Maybe it was my article from September 12th expressing my disappointment with the Union Leader's front page from the 11th or maybe it was their attempt to build up a story to be more sensational then it really was but in today's paper I was butchered.
I was called by a reporter at the Union Leader regarding last Thursday's events in Merrimack which ended in the result of the chairman of the Merrimack town Council being removed as chair. During the call I stated that there were phone calls being made before the meeting suggesting people show up to support the idea of removing Dave as chair over his actions. I knew this was true as I know people who received the calls, however the calls were being made to my knowledge by one person. I gave the reporter the person's name and suggested they contact him. Further into the conversation Dave's political "enemies" came up. Again, it is well known that Dave is often on different political sides with a number of people and often seen campaigning either against or supporting opposing candidates with a number of political candidates. I mentioned the previous selectmen chair who had a number of public disagreements with Dave as well as members of the school board also known to disagree with Dave on occasion. From this, the Union Leader wrote as if it were me saying it, that a "rudimentary telephone tree was set up to draw his opponents" then listing the past Selectmen Chair and the school board as his opponents. This seems to imply that I believed the school board not only to be in on the decision to remove him as chair but also were involved in calling people which isn't the case.
I wish this was the first time I had been either taken out of context or had things printed not quite as they really were but unfortunately it isn't so. A while back when I ran for School Board I came in 3rd out of 4 people. It was a close race and the two women who won turned out to be very good members of the school board. During the race, I was lumped together with one of the two women running and viewed as running mates while the previous school chairman was lumped with the other. We never officially created the two sides but never the less that's how the race was broken down. After the election I was at an after party to hear the results. The woman viewed as my running mate was also there. She won, the other woman running came in second winning the second seat. I however lost coming in third but I did beat the out going chairman. A reporter also from the Union Leader came up to me asking me my feelings about losing. Clearly I was sad in that I didn't win but I commented that I did like the two women who won. While I was talking to the reporter someone came up to me and said not to feel too bad as I was able to beat out the chairman who'd served on the school board the previous 10 years. I nodded and agreed that yes I guess that does count for something, I beat the chairman and that's what matters. I said this back to the person in the bar and I said it more to cheer myself up after losing the election but what was quoted in the paper? Not me saying the two women who won were good choices... nope. Me saying I beat the chair and that's what matters.
So be very careful of what you say to reporters folks. Not only that watch what you even say when they are around as you never know how they will use your words or which words for that matter they will choose to use.