Mark Hayward insisted on “outing” NH State Reps for their behavior back on Organization Day. I made sport of him then becasue instead of being a reporter he had willingly become just another MSM SJW.
Well, he wasn’t happy with the result and I’d be happy if GraniteGrok was part of the reason why (along with the traditional NH “Who the heck are YOU to be asking ME that question – GET OFF MY LAWN!!).
Lesson learned? Nope, he’s done it again and with the same tone-deafness as the first time.
“Why you did not wear a facemask on Dec. 2,” as if he was the lead prosecutor in a capital murder case. Or, in the same voice of AOC screaming that both Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley should resign from the US Senate.
And thanks to one of the Socially Accused for passing this along to me!
The reality is that this is what this is all about – conviction in the Arena of Public Opinion.Prepping the battlefield two years in advance by having them hand over information that would be used to pound them into the ground two years hence.
Emphasis mine in this micro fisking:
From: Mark Hayward <mhayward@unionleader.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 4:49 PM
To: Mark Hayward <mhayward@unionleader.com>
Subject: Union Leader article on the House and facemasksHello state rep,
Can’t even bother to use their name? Or even just capitalize the greeting? Naw, not worth, so it seems.
You are among the several dozen state reps whom I have identified as not wearing a facemask during the Dec. 2 organization day at the University of New Hampshire.
Several dozen – that’s at least three. That’s a minimum of 36 reps. Originally it was 43 which means he got little response to his first accusatory email. Did he ever think “maybe this wasn’t the greatest of projects”? I guess not, and decided to double down on both his sentence framing and the questions asked:
I write to ask for input for an article that we plan to run in the near future about the House and facemasks. Please drop me a few lines. I’m interested in knowing:
- Why you did not wear a facemask on Dec. 2.
Not even a question mark used, which would have been a polite request. Instead, a period, which that wordsmith knows he’s turned it into a demand. Back to being the Prosecutor!
- What your plans are for a facemask once the House moves indoors for its full sessions.
- If you have changed your mind about mask wearing, why?
- Your thoughts about plans to spread House floor sessions out among various rooms in the Statehouse complex.
- How you feel about defying Gov. Sununu’s mandate for facemasks.
Proper response is “none of your dang business”. Or better, ignore him like you did before. And how did you like him “casually” accusing you of DELIBERATELY deciding that you will be your own superspreader among all those innocent people? WAIT, WAIT! If masks work so well, shouldn’t they be sufficient to keep the wearers safe and sound? Isn’t that the conventional wisdom?
Guess, too, he hasn’t read Gov. Sununu’s own Emergency Order on mask mandates. Here Mark, let me make it easy on you because both of your emails show a propensity of not willing to do the homework that a journalist used to be expected to do at one time:
Perhaps I should send him one…what do you think, commenters??
- The number of terms you have been in the House.
- Anything else you’d like to say.
Please provide a response by 2 p.m. Thursday.
Thank you,
Mark
So the UL slimes them and now the UL wants their reaction to it? Talk about chutzpah!
