Last Updated on 5/30/2012

Published on 2/12/2012

One of the pleasures of writing a weekly newspaper column is the delight of watching reader reaction expressed in Emails and Letters to the Editor. Although ninety percent or better of the response is positive, I enjoy reading from folks who express opposition with what I have written.

I can usually predict the response to any column and sometimes I can even discern who will object or agree. I had no idea, however, that one of the respondents would be a dog — but more about that later.

It seems that about once a year I have to point out that editorial columns are opinion pieces and not news stories. They are simply one person’s opinion and that’s why they appear on the editorial page and not in the news columns. The writer deserves the right of personal opinion just as does each reader. But, yet, a few readers seem to have a problem understanding this basic precept of editorial writing.

Such was the case several weeks ago when I pointed out the conflicting views of many of the liberal persuasion. I said that it had always dumbfounded me how many of the same folks who were against capital punishment had no problem with the destruction of human life by way of abortion. I also pointed out several other lapses in logic and commonsense shared by some of these folks: How Free Speech is OK as long as the speaking is espousing liberal dogma; Must be politically correct when honoring other religions but must not allow Judeo/Christian basic beliefs in our Public schools; claiming to be “family oriented” but having trouble accepting the eons-old idea of marriage being solely between one man and one woman and so forth – you get the idea. These were my opinions but there are those, who, thankfully, remain few in numbers and who don’t recognize my right to express my personal opinion and attack me in the process.

Well, not only did several humans but at least one dog was led to comment on what I had to say. It seems that a retired Presbyterian preacher, Jim Watkins, and his alter ego, Mojo, found time to point out my “dog-gone” errors of judgment. Interestingly, the man/dog duo went on to express many ideas that mesh pretty closely with mine as illustrated in this column through the years. They were quite civil in their discourse which I appreciate very much. There can be disagreement among civilized citizens without resorting to character assassination.

Another reader, Eric Muller, was moved to object to my “ranting” then proceeds to initiate a rant of his own. He found it necessary to get personal and express his thankfulness that neither he nor his loved ones had ever been subjected to my college classroom lecturing. While I might agree that I am equally thankful of that fact, I must point out that he knows absolutely nothing of what transpired in my classroom, therefore, his opinion is not valid. He goes on to question under what authority do I claim that a family should be comprised of one man and one woman, who are legally married, heading a family. I do so on the basis of commonsense and perennial tradition – both cultural and religious. This arrangement only fell from favor with a few folks within the last generation.

And then I heard from Stewart Walls, who also questioned my view of what marriage has traditionally been. He also accuses me of right-wing ranting. I suppose that the most interesting part of his labor is asking why I don’t offer supporting proof of my opinion. Once more, for those having a problem with this concept of opinion pieces: Editorial columns are not research papers, news columns or scholarly “White Papers” complete with footnotes, etc. They are OPINIONS of one person. Mr. Walls also wanted to know why I couldn’t be more like internationally syndicated columnists George Will and David Brooks. Well, I suppose I might come closer if I were making big bucks like these gentlemen. I could hire a big staff and travel to the locus of great thoughts. But, you see, I’m just a small town guy who just enjoys writing for local consumption. I suppose I should be forever thankful, however, for all the big-idea folks who come among us and tell all of us how we should do things.

Interestingly, all of these complainers overlooked the statement that I made in the opening sentence of my errant column. And it plainly said for those willing to take the trouble of ascertaining from whence my thoughts originated. I clearly said that my thoughts were aimed at: “… the EXTREME members of our society.” I did not and have never, nor, do I now declare that ALL liberals are guilty of “schizophrenic thinking.”

There are good guys in almost any group. Perhaps, some day these critics will allow me to be one in my traditional group. I want to thank all three of these writers for identifying themselves. I don’t usually acknowledge anonymous missives.

In the meantime, keep those cards and letters coming. I might need another column idea.



John Brock is a retired professor and newspaper editor/publisher who lives in Georgetown County. He can be reached by Email: brock@johnbrock.com