By BRYAN GOULD
Member of the Concerned Taxpayers of Bow
I read with grim amusement Harry Judd’s column in the Feb. 27 Monitor Forum. Taken at face value, it’s hard to argue with what he has to say. After all, who can be opposed to civility and a unified community?
Judd laments the “polarization” in Bow and says that unnamed people have been “slandered” and accused of lying in public meetings. In my experience, this complaint is usually made by people who want to polarize, slander and accuse others of lying but can’t take it when they’re given a dose of their own medicine.
It is a well-known fact in Bow that Judd has been instrumental in making town politics far more partisan than they had been beforehand. He is an activist in his party, and he has worked very hard to build a strong partisan organization in our community. While nominally nonpartisan, our local races have become part of the party-building program that Judd helped put in place. It’s no coincidence that four of the five selectmen are members of his party.
Now, there is nothing wrong with building the organization of the party to which you belong, but you can’t have it both ways. Very little is more polarizing than party politics. For someone who has so actively promoted one political party over another in Bow to complain that others are polarizing the town is more than just a little hypocritical.
Judd’s objections to accusations of lying also have a hollow ring. Just last year, he wrote an opinion piece in the Monitor charging the Bow taxpayers organization of spreading 15 “myths” about the selectmen’s proposal to build an extravagant public safety building. By “myths” he meant “lies.” Evidently, in Judd’s mind it is civil to publish something in the local newspaper accusing a group of the town’s citizens of spreading lies, but it is a serious breach of town etiquette for a single individual to accuse another person of lying in a sparsely attended meeting.
Ironically, in his Feb. 27 column, Judd adds yet another slur against those who don’t share his enthusiasm for grandiose town buildings. He speculates that an act of vandalism at his home last year was caused by “anger generated” by those who had the temerity to object to Bow’s skyrocketing tax burden. Calling the Concerned Taxpayers of Bow a “hate group” can’t be far behind.
Perhaps Judd and the selectmen who agree with his column should consider that the opposition they are experiencing is indicative of nothing more than taxpayers being fed up with the town’s reckless spending. And if Judd is really concerned about restoring civility to town discourse, maybe he should start by reflecting on his own behavior.