[Snow-i]

New Hamphsire Democrat Threatens To Remove Citizen Freedoms | FaceThePolitics

Can any of you here say you'd vote for this woman? Her stated objective is to target dissidents and remove their liberties so they'll move somewhere else. Is that not the very thing our revolution was fought to eliminate?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Read the article a little closer. She was talking about "Free Staters" and the author twisted that in the opener to make it sound like she refered to conservatives in general. Her comment is obviously a clumsy response to an even more ridiculous proposal (the one for libertarians to concentrate in the "live free or die" state so they can take it over and implement their libertarian utopia). She does have a point, it's not too nice for native NH people to have their state taken over by outsiders with an experiment to run on it, though she seems to have made that point in a terrible way that makes things worse. Come to a new state because you like it, that's great. Come to a new state so that you can change it into your fantasy land, and I think I'm going to sympathize with the local opposition. If anyone is going to be representing the rebellious colonists in this role-playing game, why wouldn't it be the native New Hampshirites who are facing a scheme to be transformed by outsiders?

[andi*pandi]

Try that takeover scheme in Texas and I think they'd shoot you.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

It won't work. They can't possibly surpass the number of immigrants from Massachusetts. Never mind India.

[lpkmckenna]

Can someone tell me what precisely this woman is suggesting? A Google for her reveals nothing but a bloat of rightwing blogs repeating the exact same meaningless statement about "attacking the freedoms of conservatives," when she really says:

“In the opinion of this Democrat, Free Staters are the single biggest threat the state is facing today. There is, legally, nothing we can do to prevent them from moving here to take over the state, which is their openly stated goal. In this country you can move anywhere you choose and they have that same right. What we can do is to make the environment here so unwelcoming that some will choose not to come, and some may actually leave. One way is to pass measures that will restrict the ‘freedoms’ that they think they will find here. Another is to shine the bright light of publicity on who they are and why they are coming.”

The bolded statement is literally the only alarm-triggering phrase in an otherwise unremarkable comment. But what exactly are the "freedoms" that are at risk? What does she mean? What do these libertarians think she means?

She wants to purposefully use her powers to write laws to target individuals with whom she disagrees, take away their freedoms and liberties, and all in the hopes that the citizens she is oppressing might move away from her state.

I don't see anything about targeting anyone in her statement.

Imagine if a legislator had written a blog post targeting the freedoms of gays, or women, or some other minority?

Conservatives do that every single damn day. This woman, of course, has not.

I remember reading about the Free State Project a few years ago. I was astounded that anyone would suggest flooding a tiny state with libertarians for the exclusive purpose of electoral demographic shift. Surely, when choosing a place to live, you wouldn't make your choice for such a nonsensical reason. But then again, these are libertarians, who think public education, public libraries, and public hospitals are "slavery," so reason isn't highly valued. But I guess it isn't surprising that a political stance that can't possibly convince people to its own point of view would just give up, and simply try to drown out everyone else with sheer numbers of bodies.

And then there's the meaninglessness of it all: a libertarian paradise of state government would be utterly eclipsed by the federal government anyway.