“The Live Free or Die state seeks a strong leader who is truly passionate about banning books and censoring other library materials. Reporting to the wing-nut caucus of the Legislature and Executive Council, the successful candidate will be responsible for creating and maintaining an updated list of proscribed materials for the state’s 234 public libraries, including but not limited to those that address gender, sexuality and race in a way that contravenes evangelical Christian and Roman Catholic doctrine or the views of any individual parent. Send resume and censorship samples to Gov.-Elect Kelly Ayotte, state of New Hampshire.”

Welcome to the Granite State, where reality so often gives hyperbole a run for its money. Earlier this month on his way out the door, Gov. Chris Sununu withdrew his nomination of the well-qualified Mindy Atwood to be state librarian in the face of objections by conservative activists and some members of the Executive Council. Their opposition — you couldn’t make this up — was centered on Atwood’s advocacy against book censorship. Thus the fanciful job description posted above.

When she applied for the job in October, Atwood, who is currently director of operations for the state library, wrote, “I deeply believe in the mission of public libraries to provide free and equal access to information for everyone.”

This unexceptional, mainstream view aligns with the position of professional organizations and with the outlook of virtually all public librarians throughout New Hampshire and Vermont. In short, it’s a no-brainer — but perhaps that term is better reserved for the opposition to her nomination. It is personified by Executive Councilor David Wheeler, who according to New Hampshire Public Radio, cited presentations Atwood had given on behalf of regional and national library associations challenging censorship of library materials.

“It was her involvement and the state library’s involvement in opposing parents from keeping their kids from seeing pornography in libraries,” said Wheeler (who presumably wants to have kids’ access to “pornography” restricted to the internet, where no one monitors content). “She was fighting parents to have any type of choice over what their kids can see.”

Thus is the ignorance of parents visited on their children, generation to generation down through the years. But more likely, the underlying object is to restrict what everybody else has access to, as well.

By way of context, it’s important to emphasize that the opposition was not to any particular materials contained in the state library, but to Atwood’s advocacy of the right to be informed. Michael York, the retiring state librarian, notes that under state law, the state librarian has no authority over what materials schools and public libraries provide.

“The 234 public libraries in the state of New Hampshire all have a board of trustees, and more than 90% of those libraries have elected library trustees,” according to York. And those trustees employ librarians who thoughtfully develop and share collections in the spirit of providing free and equal access to information for everyone.

Once upon a time in America, decentralized local control such as that personified by New Hampshire libraries was the realization of conservative dreams. But as time has gone on, the reactionary right-wing has concluded that it is losing its grip on public sentiment and so now focuses on top-down imposition of its views, such as derailing Atwood’s nomination for daring to challenge radical conservative orthodoxy.

It will be interesting to see if Ayotte can find a library nominee willing to kiss the conservatives’ ring at the considerable risk not only of professional self-respect but also of impairing the freedom of New Hampshire residents to inform themselves as they see fit.