Dear Editor:
This is in response to Ricky Mason’s letter to the publisher of 9/18/11. With all due respect to Mr. Mason and given his education, reputation and breadth of legal experience, I am incredulous that he does not seem to grasp the meaning of political satire or lampoon. Political lampoons date back more than 200 years and have offered a path to parody for citizens who want to voice their opposition to a particular person or policy.
Under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, we are guaranteed the right to express our views – whether literally or by lampooning (e.g., “PUNCH” or “Mad Magazine”). Nancy Pincus does not present a threat and for anyone to suggest otherwise is ludicrous. She is a long-time, responsible resident of Hoboken, a taxpayer, a member of the Zoning Board and most importantly, a mother who would never jeopardize the security of her young daughter. Nancy Pincus cares deeply about Hoboken, which is why she airs her views (satirically) on her blog. That’s a good thing. It makes people think.
Which begs the question: why did Mr. Mason’s letter come from him and not his wife?
Sincerely,
Ellen Scheurer