Folks who know me understand that when I get poked, I often poke back. Probably a Marine thing. So, when The Grok published a sad screed by a Granite State bomb thrower, I considered whether to respond. Friends advised against it.
“Just ignore it.”
The thing is that the truth is important, and I don’t mind mixing it up.
So, where to start?
The bomb thrower was upset with my vote on HB1002 which was related to RSA 91-A, the “Right to Know” law, which I strongly support.
- “First and foremost, [Moffett]’s an enemy of 91A [sic], which is my primary inspiration for writing this article.”
HB1002, now law, sought to address abuses regarding 91-A. Sadly, all too often, the law was misappropriated by many folks in order to hassle municipal officials, sometimes with snarky comments, i.e. “That ought to keep them busy for a while.” These abuses involved massive requests for public information involving huge amounts of time and expense for piles of copies that were probably not even read. As a taxpayer advocate, I joined a majority of legislators who were appalled by the abuse. The measure still provided that RTK requests be honored free of charge, unless the request required response time exceeding ten hours, in which case the requesters would be expected to help with a portion of the costs. HB1002 protected both legitimate information seekers as well as taxpayers. It was a good measure that deservedly became law. I stand by my vote.
The bomb thrower then observed that I am involved in a contested primary, with three candidates vying for two seats. Jose Cambrils and I are incumbents. Carolyn Virtue is also a candidate.
- “[At Loudon’s Old Home Day on 8/10] I actually had the chance to meet the nonincumbent candidate, Carolyn Virtue, and had a pleasant chat with her in the GOP tent. She’s a seemingly nice lady, but after listening to various locals, I heard Moffett recruited Carolyn to ‘take out Jose.’”
Nothing could be further from the truth. Rep. Cambrils and I are longtime friends and colleagues. We sit near each other in Representatives Hall and vote similarly. I had no idea Carolyn (also a friend) was running until she gave me a courtesy call.
- “I don’t have all the intricate details … To avoid misinformation, please fact-check on your own as you see fit, but if true, Moffett is the one that needs to go.”
In other words, the bomb thrower doesn’t really have good information and leaves it to the reader to fact-check her faulty prose. To be clear, she never had the nerve or integrity to talk to me, or presumably Rep. Cambrils, either.
- “As I’ve said in previous posts, most enemies of 91A sadly don’t have primaries. Scott Wallace does, and he got his hit piece. Now it’s Moffett’s turn.”
As explained above, I am a big supporter, not an enemy of 91-A. But apparently, those who voted for HB1002 rate “hit pieces.” As a majority of legislators voted for HB1002, the Bomb Thrower will presumably be busy writing “hit pieces” well into 2025. Good luck with that.
- “I was hoping … someone with bigger name recognition as a Grok contributor would do my bidding, but it’s up to me to raise awareness.”
As a GROK contributor myself, I understand why no other fellow writer would do her bidding. People with integrity tend not generate dubious self-described “hit pieces” based on hearsay or false information without even contacting the target subjects.
- “Like Wallace, Moffett has high ‘liberty scores,’ but as I mentioned in previous articles, many liberty groups have tarnished their credibility by endorsing or giving high scores to the undeserving. A few examples of these groups are Americans for Prosperity, NH Liberty Alliance, and Granite State Taxpayers.”
Quite a “Rogues Gallery” the Bomb Thrower creates here. Inconveniently, these prominent conservative groups rate me, Wallace, and others highly. Hence, they are now tarnished. Hopefully they all got the memo.
- 91A is not the only thing that Moffett is an enemy of. Just click here for a list of links to 4 NH [sic] Journal articles to see how much his seething pathological hatred for Trump is on full display.
I do not have a seething pathological hatred for Trump. I voted for him in 2016 and 2020. I plan to vote for him in 2024. I was among the 46% of N.H. Primary voters who did not vote for him last January. And yes, I wrote several pieces seeking to make the case that he was not our best choice for 2024. I don’t mind putting myself out there and giving expression to what I think is best for my country. I do research and cite facts.
- “While he apparently [sic] served his COUNTRY in uniform, has he really SERVED Loudon? … The problem, I’ve been told by locals, is that Moffett usually gets the highest number of votes in each election. As someone who doesn’t get to vote in this race, I’m here to amplify {sic] my preference for Jose … Carolyn Virtue has no record, but from talking to her, I learned that she’s a supporter of 91A and even mentioned doing some RTK inquiries herself. Moffett is a swamp rat in the Good Old Boy Network. Some people might unconditionally like him because he’s a veteran but remember that no group is exempt from having bad actors, no matter how respected the group is. That’s a tough pill to swallow, but it’s true. Please join me in supporting … the “bullet vote” to force Moffett into retirement.
I’m not sure I understand how my military service conflates with being a “swamp rat,” a “Good Old Boy,” or a “bad actor” who deserves the bullet vote treatment. I’m very proud of my record as a Marine, as a citizen-legislator, as an educator, as a member of many service organizations, and, yes, as a leading vote-getter in my district. Clearly, the bomb thrower would like to change that. C’est la vie. The voters will decide.
And as a big free speech advocate, I support the bomb thrower’s right to put out libelous opinion pieces. That’s what makes our country special, even among Western democracies.
Elected public officials don’t rate the same protections concerning slander that private individuals do. It is what it is, and that’s okay. But for their own edification, I encourage bomb throwers to research the subjects of “defamation” and “apologies.”
I’m sure the related material can be obtained even without submitting “Right to Know” requests.
Live free or die.
