Despite being highly rated by the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance, Moore is the co-sponsor of discriminatory, anti-freedom legislation, HB-1525FN that would criminalize female toplessness across New Hampshire. On Tuesday, Bouldin took to her Facebook page with a response, pointing out that all the sponsors of the proposal are male republicans, calling them out on their hypocrisy, in that they claim to supposedly support smaller government, but in this case they are advocating for its expansion.
In response, Moore comments:
“I’ll see you on the house floor. I have obviously have more respect for a women and her innocence and decency than than women who are support public nudity.” – State Representative Josh Moore
“Who doesn’t support a mothers right to feed? Don’t give me the liberal talking points Amanda. If it’s a woman’s natural inclination to pull her nipple out in public and you support that, than you should have no problem with a mans to stare at it and grab it. After all, it’s ALL relative and natural, right?” – State Representative Josh Moore
Does Moore really believe that a woman going topless justifies a man committing assault and grabbing it? It’s hysteria like this that needs to end. They are breasts. Men and women both have them – it’s a basic human liberty to be as clothed as one wishes on your own, or public property.
Moore and his cohort, state representative Al Baldasaro were subsequently eviscerated on Amanda’s facebook thread, by countless libertarians. During the process, Baldasaro weighed in with another rude quip:
“No disrespect, but your nipple would be the last one I would want to see. You want to turn our family beach’s into a pervert show.” – State Representative Al Baldasaro
(All spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors by Moore and Baldasaro were left intact.)
Somewhere along the line, Slate published a piece featuring Moore and Baldasaro’s ridiculous support of oppressing topless freedom. That then led to several more major websites picking up the story. Here’s a quick rundown:
I’m one of New Hampshire’s newest UBER drivers, or “partners” as UBER refers to us. I’ve been a fan of UBER’s innovation and open challenging of the status quo of transportation for a long time, and we’ve covered their various conflicts with state and city regulators on my talk radio program, Free Talk Live.
More recently, UBER has been featured multiple times here on Free Keene in the context of the Portsmouth, NH showdown between Free UBER activists committing ongoing civil disobedience versus the city enforcers who are protecting an oligopoly. With Portsmouth police openly threatening New Years Eve charity rides – the city is now scraping the bottom of the barrel, and it will be a real feat for them to look more embarrassing and ridiculous than they do now, but they might figure out a way. Give ’em time. Maybe Portsmouth will file a stupid lawsuit like Keene did against the Robin Hooders and shoot the free publicity for the new Arcade City ride-sharing app to the moon.
The actual coverage extends north of Concord and as far west as Peteborough and Hillsborough.
On New Year’s Eve I logged in to the UBER partner app in the Concord area and was able to help a bunch of somewhat intoxicated, very nice people get home safely! Plus, we had some very interesting conversations. I’ve only given six rides for UBER thus far, but my clients have all been under forty years old. I asked some tonight what made them use UBER in Concord, given that it’s not even officially operating there (click to see UBER’s currently inaccurate coverage map), and their responses were that they knew it worked in other big cities and wanted to try it rather than deal with the apparently awful cabs. There were plenty of unprompted complaints about terrible cab experiences my passengers have had in New Hampshire.
For one passenger tonight, it was his first time taking an UBER. He said it was the best possible UBER first time experience – wow, what a compliment! The guy tipped me, too (not required with UBER, but still appreciated!) During our conversation we were talking about the crackdown in Portsmouth on Free UBER (which he’d not heard about), and he was totally onboard with freedom, at least in the area of transportation. He even commented about how competition makes everything better. (more…)
Here’s a 24-minute short documentary covering what we saw and what we learned. In short, one can cross to Canada with only a driver’s license and despite what the US federal government claims, you don’t need a passport to cross back into the US, but they might hassle you. Also, Derby Line, VT and Stanstead, Quebec have been hurt economically by the border-tightening that happened around 2007. Derby Line’s commercial property is nearly completely empty, and several homes are on the market for sale. Stanstead is in somewhat better shape.
Who would want to live where most of the cars on the streets are Border Patrol vehicles? That’s life in the ghost town of Derby Line, a microcosm of what will happen to the United States if the borders continue to tighten – freedom and the economy will suffer.
Christopher David of Free UBER – Graphic Courtesy Coin Telegraph
Free UBER‘s Christopher David is making headlines again for his latest announcement where he and several other drivers are offering free rides to people on New Year’s Eve in Portsmouth, NH. The drivers are accepting tips, and Portsmouth police chief Frank Warchol said in an interview with the Portsmouth Herald that accepting donations would still place them under government control and means they’d be fined if caught operating without government permission slips.
Chris’ announcement has really put the government gang in a ridiculous spot that shows their true nature. Prior to this, the controversy with UBER in Portsmouth has been that UBER’s background check requirements aren’t as stringent as Portsmouth’s ordinances demand. There’s been endless debate and discussion in city council meetings about who should be allowed to drive other consenting adults from place to place, with the town government agents acting concerned about “protecting” the passengers from potentially criminal drivers. However, no one in the Portsmouth government would care if a felon takes someone from point A to point B for free, but if they accept a dollar for their effort, then the regulations apply! What’s this scheme of theirs really about? Perhaps money, control, and protecting the old cab companies from competition?
Frank Warchol, Chief of Portsmouth Police – Photo Courtesy SeacoastOnline
The Portsmouth gang is threatening the charity drivers with fines of $500 to $1,000 if they are caught accepting money for rides. How police will catch them is another question entirely. With UBER, police could use the UBER app to monitor the locations of the UBER cars (whether they have, I don’t know). However, UBER is not involved at all with the New Year’s Eve charity, so police would have to run a sting operation by scheduling a ride, then pouncing on the driver when he or she accepts a tip from the undercover cop.
Chris says that his reading of the Portsmouth gang’s “ordinances” and the state gang’s “statutes” lead him to believe there are virtually no restrictions on limousines. The Portsmouth transportation ordinance defines limousine services as those which, “provide designated luxury or specialty vehicles by prior appointment for discrete functions or transportation to locations outside the City or the reverse”. Chris says the vehicles on New Years Eve will be specialty because they will have fun games in the passenger seats.
Will anything go down on New Year’s Eve between city cops and the charity drivers? Stay tuned here to Free Keene for the latest, and if you’re looking for a ride on New Year’s Eve in Portsmouth, sign up for yours here at Chris’ new project, Arcade City!
Hoping to overturn the illegal, discriminatory town ordinance, Lilley and MacKinnon teamed up with Free State Project early mover and attorney Dan Hynes.
Hynes’ line of questioning was interesting, specifically asking the state’s witnesses, which included three snitches and a few cops, how they determine someone is a woman. The all answered something about breasts, which is inconclusive. Without inspecting genitalia, which the police did not do, there would be reasonable doubt that the person is female.
Hynes argued, in a ten-page motion to dismiss (complimented by jovial Judge James M. Carroll) the ordinance is unconstitutional and violates equal protection and the right to free expression. Further, he argues the ordinance is also illegal because New Hampshire is not a “home rule” state and unless the state legislature authorizes towns to pass laws of their own, they cannot legally do so.
