrease.
Would you like me to continue?
Please Mason saves either your lies or your utter ignorance for people who don't know any better!
8:44
If you took the time to read it, you'd probably see that it was worth the read. But instead, you remain ignorant.
Mr. Mason put his name to his words and that alone takes him to the next level of political civility. Nobody twists anyone's arm to read anything. I took a little offense to his first response, however, Mr. Mason is an American and is free to express his opinion. No sour grapes here.
As a Daily Times reader I have always read the answers to the Daily Times questions. The majority of the times I do not agree with Mr Mason BUT I will now add that my respect for him has jumped a hundredfold.
It is amazing that so many commented, not knowing Mr Mason was answering a QUESTION and was not "A Letter to the Editor". When I read comments on Joe's original piece, I could not figure out why assumptions were being made by Joe and readers of this blog over an "an opinion" answer to a Daily Times Question.
I was not offended by George Mason's first or second letter to Salisbury News. It is his opinion and his right but probably a waste of his time to try and explain his original opinion should have not have been turned into assumptions
Good job Mr Mason. I understand exactly what your point is, unlike a few commenters on here.
George - due to "religious exemptions" Muslims are not required to participate in any way whatsoever in Obamacare, but in your opinion your feel that Christians should be required to participate in one of Obamacare's requirements that is against their religious beliefs!? You're wrong and your opinion is anti-American.
while this gentleman communicates well through his writings,at this point, he is engaged in his own personal "contest" (as stated in his first comment, and again in his 2nd comment) he has now "won" said contest twice on this blog, with his opinions published under their own headlines, not once, but twice. i'm not sure that i would want to read his "column" as a regular piece but he could become a regular now that he is enjoying the attention his letter writing has earned him. i don't like to feel as i'm being spoken or
"written" down to, i am perfectly capable of understanding the written word. so if we are going to have to view his opinions on a more regular basis, i hope he can lose the condescending tone of his essays.
9:24, you sign anonymous and call Mason a coward for not commenting on blogs. In my book, a signed letter speaks volumes. I will sign anonymous and willingly admit I am a coward for not signing my name. You are too dense to see that you are the pot calling the kettle black.
Most of the "fabulous" comments were by George T. Mason himself trying to make it look like he has a lot of supporters. What a joke.
The term "fabulous" reminds me of that homo mayor and the rest of the homo's in Rehoboth beach saying it with a lisp in there voice.
@11:28 I think he knows his audience rather well!
9:28 no you were the idiot for believing Obamas lies and thinking the gov. gave a crap about you.
@12:09, i have no idea what your comment means? i didn't mention any audience, i merely stated how i felt about the length and tone of the essay. i also pointed out that he has himself admitted he likes to respond as part of a "contest" to see if he will be published. i am guessing your comment directed at me is an insult to my intelligence (in some way) but i guess i am too stupid to understand so it was a wasted effort on your part :)
12:03 Got your panties in a twist, don't you?
11:54-People who participate in blog discussions and comment are not cowards. It's the nature of a blog and the reason they are so popular.
I personally do not see the obsession with people who question why people comment anon.
Who cares who is saying whatever it is they are saying!
Why would a signed piece speak volumes and an unsigned not?
A name doesn't even necessarily give a something more credibility either. Obama is the perfect example of that with his lie after lie.
Is he the owner of the used book store in OC?
Andy, Muslims are not exempt from Obamacare. There are religious exemptions, mostly within the Anabaptist faith (Amish, Mennonite, etc) that because they not only do not believe in insurance but participate in their own form to which they contribute. The fund is overseen by a steerage committee, invested and used to pay medical expenses.
11:15-The question asked by the DT's was not asking for an opinion. The question was "What does the Hobby Lobby ruling mean?"
First and foremost he did not address what it meant at all, which is very simple. Certain types of employers (not corporations as a corp can't have a religious based belief) are exempt from paying for emergency contraception and abortifacients.
He goes on to lump everyone who applauds this ruling as some kind of religious fanatic.
I applaud it and I'm not religious by anyone's stretch of the imagination. I never pray and only go into a church for funerals and weddings.
But I do respect the opinion of those who think life begins at conception. And above and beyond all I respect their Constitutional right to freely practice and exercise their own religious beliefs. They don't want to be forced to take part in what they deem as taking a life.
Hobby Lobby in no way had ever nor is now attempting to prevent the use of birth control and their plan covers the 16 (plus additional) more required under Obamacare.
Don't know 4:41. I don't like his opinions ever, but I do like that store. Even if he does own it, I will continue to patronize the store because I don't do big chains like Walmart or any number of the other chains. I'm big on trying to keep the money local and put back into our economy.
I have spoken to Laura Mitchell once as any citizen might and I don’t know Josh Hastings or Chuck Cook.
Who are these clowns?
12:37, what I meant by knowing his audience well is that MOST of these commenters don't seem capable of understanding the written word. If you are one who does, I would say you are the exception that proves the rule. My sincere apologies that you thought this was directed at you rather than the masses.
to 12:03, I wrote the fabulous remark and I certainly am not Mr. Mason. I am a 70 year young grandmother who is a loyal reader of SBYnews. So there, smartie pants.
I think Mr Mason's main difficulty is he lacks comprehension. The question the DT's asked wasn't for an opinion, but was what does the ruling mean.
His response was some nonsensical diatribe which never once addressed the question asked.
He used the question to attack those Justices who ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby and those who agreed with the decision.
He won't get into blog discussions because he fears a one on one debate. Who can blame him though because he's been wrong on everything he has stated so far.
MR Mason, As always, well written
& explained!!
And , as one person said--it's
nice to see some sincere civilty
on here!!!
Joe, just a heads up that Mr Mason has another op-ed in Sunday Times. He did not mention this blog or you. Maybe you can gain even more hits if you can figure how reason he should have mentioned SBYNews and you.
Post a Comment