The Collective Pushes NH Republican Dan Innis Out Over Opposition to Portsmouth Mask Mandate - Granite Grok

The Collective Pushes NH Republican Dan Innis Out Over Opposition to Portsmouth Mask Mandate

Many towns and cities in New Hampshire are passing mandatory mask ordinances. Some include soul-crushing penalties of up to $1,000. This is a modern equivalent of “Ver are your papers, please?” where the question mark is really an exclamation point over a mask.

Related:  Masks Still Don’t Work

Well, Portsmouth is the latest Democrat conclave to take another Choice away from people hoping to run their own lives. The city council has decided that The Collective is more important than Individual Liberty.

The Union Leader backed them up and threw Dan Innis to the wolves with their reporting (reformatted, emphasis mine):

Portsmouth chamber board chair resigns after anti-mask tweets

The Chamber Collaborative of Greater Portsmouth’s board chair has resigned after saying he received backlash for his personal social media posts. “I don’t know if I would call this cancel culture, but it is not too far from it,” Dan Innis said. “I will not be silenced.”

“Good thing we are still pretending that this is a horrible pandemic, when we have done everything we were told to do back in March. We did our part. When will the government do its part and give us back our freedom?” Innis asked.

…Prior to the vote, the chamber’s chief, Valerie Rochon urged the council to enact the mask ordinance on behalf of businesses that are part of the organization.

Sidenote: Valerie’s actual title is Chief Collaborator where most people holding that position would be an Executive Director. Progressive Pomposity at its finest – what a nonsense title. It matches up with another one silly one:  “VP of What’s Next”.

So, who is in charge of this NGO, the Chair of the board or the hired help? What is the chain of command here? Certainly, the Chamber members…

Sidenote: the COLLABORATIVE members, as they are calling themselves that, swapping that word in for “Chamber.” The appearance of being hip, I guess

…knew where Dan stood on things of this nature BEFORE they voted him into the position. A vested interest in personal liberty just seems to run counter to the Chamber Collaborative’s new mission – going lockstep with those that prize the Collaborative’s Collective’s (see, I corrected your spelling) herd mentality. No one outside and no dissent allowed.

Innis, who lives in New Castle, tweeted after her statements that he would not be visiting the city of Portsmouth “until the insanity ends.”  Innis went on to say that outdoor mask mandates are an overreach.

Chamber officials said in a statement that they “carefully communicate the ideals the organization embraces as a whole, and ask that our leadership do the same.” “We will continue to work toward creating a positive business climate for the community and to fostering respectful discourse,” a statement issued by Martha Sullivan of Sullivan Communications said.

Of COURSE, she said that. The whole doesn’t care about the part(s), just the summation. This is like most School Boards’ policies: you may be elected as well but shut up and go along with the majority – there cannot be a decision. Yes, people, it seems like the hired help at the Portsmouth Collaborative have risen up, thrown off their capitalist roots and gone Collectivist. The inmates stole the keys to the locks. How DARE Dan Innis say anything contrary to the majority!!!

Named chairman three months ago, the former Republican state senator is a professor of hospitality management and marketing at the University of New Hampshire. He has been openly critical of the mask policies there, referring to the town and campus as the “People’s Republic of Durham.”

Yeah, well most of we Conservatives say that about Durham, and Keene, and Hanover, and a few other places as well. Thanks for proving our point.

Last word: Sorry Dan, but you did cancel yourself. Instead of quitting, you shoulda stayed in there and continued to use that Bully Pulpit. Until they FORCED you out. Then you COULD claim, in full honesty, they did cancel you out. Resigning, IMHO, gave them what they wanted all along – a form of appeasement instead of a “principled exit”. You’ve now lost that megaphone that being the head of the Collaborative gave you. However, instead of being silenced, you switched it off yourself.

(H/T: Union Leader)

>