Kevin Avard (left), and Peggy Gilmour
Okay, so the mid-term election for 2014 has been ancient history for almost two weeks now, but there was one State Senate race in southern New Hampshire that probably deserves a little more public discussion before voters return to the polls any time soon.
I’m referring to the race between then-incumbent state Sen. Peggy Gilmour, D-Nashua, and her challenger, former state Rep. Kevin Avard, R-Nashua; specifically, an extremely scathing last minute mailer that was distributed district-wide against Mr. Avard.
The mailer titled, “A Candidate of Convictions” (or maybe it was called, A Candidate with Convictions) cited Avard, among other things, as being: convicted twice on Driving Under the Influence charges, arrested once on Violating a Restraining Order, filed for Bankruptcy, had a vehicle repossessed, and was divorced at least twice before.
Now don’t get me wrong, under most circumstances, the aforementioned paragraph is more than enough information for any common sense voter to simply reelect the incumbent, Ms. Gilmour in this race, however, since that period in Mr. Avard’s life, he’s sort of redeemed himself in the public eye with serving a term as a NH State Rep from 2010-12 and hosting two community cable TV shows on the Access Nashua network: Gate City Chronicles, and Speak Out. Avard also appears to be in a content marriage now at this point in his life.
Avard managed to defeat Gilmour earlier this month by about 300 or so votes but one has to seriously wonder if the challenger’s margin of victory could’ve been a lot greater had he been given the opportunity to address some of these “controversial issues” weeks earlier in the campaign.
For example, is somebody who was ever whacked with a Restraining Order – especially in conjunction with a soon-to-be divorce, automatically a violent “convicted” Assault and Battery recipient? I don’t think so. Ask any lawyer.
Usually when there’s a soon-to-be divorce with a possible Child Custody hearing involved, the wife will often file a Restraining Order against her husband that’s usually absolute bullBLEEP. That supposedly gives the woman extra ammunition to get custody of her kids in the eyes of the Court. As far as substantiating evidence goes, it’s more important here that the Police and Court err on the side of caution rather than digging up any actual proof, which tends to be a rather time-consuming process.
In defense of the small percentage of women who are actually protected from being beaten or killed in this particular situation, I guess I can understand the logic of issuing Restraining Orders against soon-to-be-divorced men with little-to-no evidence of physical violence or even threats against them, but in Avard’s case, I wouldn’t necessarily hold that against a guy who was running for elected public office.
Aside from being whacked with a Restraining Order in conjunction with his then soon-to-be divorce, what other evidence was there that Avard was ever arrested for either Assault and Battery, or Criminal Threatening? If there were any previous arrests on Avard in this area, I’m fairly sure Ms. Gilmour, along with her political cronies, would’ve amply mentioned that in her pre-election mailer.
Moving right along, (and please try to be honest here) how many people do YOU know who have been through AT LEAST two divorces? If the national divorce rate in America is around 60 percent, odds would dictate that most marriages in our country will end long, long before “death do us part”. Granted, one could argue that people who have been through at least two divorces (or married at least three times) exercise poor judgment and weak commitments in their personal lives, but how does that automatically disqualify a candidate for elected office if they happen to be a part of this category? If YOU are in this category, should YOU be viewed by the general public like a “criminal” for your inability to stay committed in a marriage?
I would echo the same feelings about filing a Bankruptcy, or having had a vehicle repossessed. Welcome to the Obama Administration, ladies and gentlemen. Are times a little tough in our country these days to “make ends meet”? Do a lot of people seem to be working two or more jobs these days? Why not elect a candidate to public office who understands and acknowledges these problems, and will hopefully push to get America (or New Hampshire) working again?
To be previously convicted of two DUI’s, especially if either one took place after the individual turned 30, should be viewed by voters as a very serious concern. I would definitely disqualify a candidate for elected office if they had killed, or even critically injured, another individual as a result of their reckless drunk driving. In Avard’s case, I think he “paid his dues to society” and then redeemed himself as serving as a NH State Rep for a term and currently hosting a couple of community cable TV shows on the Access Nashua network.
For those who think Avard got off with just a “slap on the wrist” for any of the aforementioned infractions, why not step up to the plate NOW and push for more stringent punishments on these improprieties? Otherwise, will you please just shut the heck up. If you’re not part of the solution, then you’re obviously part of the problem – especially in regards to Mr. Avard’s past history.
Given enough time and opportunity, I’m sure one could easily dig up a few interesting “skeletons” in Ms. Gilmour’s closet. Gilmour, incidentally, bears a striking physical resemblance to the Lillian Munster character on the popular 60’s sitcom TV show, The Munsters – so there’s at least one “skeleton” against this former NH State Senator already.
At last check, the ONLY PERFECT INDIVIDUAL that I’m aware of was crucified and died a little more than 2000 years ago – everyone else has fallen far, far short of perfection. Please remember this the next time YOU vote for the “BEST” possible candidate in the next election.
(This author, Carol Robidoux was the former Moderator of the Nashua [NH] Patch internet site, and needless to say, I’ve got to agree with her assessment on the two obvious front-runners in America’s upcoming Presidential race. Do I think a Presidential election campaign between Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton would be “entertaining”? You bet. As far as Reality TV shows go, I’m sure their debates between each other will draw much better ratings than Survivor, The Bachelor, The Bachelorette, Big Brother, The Amazing Race, Dancing with the Stars, and WWE Wrestling combined. Do I think either Trump or Mrs. Clinton are worthy enough to serve as President of the United States? Hell no. BLEEP no. For the American voters to enable and subsequently set-up this general election campaign match up in November will do nothing more than just further substantiate P.T. Barnum’s famous phrase, “There’s a Sucker born every minute”. 
One Bad Decision Away From Homelessness 