Nashua candidate’s attempt to justify slur raises question

The recent conduct of Peter Silva, Republican nominee for the Nov. 5 Nashua Ward 8 special election for state representative, raises an important ethical question. Is it a more serious moral breach to utter an ethnic slur, or to fail to appreciate the deeply offensive nature of your behavior?

Silva faces Democratic nominee Latha Mangipudi. She and her family are of Indian descent. At an Oct. 10 Nashua Republican City Committee forum, Silva warned of the challenges that face his candidacy.

Silva predicted Mangipudi would benefit from a large turnout of Indian voters, saying “they’ll be coming out of the woodwork” on election day. To back up his claim, he cited his personal experience on primary election day, when “I thought I was in New Delhi,” he said.

When asked if he thought his comments could be considered offensive to people from India, Silva said: “What I said is true. I can understand being criticized if I said something derogatory. If what I said is considered derogatory, then I think we should live in plastic bubbles,” he said.

Well, it is derogatory. It seeks to raise fears among Republican voters that a group of people is a threat to the GOP’s values and must be thwarted simply because of their non-American heritage.

And even if Silva doesn’t get it, he could at least acknowledge the feelings of those who were offended. It would at least suggest he is open to listening to alternative points of view.

Department’s long wait for ammunition is rooted in fear

The unsettling aspect of the 10-month wait for ammunition ordered by the Nashua Police Department is the reason for the delay – demand. So many people are ordering ammunition that manufacturers can’t keep up.

Fear fuels the rush. People are worried that new forms of gun-control legislation will restrict their Second Amendment rights. The increase in demand started when Barack Obama was elected president, an event followed by widespread paranoia that, the Second Amendment notwithstanding, “they” were going to confiscate people’s firearms.

Another spike followed the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, when Congress worked up the nerve to consider legislation that might have made guns harder to get under limited circumstances.

When one considers that, even after the massacre of helpless school children, the wimpiest of gun control measures never really had a chance in Congress, the fear behind the ammo shortage is probably a tad overstated.

NHIAA gets kicked around for ruling about pink socks

‘I’ve had one after another of nasty and vile anonymous voice mails, mostly from the Nashua area,” New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Association Executive Director R. Patrick Corbin told The Telegraph’s George Scione this week. “They’ll tell me, because I’m a man, that I don’t care about women with breast cancer. That I have no heart and don’t care if people die from such a horrible thing. It’s been one call after another since the month of October began.”

Corbin’s transgression? He’s the guy responsible for telling soccer teams they can’t wear pink socks during their home games. This offends some supporters of Breast Cancer Awareness Month who believe it represents the pinnacle of insensitivity.

In fact, the rule is rooted in sound logic. Contrasting colors of socks make it easier for officials to do their jobs during games when looking at a sea of legs. It’s not just pink socks that home teams can’t wear, it’s any color. Home teams wear white socks.

How this straightforward and sensible rule could be construed to be insensitive to cancer patients is the height of hyperbole. Besides, the NHIAA and some schools, such as Nashua North, have a solution in place – home teams can ask visiting teams to wear white socks so they can wear pink socks.

Can you say “tempest in a teapot?”

Let the nasty calls begin.

Newsletter