Sent this LTE to the Laconia paper and a slightly different version to the Concord paper…as a response to their article about Mike Sylvia’s comments. Can you do something similar?
NH independence vs. Fed rule - We’re not competing with perfect here!
Dear folks at the Sun:
Some thoughts regarding your article about Belmont Rep. Mike Sylvia’s attempt to bring forward the NH Independence Amendment. This is legislation which, if passed, would let New Hampshire voters decide whether they want to continue being governed by Washington. The latter appears to have proven effective only at mistreating immigrants in Texas and running torture chambers in Afghanistan.
You pointed out Sylvia’s comments, in which he paraphrased - then condemned - anti-immigrant sentiment. These comments have “triggered” an attempt by Federal sympathizers to paint Sylvia’s meaning as opposite of what it was. But presumably we are all in agreement that harsh deeds are a much nastier thing than harsh words. As the loudest open-borders, Spanish-speaking voice in New Hampshire’s Independence faction, I’m more enraged over Fed mistreatment of my sisters and brothers from Mexico…than over any “comment” a person could ever make. We’re not competing with perfect here, not even with D-minus. Washington dumps kids into concentration camps for being born the wrong spot and orders you to underwrite the “service.” But folks are more upset about a “comment” by 100-dollar-a-year citizen legislator?
Maybe what the pro-Fed faction fears is not Mike Sylvia’s open-handed brainstorming…but the possibility that NH might someday be independent of DC, of the Feds’ border fascism and their literal million-page list of Forbidden Acts. The chance that eventually…we might be able to exclusively govern our own affairs and welcome our foreign siblings in a dramatically more humane, inexpensive manner than Washington does.