Personal dislike has no place in politics.

Amesbury News
Friday, February 23, 2007

To the editor:

William H. Parker, III abhors me. He does not know me, but he loathes me.

Why? I can only guess. My best guess is that he is still angry about my role
in the Save Our Library group. That impromptu group fought for the right of
Amesbury residents to vote on the Library Project (and then the project was
defeated by a greater margin than I was, when I ran for mayor).

I have only met Mr. Parker twice in my life. The first time was a year and a
half ago, when someone tried to introduce us at an Amesbury Improvement
Association event. He refused to shake my hand and walked away. The woman
standing next to him (who turned out to be his wife) told me that "He is
still upset about the library vote."

But, the library vote was a vote of the people; it wasn’t anything I did,
personally. Is Mr. Parker mad at me for my role in allowing the people to
vote? Would he have preferred to keep the people silent, deny their right to
referendum, whatever it took, as long as the project went forward?

The second time we met was last December, in a local restaurant. He greeted
the person I was with, and that person tried to introduce us. Again, Mr.
Parker refused to shake my hand and walked away.

I do not believe in the politics of hate. There is no issue, no political
campaign — win or lose — that can justify personal hate. Tip O’Neill and
Ronald Reagan used to argue about issues all the time; but they also
maintained a cordial, even friendly, personal relationship. Nobody wins all
the time, in politics. Situations change, alliances shift; the people you
argued against on one issue become the people you are working with on the
next issue.

You have to be able to talk to each other. You can’t just label people as
"opponents" and then refuse to even meet them. You don’t just walk away.

Mr. Parker is an enthusiastic letter writer. Over the past year, he has
mentioned me several times in letters to the editor. He has voiced a bizarre
theory about how I supposedly "control" the Municipal Council through text
messages. He has equated me to fantasy characters from children’s
literature. He has consistently vilified me.

But he still has not met me. He does not know me. Yet he loathes me. And
hate must be a strong motivator.

Last week, Mr. Parker made even more accusations against me, in yet another
letter to the editor "Recall organizer responds to Councilor Thone’s letter"
(Amesbury News, Feb. 9).

After reading his letter, I have to wonder if Mr. Parker is organizing this
recall against Councilor Thone because of… me?

How strong is his loathing? Mr. Parker can’t recall me because I lost the
mayoral election. So now he wants to recall someone that he thinks I
"control."

If he thinks I "control" Councilor Thone, then he doesn’t know Councilor
Thone, either. (I do know Councilor Thone. and everybody who knows Michelle
Thone knows that nobody controls her! She is very much her own person. She
does her own research and makes up her own mind about what she believes is
best for her constituents.)

Mr. Parker gave only two reasons for the recall.

The first reason is to ensure that the mayor’s vetoes will never be
overridden. According to Mr. Parker, recalling Councilor Thone will change
the council membership enough so that Mayor Kezer’s vetoes will always be
upheld.

The second reason is that, according to Mr. Parker’s view of the world, the
current council is "aligned" with me and somehow pursuing "my" agenda.

I wish Mr. Parker had been willing to talk with me, last December, because
maybe he could have learned a little bit about "my" agenda. Myself, I was
never "for" a split tax rate — I supported a single tax rate. But nobody
wins all the time, in politics, remember? Situations change, alliances
shift; the people you worked with on one issue become the people you are
arguing against on the next (just ask David Hildt, Kate Broughton, Roger
Benson, Ann Connolly-King or Chris Hyde — all of whom I have helped and
advised in the past).

That’s why the politics of hate don’t work well, over the long run,
particularly in a small community.

Mr. Parker’s letter alleged "improper actions" and a supposed investigation
of me by the district attorney’s office. Every law enforcement agency is
familiar with politically motivated allegations that, once investigated,
turn out to have no basis in fact. But the agencies have to investigate,
that’s their job. Since I lost the election, there have been a series of
politically motivated complaints made about me, and all of them have been
dismissed. I am quite confident that this one will be dismissed, too, after
it has been thoroughly investigated.

Mr. Parker has been willing to vilify me, but not willing to shake my hand.
He has accused me of controlling six members of the council, but never
bothered learning that Mayor Kezer and I actually agreed on the split tax
rate issue. Remember, the people you argue against in one campaign become
the people you agree with, in the next campaign.

In my personal opinion, there should not be any recalls underway right now;
there is an election in just nine months, and the voters can replace people
then. Only one of the three pending recalls offers a specific reason for
recall, and maybe that could have some merit. But the other two recalls? In
my opinion, there is no justification for attempting to recall an elected
official on the basis of vague dissatisfaction or "reasons to be explained
later."

But I am not the mayor: I cannot use that bully pulpit to "spread oil on
troubled waters" and try to calm down the rhetoric. I lost that election in
2005 — and I am not running for mayor in 2007. I have moved on. I wish Mr.
Parker could put aside his personal animosity and do the same.

Tom Iacobucci

Amesbury