Wow … nasty

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Recently, a reporter for The Cabinet e-mailed a question to state Rep. Bob Mead of Mont Vernon. Mead was asked to respond to mild criticism from a young Democrat, Theodore Groh, who will be on the House District 4 primary ballot.

Groh had said Mead and fellow Mont Vernon Republican representative Bill O’Brien spent little time in other District 4 towns.

Instead of just answering the question, Mead and O’Brien took the opportunity to lash out at Democrats, which is not unreasonable, but in a way that was over the top and, frankly, embarrassing to them.

First, though, a chronology: The reporter e-mailed Mead. The reporter got a response from O’Brien. The reporter responded to O’Brien asking why Mead, to whom the question had been addressed, hadn’t answered.

The reporter got a response from Mead.

It might all just be happenstance, of course – perhaps Mead sent the e-mail to O’Brien, suggesting he respond, too, and then O’Brien responded before Mead – but there it is for you to consider.

But also consider these comments from this duo in response to a question about Groh’s mild criticism:

O’Brien said his potential opponents, including young Mr. Groh, will “push transgender, euthanasia and more hate crime bills …”

Mead wrote people are “demanding that the Legislature return to them their traditional family values, their state sovereignty, and a government they can afford.”

As if naught but evil flows from Concord and just because Groh said they didn’t spend enough time in Wilton, Lyndeborough and Temple. Good thing he didn’t say anything harsh.

The probability is that Mead and O’Brien will be on the November ballot. While it’s true that five Republicans are facing off in the Sept. 14 primary for the four GOP slots, Mead and O’Brien have been around the block enough (although Groh would say not enough in Wilton, Lyndeborough and Temple) to have good name recognition.

In a way, it’s too bad that there are five because, were there only four, GOP primary voters could send a message to Mead and O’Brien without harming the party, to wit: Vote for two, leave them blank. But with five on the ballot, someone is for the chop.

Pity, because leaving their names blank would be a great way to tell them to be positive, not so … well, call it what you will.

A question for Mead, though, simply leaps to mind: Whose family values? Probably his, of course, but, really, how do we determine what “family values” are when there are so many different kinds of families in New Hampshire.

Do we discount the values of families with gay members? Do we discount the values of families with transgender members? Do we discount the values of families who are (heaven forbid) not religious? Mead didn’t say, nor does anyone who spouts the “family values” sound bite.

We’re also curious about O’Brien’s “euthanize” claim: Who wants to euthanize whom?

And what’s the other one? Oh, right: hate-crime bills. Somehow we’re supposed to deduce that hate-crime bills are bad because … we’re not even going to speculate.

You know, if Groh had been wrong, all O’Brien and Mead had to do was say so and mention a few places in Wilton, Lyndeborough and Temple that they’ve recently visited, or name a few residents of those towns to whom they’ve spoken.

“Mr. Groh is incorrect. I have been to (A), (B), (C) and (D) speaking to lots of people and the consensus is …”

Would that have been so hard?

So, maybe Groh wasn’t wrong, eh?