HB404 here in NH is an attempt to make it illegal for our local law enforcement to ask if someone is illegally here in the state. Make sense to you? Certainly not to me, and I blogged about this bill earlier here.
I tried to get the two sponsors of this bill to come on Meet The New Press for the last couple of weeks to discuss the WHY and the RAMIFICATIONS of the bill. At first, the answer was yes, then it turned to silence, then yes, and then quickly to "nope". So, we will be talking about it on the show today, but for those of you who cannot listen to the show or to the podcast (it will be here after the show), here’s the primary info.
I was first alerted to this bill by a loyal reader (H/T: Mike) who emailed me (I’ve edited):
I just listened to rMichael Graham interviewing a NH legislature who claims to want to make NH into something like a sanctuary state.
She represents Manchester West according to her. Her name is Lilly Mesa and she has introduced a bill to not allow police in this state to ask any questions regarding immigration status. I think the bill is HB404.
Since I was kind of half listening to the radio at the time I noticed what the subject was and who the host was talking to I’m not sure of the above facts, but I got the gist right.
What do you guys know about this one?
Well, I knew nothing about this, so I figured that I would listen to the show (podcast here). Now, my own opinion is that is not how we do interviews on MTNP, but it did perk my interest, and then, bluntly, my ire. I am a conservative – the idea of combating illegal immigration by making it illegal to ask was nonsense.
In fact, it forces law enforcement to not enforce our nation’s law. I have little tolerance for foolishness like this. It is one thing to not like a law, but if we are to maintain one of the greatest things about this country, all must obey the laws and not single out a class of people that would be immune from that law.
Especially if they are here illegally. In fact, my take on this law is to not make it illegal to ask, but make it illegal to NOT ask! That way, there is no racial profiling, there is no pre-judgement, and all are subject to that law. Anyways, back to the story.
I invited Lily Mesa onto the show:
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 12:06:52 -0400
From: skip@GraniteGrok.com
To: Lilly Mesa
Subject: House Bill 404
Dear Ms. Mesa,
This email concerns House Bill 404, of which you and Susi Nord are sponsors. It is currently retained in the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee. I have reprinted it below.
I have a radio show, Meet The New Press, here in Central NH that is broadcast on WEMJ 1490AM (and we also live stream and podcast as well). I was wondering if you would be willing to come on the show and talk about this bill? While I and my co-hosts are conservative, we try hard to be a "no sandbag zone" – we are not out to be a Hannity-Colmes where shouting is the norm – we want to talk about the issues and the philosophies behind them.
Kindest Regards,
-Skip
Skip Murphy
Meet The New Press
GraniteGrok.com
Her answer was (6/27):
I will be more than glad to come to your show because I want to have the opportunity to talk about all the issues behind this since the interview that I had this morning it was just a set-up from someone in NH to cruxify me. I’m coming back to NH on Sunday because I am right now in Atlanta attending the US Social Forum. I will give you a call on Monday the 2nd. Thank you.
Representative Mesa.
So far, so good….but then the prevarication started…
So I answered back on 6/28:
Good evening!
If I might, I have a question:
>> I will be more than glad to come to your show because I want to have the opportunity to talk about
>> all the issues behind this since the interview that I had this morning it was just a set-up from
>> someone in NH to cruxify me.Would you be willing to share with me with whom you had the interview? Would it be possible to get a copy of it so that I could be well informed for ours? Again, we are not a "sandbag zone" – we may end up disagreeing with you, but we are not looking to intentionally embarrass anyone..
Thanks!
-Skip
After all, even though Mike had tipped me off and I had listened to the podcast, by asking Ms. Mesa I was trying to make sure that the podcast I had listened to was the right one. I also wanted to let her know that we are not out to embarass anyone – we will ask hard questions but we do not want to humiliate anyone on air.
Next up – background and homework. Time to find out who Lily Mesa was. First up, if she was a State Rep, she must be listed there. Swoop on over and found this:
(Please note: I have edited the original screen shot to make it fit here)
In looking at many other reps info, there was always information for the business / job selection. When I saw nothing, I raised my eyebrows and wondered. After all, a Rep only recieves $100 / year plus travel expenses (essentially) – how would she be supporting herself?
Next – google time. First hit – MySpace (I have chopped the screen shot to make the relevant parts fit).
Now, sometimes I read a lot into things that perhaps I should not…but keep in mind that I believe that illegal immigration and the lack of assimilation. When someone puts in a bill that makes it illegal to ask about immigration status, I wonder why. It did raise eyebrows when I saw not an American flag but a Columbian flag. That her leanings are still to a culture that she left 20 odd years ago (from the podcast).
I also continued to wonder about the Occupation – one cannot make a living from being a State Rep. I also noted her Heros: people that work and advocate for peace and justice. This phrase, to me, generally means that she believes in general overall oppression of some class or classes of people by the majority, and somebody had better feel guilty about it. Frankly, I know very few people who are against "peace" and justice is so much a maligned word nowadays, for ills that are so often a result of being alive, is mere pap.
Also, last night I realized that something had been removed from the first time I had visited her MySpace page (glad I screen scraped it):
Notice the last line "I am becoming a professional protester too." OK, here’s my bias – I see that phrase and immediately I think Left. This is a person who will protest for bucks. Probably only for issues and groups that she would be already in agreement, but to make that one’s profession? What does that pay? More importantly, it does show a leaning toward a mind set.
Next on the journey was determing who Lilly Mesa is and growing an understanding of why she would write such a bill. I also found this by Googling her at PeaceWork magazine:
When people outside the USA live in extreme poverty conditions, and there are no opportunities to better themselves or their families, they see the USA as the greatest country in the world, where they can accomplish all their goals, provide for their families, and give their children a future.
We are fortunate to live in a country that has a government built on the rule of law. There is also a lower level of corruption and a society that is less "class oriented" than in most other countries that allow that striving for better to be achieved.
But the reality is totally different when they arrive here and get hit with it in their face. The so-called “freedom” doesn’t exist. They cannot walk on the streets without feeling fear of others looking at them differently because they think they don’t belong here. They cannot find a good job because of their legal status or because of the language. So, they end up having two or three odd jobs to support their families. They don’t have time to go to school to learn the language because they are always working.
Yes, freedom is here, but it is not free. It is not a free ride. Of course illegal immigrants have a fear of people looking at them – they should as there are here illegally! If I were to go somewhere knowing that I was not legally supposed to be there, I’d be looking over my shoulder too! And no, they are not entitled to a good job; heck, according to our laws, they should not be working period.
And what a straw man argument – "or because of the language" – for not having a good job! Logical? Sure, if I go to Germany, would I get a good job if I did not speak the language? Get real!
They are always working because the wages are so low that they can hardly meet the needs of their families. The children are always home alone, and they cannot be enrolled in any after school activity either because they cannot pay or because there’s nobody to take them. And because they don’t have someone at home to help with the school chores they don’t succeed in school. The children end up doing the same thing as their parents, working at two or three jobs in order to provide for themselves from a young age so they won’t be a burden for their parents. And when they try to go to college they cannot afford it. That’s a vicious cycle that we need to break. And this is only one of the situations. There are many different situations. Every immigrant has his or her own story.
Again, the non-use of the word "illegal" shows much of how Ms. Mesa views this country. It is alright for people without papers to come to the US. The expectation is that a good job should go to them, before a legal citizen, even if they cannot communicate with anyone.
THe emotional appeal of how their families are suffering because their decision, freely made, to illegaly come here.
Maybe they should be blaming their home countries’ governments for doing such a lousy job of g creating an environment that does not allow them
We need a comprehensive immigration reform that allows families to reunite in a matter of months, not years, that makes employers provide a safe environment for workers, and that allows migrants that want to come to work temporarily to do so without waiting two or three years and paying an extraordinary amount of money. We need a reform that respects our cultural differences and appreciates our contributions to this country.
Well, I had not heard from her in response to my last email, so on 7/3, I sent anoth
er:
Good Morning!
I just wanted to take a moment to touch base to see if you were still planning on coming on our show this Saturday? If so, would you be able to come up to the studio here in Gilford (right next to Laconia) or would a phone interview be better? If the latter is preferable, is there a phone number (a landline is preferred) at which our engineer can call you?
I have also seen that you are a Bill Richardson for President supporter – would you want to talk about his campaign for a little bit as well?
Kindest Regards,
-Skip
By 7/6 having not heard from her, I finally sent another email out to the other co-sponsor: Susi Nord, another Democrat.
Dear Ms. Nord,
My name is Skip Murphy and I co-own a radio show out of WEMJ in Gilford called Meet The
New Press" on Saturdays 11am – 1pm. I had been emailing with Ms. Mesa about coming
on the show this Saturday (which two weeks ago, she agreed to do) to do a couple of
segments on HB 404, but have not been able to reach her. While I, and my co-hosts, are
conservatives, we also try to run the show as a "no sandbag" zone – we are not a Hannity and
Colmes show, preferring to have a honest back and forth (heated can be ok, no shouting and
not talking over others). I was wondering two things as you are a co-sponsor of the bill:– Do you have a way to contact Ms. Mesa to see if she is still planning on coming
(last contact I had was an email saying she was going to the US Social Forum)– If not, would you want to come onto the show yourself? Either into the studio or
by phone?Kindest Regards,
Skip Murphy
Meet The New Press
Now, Susi responded the next day (7/7):
Dear Skip,
Lily did ask me if I would be willing to do the interview since she would not be available. I
told her that since the point of the bill is to highlight the relationship that the
legal immigrant population has with the police that I would not be the appropriate person to be
interviewed on your show. I apologize for not getting back to you sooner, but I was away from
my computer and did not receive your email until this morning.Susi Nord
A small quiet, but persistent alarm went off. Someone decides to write a bill, someone who is sworn to uphold the law, that effectively says "don’t uphold the law"? And then tries to dodge it with the argument of "oh, I’m not an immigrant so I cannot talk about this – find an immigrant"? Such pap! My first indication that something is just not starting to smell right about this bill.
If one writes it, they should be willing to defend it anywhere and any time. If not, it falls into that special catagory of "oops, we got caught doing a special interest deal".
Oh, I forgot – the US Social Forum. Held in Atlanta, it very much is a Left leaning gathering. I went to its site and found this:
The US Social Forum is more than a conference, more than a networking bonanza, more than a reaction to war and repression. The USSF will provide space to build relationships, learn from each other’s experiences, share our analysis of the problems our communities face, and bring renewed insight and inspiration. It will help develop leadership and develop consciousness, vision, and strategy needed to realize another world.
The USSF sends a message to other people’s movements around the world that there is an active movement in the US opposing US Policies at home and abroad.
Ms. Mesa’s comment about becoming a professional protester seems to take on a different light here. After all, everyone is repressed by the Man, right? After all, it is not about SUPPORTING your country (with gentle corrections as needed) but OPPOSING it.
Sorry, but when I see words like that, the first thing that pops in is "Anti-Americanism" – the Hate America First crowd….so let’s put things on a path to make it non-American.
We must declare what we want our world to look like and begin planning the path to get there. A global movement is rising. The USSF is our opportunity to demonstrate to the world Another World is Possible!
"Another US is necessary"….thus, it becomes quite clearer the circumstances for this bill. The highlighted line in Ms. Nord’s email also gave me concern. It obviously is the case that these two just do not want our law enforcement officials to be able to enforce our nation’s laws. They are being quite "politically correct" and show an open borders mentality.
Be that as it may, everyone is entitled to their own opinion (except when it is directed to harm to others or the overthrow of our government).
Ms. Mesa did write back:
Hello Skip,
I apologize for not contacting you earlier but I had too much work this week and my computer wasn’t working well. Besides that I had someone in the family very sick. I would definitely like to go to your show with Rep. Nord, but as of right now the only Saturday that I will be available would be the 28th. Please let me know and I’ll give you a call to confirm that. Thank you.
Representative Mesa
OK, things are finally looking up…we would still have the debate! I replied:
Good Afternoon,
The 28th would be fine (Lilly, I will consider you as confirmed) and BOTH of you are invited to come into the studio if you wish (by phone if not). Susi, we believe that you ARE appropriate, as you are the co-sponsor of the bill, and we are interested in the bill from a legislative viewpoint as well.
Let me know who this works for you both.
Kindest Regards,
-Skip
I may disagree philisophically with them, and be opposed to the bill, but I can be polite, right? As I tell my two sons, try to always take the high road.
Uh-oh, then it started. From Ms. Nord on 7/10:
Dear Skip,
I will not be participating, but thank you for your kind invitation.
Susi Nord
followed quickly by:
Skip,
I am really sorry but I was advised for my family, friends, and my lawyer not to participate in this interview. The last interview that I had caused a lot of trouble to my family because I got all kinds of threats, that I even had to go to the police and we are afraid of the consequences another interview might bring. I hope you understand.
Well, I could understand the latter, but not the former. Yet, the thought kept going through my mind that if two people who wished to radically change the landscape here in NH would not be willing to defend their bill, they should pull it. This is not something that you throw out there and let stick!
Time to try again.
Good Morning,
I am quite sorry to hear that you have chosen not to pa
rticipate. I am even sorrier about the threats made against you – one should win in the discussing of ideas in the public arena and not by physical intimidation.Ms Nord, while I understand that you felt that Ms. Mesa was the better person to have represented the bill that both of you crafted, would you be willing to reconsider your decision not to appear on the show? I would think that you would want some representation, for fairness sake, to discuss your reasoning behind the bill?
Immigration, legal and illegal, pro and con, is one of the topics of the day – being a talk show, we have and will continue to address it. I’m sorry to see that the sponsors of this bill that would have such a large effect on law enforcement in New Hampshire are not willing to defend it publicly. We strive to be a "no sandbag" zone – we are about the reasoned discussion of ideas and not about humiliating people and their ideas.
Kindest Regards,
-Skip
While Ms. Nord did reply, I was none too please with the condescending attitude:
Dear Skip,
Having seen the kind of treatment Representative Mesa has received at the hands of listeners to conservative radio shows, I will once again refuse your kind invitation. The people she has encountered have already made up their minds, and I have no desire to disturb their worldview with reason and facts that they won’t listen to anyway. I choose to defend HB 404 in venues where those in attendence have open minds and do not openly threaten people with alternative viewpoints to their own.
Susi Nord
In other words, politely, go pound sand you bunch of cretins! We know better people to talk to, so we will do so – after all, you are all close minded and not willing to listen!
Yeah, I got ticked – just as not all liberals act the same, neither do conservatives. There are rational and loonies at both ends of the spectrum. However, exactly what Ms. Nord was claiming for "my side" (closed mindedness) was exactly the same behavior she was exhibiting.
And I told her that:
>> I choose to defend HB 404 in venues where those in attendence have open minds
Let me play devil’s advocate for a moment – are you not, then, preaching to the choir on the liberal side? Whose minds have also been made up? Are you not already stereotyping us, being closed minded about us and our audience, just because of the label "conservative" that we attach to ourselves?
I listened to the Michael Graham interview….THAT is not us, even if we are more conservative leaning than you both. We may disagree with our guests, but we are not out to humiliate them. If anything, we are trying to be more of the late David Brudnoy style (albeit, a bit livelier, less libertarian) than a Michael Graham.
I do not wish to belabor the invitation that has been extended. The bill will be discussed even if there is merely an open chair to defend its philosophical underpinnings.
-Skip
I think I raised some hackles, to wit:
Skip-
I was referring to venues such as the NH House of Representatives where our hearings are open to the public and the legislators are supposed to be open-minded. I have little interest in participating in any radio call-in program period. A program such as NHPR’s The Exchange is no different from what happened to Lily on that other program other than its tone. It still reinforces the dualistic us versus them mentality that predominates in our society. We seem to think that offering only two points of view means something is "balanced". To be honest in a way I respect you for at least owning up to your ideology.
Unfortunately the discourse in this country has become so polarized that I am afraid no one listens to what the other side has to say. We don’t try to change people’s minds anymore, we try to come up with the sound byte that will appeal to the most people. We try to win the media battle of who gets to frame the debate. I have no desire to be a "talking head" "spinning" my position. I co-sponsored a bill that is similar to laws in another state, as well as many counties and municipalities. It is a perfectly reasonable and not terribly radical piece of legislation. There are many people who disagree with my approach to solving this problem and I respect their right to differ from my opinion. I am not so arrogant as to think that anything I have to say on a radio program will be any different or more effective in changing the court of public opinion. Until policymakers are ready to put aside ideology and craft a solution that acknowledges reality, there will be little real progress on this issue.
I am sorry I won’t do your show, but stereotyping or not, Lily received very real and very ugly feedback from those who disagree with her views. I have no desire to fan those flames, and I ask that you keep this in mind when you do your show. There are many more people like Lily who bear the brunt of this debate firsthand and they don’t even have her very limited protection of being an elected official. What is a theoretical debate to you and me is the day to day life experience for the thousands of legal immigrants and new citizens who are here in New Hampshire. Very few people consider the fallout that this debate and the hatred it engenders has on their lives. Don’t forget that your show does not occur in a vacuum and that whipping people into a frenzy is wonderful for ratings, but not so good for those who have to live with the consequences.
Representative Susi Nord
The radical agenda, politely stated (I have to be honest) starts to show.
Please note, however, that in these emails was the kind of debate I wanted on the show! No nasty words, no "hate" speech. Just ideas. Of COURSE I replied! And being a blogger, of COURSE I fisked it:
>> We seem to think that offering only two points of view means something is "balanced".
Well, HB404 lends itself to either two points of view in the end – either law enforcement CAN ask or they CANNOT. There is another way to look at this?
>> To be honest in a way I respect you for at least owning up to your ideology.
Thank you>> Unfortunately the discourse in this country has become so polarized that I am >> afraid no one listens to what the other side has to say. We don’t try to change
>> people’s minds anymore, we try to come up with the sound byte that will
>> appeal to the most people. We try to win the media battle of who gets
>> to frame the debate. I have no desire to be a "talking head" "spinning" my
>> position.
And here I am trying to give you the opportunity to NOT do that, to move beyond the sound bite, to speak plainly and not "spin" the issue – just try to convince "the folks". I was not intending on just one segment (about 15 minutes) – I was hoping to truly debate this.
And you are turning it down.>>I co-sponsored a bill that is similar to laws in another state, as well as many
>> counties and municipalities.
>> It is a perfectly reasonable and not terribly radical piece of legislation.Yes, there are other states with this. However, I do not believe that is is "perfectly reasonable" and I do believe it is "radical" – come, let us debate it in an open manner!
>> There are many people who disagree with my approach to solving this problem >> and I respect their right to differ from my opinion.
Agreed, from the other side….
>> I am not so arrogant as to think that anything I have to say on a radio program >> will be any different or more effective in changing the court of public opinion.
And that is where you would be wrong….it should be debated on radio, on TV, in newspapers, in magazines, on websites, on blogs, and on the corner on soap boxes.The issue is of importance, for it is one that on one hand extols Federalism, but on the other denigrates that central Federal authority at the same time. This isn’t just about illegal and legal immigration.
Only with much debate should this issue be resolved. Removing yourself, especially as the primary proponents of starting the debate, does no one any good.
>> Until policymakers are ready to put aside ideology and craft a solution that
>> acknowledges reality, there will be little real progress on this issue.
One could state that it is your very own ideology that has led you to craft this bill. You both are the ones that have started this debate.I do not believe in "alternate" realities – there is a problem and it must be solved. Oh, there will be a solution – one that will be voted on by a majority of the NH governmental system. The public has the right to be a part of that via debate and holding its legislators accountable for their actions – as was seen in DC this past month.
The same hue and cry that was there may soon be here in NH.
>> " I have no desire to fan those flames"
What I will say next will probably drive those that believe as I do kinda nuts!
"Evil men succeed when good men do nothing". By doing nothing to defend your bill, you will allow those that you consider to be evil to win the day. Even though I am on the opposite side on this issue, I believe you are doing those that support your position no good by remaining silent. If you truly believe in what you say, I would think that you would be standing up at every opportunity for the courage of your convictions in order to convince those that believe otherwise that your’s is the wiser path.
In closing, I thank you both for your time, and wish you no ill will and will not badger you any longer. I am extremely disappointed that neither of you will defend your thesis – the offer will stay open until the bill is either passed or voted down.
-Skip
Well, Reps Lilly Mesa and Susi Nord dropped out – they are the writers of HB404 that would turn NH into a sanctuary state. They have now refused to come on.
Given the public "trail" that Lilly Mesa has left, and the other organizations of which she is apart, it is obvious that she is of the open borders crowd and wished to radically change the mores of this country as she fights for "social justice" (whatever that hackneyed phrase is supposed to mean!). Susi Nord, belong to a few of the same organizations, is in the same camp.
While I use the saying "Evil men succeed when good men do nothing" with Ms. Nord, it also applies to the conservative side of this argument as well. I have not comradeship with those that would lessen the worth of living in this country and being a citizen. I have severe problems with those that dispense with the important idea of US soil being sovereign and that it should be protected.
I have a large problem with the overthrow of the Rule of Law just because it does not fit the emotional appeals of "social justice" notions of the Left.
