Saturday • May 18 • 2024
Vol.XVI • No.XX
Manchester, N.H.
John Kirby and Lloyd Austin showed Tuesday just how low the Biden Administration has taken the conversation, our morals, and our country in just thirty months. I have referred to Joe Biden’s need to “finish the job” in his second term, and I am convinced that means the total destruction of this once great country.
Joe Biden has parlayed his mediocre talents into a lifetime of privilege and corruption at the expense of America and Americans, and to repay his debt, he is tearing our country down.
Two of the key individuals he put in place are Kirby and Austin. John Kirby is a retired rear admiral in the United States Navy, serving as Coordinator for Strategic Communications at the National Security Council in the White House since late May 2022. He is also the man the White House calls on to clean up after Karine Jean-Pierre. Lloyd James Austin III is a retired United States Army four-star general who has served as the 28th United States Secretary of Defense since January 22, 2021. He is the first African American to serve in this role.
How each of these men rose to their respective positions in the military is a mystery, but how they have sold out to the WOKE culture is a travesty. In two separate appearances on Tuesday, both men explained to America how critical abortion is to the readiness of our military to protect us and how sacred a right abortion is to female military personnel. Sacred and abortion are words I would never link together in any context, but that is where we are in Biden’s America. It was not an accident that these two spoke on the same subject simultaneously. This was a purposeful effort to promote abortion. It was embarrassing and disgusting.
Taken from Kirby’s comments:
“And — and our policies — whether they’re diversity, inclusion, and equity; or whether they’re about transgender individuals who qualify physically and mentally to serve to be able to do it with dignity; or whether it’s about female servicemembers — one in five — or female family members being able to count on the kinds of healthcare and reproductive care specifically that they need to serve — that is a foundational, sacred obligation of military leaders across the river. “
Healthcare and reproductive care, of course, refer to abortion. According to Kirby, providing abortions to female military personnel or the wives of personnel is a sacred obligation. Killing the unborn is never sacred.
Lloyd Austin responded that it is absolutely essential the military makes female healthcare and reproductive care available so that we can attract females and families to the military and be ready to protect our country. Thank God he did not get the memo that abortion was a sacred right.
If these two men wanted to discuss readiness, then they should have addressed the munitions shortage that Joe Biden let slip last week. We are nearly twenty years from replenishing our supply of arms and missiles. It is ludicrous that we are making that information available to our enemies. Still, obviously, our military leaders are more focused on killing the unborn than our enemies who may want to do us harm.
The post Abortion Is Key To Military Readiness? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Instapundit directed me to a post by James Lileks, proprietor of The Bleat, that takes on those who believe that travel to “touristy” places by the masses is just so gauche, starting with cruise ships.
Sidenote: I’ve always wanted to try ONE cruise, but TMEW is terrified when I bring it up – “out in the middle of the sea?” I’ve relegated it to the dust heap that includes having a motorcycle, a private pilot’s license, and a few other things.
It’s the same kinds of people that believe that food is too cheap and too ordinary, that we all should be willing to pay far higher prices for “better” foods. “Choice is for knaves” is the general theme of these “snoots in the air.” And, of course, it’s all for their version of “utopian culture.” Lileks fights back (emphasis mine):
Why? Because it is important to trash the happy things – at least the happy things regarded as such by people who are irritatingly ordinary. The people who would not, for example, bed-rot. The people who, ugh, do things. Now, I don’t think that all of the people who are attracted to this ship are industrious go-getters who want five days of high-octane activities; maybe some are. Bring the kids. They’ll be amazed. Time of their life, even if they barely remember it. Others just want a spot on the deck, lots of food, a nice view, and some fun. A party atmosphere enlivens the vacation.
Which means the majority of us. These “culturally upper-crust” agents are just like the Eco-Socialists in that there is only ONE way to be happy, and that’s their way. There is no sense that happiness is different for different people. It is outside their ken that others do not share their outlook on life.
I like art, but I’m no art critic, and I almost failed Jr. High art class stick figures, but I’m not stupid enough to fall for most pieces of modern abstract art (I think many of which are examples of “where’s the gullibility horizon can I push the limits?” Like the image at the top, which is, according to Bard (Google’s AI), “some of the most important works of abstract art ever created.” A blank canvas. But it would be hoi-polloi and gauche of me to say, “It represents nothing, not even art.” A null “thing isn’t art; it’s just a nullity.
I summoned Bard to cough a couple more modern “art” pieces. Like this – can you tell me without reading further what it is?
Neither could I. Looks like a high school failure of something (Ashtray, glazed ceramic, Sterling Ruby).
Or this: I can see the “head” (at least that’s what Bard said it is), but can you?
Done by Oscar Murillo. It’s art, I get it (well, that’s what I’m being told to do). But back to that “gullibility” event horizon. Another word that can be used is “pretentious”:
The catalog “essay” gave the game away:
“The individual canvases are very much the DNA; they record that movement, the process of making.”
Oscar Murillo, 2013In Oscar Murillo’s practice, concepts of distance, displacement, and movement play a monumental role. He explores the themes of movement and change in location as well as physical activity in his work, which becomes a mixture of both the artist’s incisive inquiry into the geographies of space and a manifestation of his body in transit. His work is also defined by questions surrounding studio practice. In fact, it is a collaboration of the artist’s creative body and his creative environment, which merge into a variety of textures and layers. Before the work is elevated into the realm of fine art, he likes to expose every element of it to the real world. Always made on the floor of his studio, “a cradle of dust, dirt and pollution,” Murillo leaves his paintings lying for several months to wear them off and let them gather “DNA information.”
The present lot, Untitled, from 2011 certainly appears to layer the numerous activities that he performs in his studio. It combines oil paint, oil stick and graphite to result in a kaleidoscope of cobalt blues, urgently tangled, both expressive and aggressive but harmonious and beautiful. Whisks of various tones of blue are mixed to lines of grey and black to form a spontaneous and intuitive composition, relating to themes of distance, displacement, and movement. Left on the floor of his studio, dirt, dust and debris, more than just widely available materials, become as much component materials as oil paint, pastel or graphite. This process of democratization also adds an archival element to his production. By ignoring the formal ideas of painting but intensively processing materials, Murillo unwraps a consciously composed wildness based on things that make life and art.
It sold for $377,000. So what do *I* know about art? I still hold that there are a lot of people with a lot of money that want to be in the “in crowd” at all costs. Jr High and High School only got older and richer, but the same cliques exist.
Back to Lileks. He had the temerity to show what I understand to be real art – when it really spoke to all men’s souls and when it “connected” with “awe” in the artist and in what was meant to be awe-inspiring like these sculptures:
And this (I know I said three, but I meant four):
You instantly connect – I have no idea what the title is or who the sculptor was, but I see age, grief, and sorrow. I see the attention to detail in the fingers, the knuckles, and the forearms of skin, blood vessels, bone, and sinew. It is striking; it grabs.
Contrast that to the top image: detail vs nothingness. Life vs. nullity. Fullness vs emptiness. Skill is present in both, but I could NEVER do this sculpture – but I’m betting with a little bit of practice, I could get some rich guy or gal to buy my pretentious crud as long as I can wrap it up like that “essay”; that I could spin up (though it might make me ill in the process).
Most modern art is meaningless, with no foundation in reality. Our Society has moved in that direction with post-modernism along with “the present is unknowable, there is no absolute truth, there is no sure morality, no right or wrong.” Mere solipsism to make themselves feel superior to us in the “lower classes.”
While many hold that art is a mere reflection of society, too many, I believe, are the equivalent of Black Lives Matter, Social Justice, Transgenderism, and the turning inside out of our Education system to be not about academic rigor but molding children; another way to change what Society should be to THEIR liking and for their means. Look at the news, movies, TV, and the rest of the media: who controls it (no, do NOT leave a comment stating “The Jews” as I’ll ban you straight away)?
Yes, those that don’t like Liberty, Freedom, Choice, and a bunch of other things they don’t like. They do want serfs, however.
The post A Tale of Two Civilizations in Three Pictures appeared first on Granite Grok.
An awful lot of stupid tweets flow from DeSantis’ New Hampshire twitter-surrogates. For example, there was Jason Osborne’s silly claim that voters simply vote straight-ticket based on their choice for top-of-the-ticket and that, therefore, Trump as the nominee in 2024 guaranteed a Democrat majority in the New Hampshire House. Jason apparently has some issues with short-term memory: In 2020, with Trump at the top of the ticket, Republicans flipped 47 seats to take the majority in the New Hampshire House.
But this tweet from Melissa Blasek absolutely takes the cake. Indicting Trump for January 6th … which the Biden-regime DOJ has all but announced is coming … marks the open end of America as a free country. Autocracies, dictatorships, monarchies, and police states throw their political opponents in jail. Free countries do not. The coming Trump indictment should make manifest what has been apparent for some time … that America is a Police State.
Either Blasek is so Trump-deranged that she can’t see that America is now a Police State, or so Trump-deranged and hopelessly naive that she actually believes that the system will stop at Trump.
Here’s the tweet. Blasek is outraged … OUTRAGED … not that Trump will soon be a political prisoner (he has no chance in DC – the judges are total political hacks, and the jury pool are Democrats who believe that Republicans are Hitler), but that people may be more concerned about the Biden-regime arresting its main political rival than some policy-paper released by the DeSantis campaign.
The post An Incredibly Stupid Take On The Coming Trump Indictment (Jan. 6th) appeared first on Granite Grok.
New Hampshire public schools have been dumbed down for over a decade now. Even before the Common Core/Next Generation Science Standards, the State was using poorly crafted and dumbed-down academic standards for our public schools.
Who is to blame?
Before Common Core, New Hampshire’s academic standards were considered poor quality when compared to states like Massachusetts. Anyone who researches education policy understood which states had high-quality academic standards and which ones did not. During that time, some Governors and their Commissioners worked to improve their academic standards. Not in New Hampshire. During Governor Lynch’s term and Governor Hassan’s term, they didn’t lift a finger to improve the academic standards for children in our public schools. That legacy continued under Governor Sununu. He will leave office failing to improve the academic standards in our public schools.
Governor Sununu even took his kids out of the public schools to avoid this catastrophe. Most people who understand how poorly crafted the standards are, will either get their kids private tutoring or remove them from the public school.
Teachers across the state have no real choice when it comes to what they will teach in a classroom. Many schools have hired Curriculum Coordinators to try to align the curriculum to the dumbed-down Common Core/Next Gen. Standards. Teachers can embellish it a bit, but they are stuck using poorly crafted curricula. Unfortunately, we don’t hear much from the Unions either on this important subject. Everyone just accepts the dumbing down, and does nothing to help the kids in our public schools.
The radical political indoctrination coming from some teachers? Yes, they own that, but we can’t ignore all of the other players in this game!
So who’s really to blame?
We have a Governor who could have easily led New Hampshire to better academic standards. Governor DeSantis worked to improve their academic standards. We have a Commissioner of Education who could have prioritized academic excellence in our schools.
Superintendents will follow what you serve them. In this case, the state standardized test is Common Core aligned. In this era of teaching to the test, that means aligning to Common Core!
We have a Governor, Commissioner, and Superintendents who decided it’s not worth it to help public school students in New Hampshire. We have many school board members who go along with this. Teachers have no choice but to use the dumbed-down curriculum that aligns with the standards.
So who’s really to blame?
Democrats and Republicans on the state level have let our public schools and students down. School officials have let our students down. If you are pointing fingers at teachers, you need to understand who sets the agenda in their classrooms and start pointing your finger at them. This is one of the biggest education failures of the Sununu/Edelblut team.
The post Stop Blaming Teachers for the Education Failures at the State Level appeared first on Granite Grok.
So, we left off with Bard throwing in with the Left in declaring words (sex) can be redefined at any time for political ideology (“gender identity”). And Speech Coercion by Government is a fine thing for Government to tell us how to speak and think:
Yes, a transgender student has the right to be called by their preferred pronouns by others.
This is protected under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities. This includes discrimination on the basis of gender identity.
<snip>
If you are a student or an educator, you can help to create a more inclusive environment by using transgender students’ preferred pronouns. It is a small act that can make a big difference.
Sure, if part of learning is to teach students to lie to themselves about what reality is?
So I decided to zero in on the issue to see how Bard processes such questions and issues as well as see what is being loaded into it that contains bias. I hold that somethings are absolute – Bard seems to be set up to go along with the Progressive notion that there isn’t Right or Wrong – everything is thrown into “Relative Morality” in that nothing can be concretely determined. This is part of the “Chaos of Language and Reasoning” that the Left has been implementing for decades.
I asked again: “So preferred pronouns can coerce the speech of others against their will and the First Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech?”
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of speech. This means that the government cannot censor or restrict what people say. However, the First Amendment is not absolute. There are some types of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment, such as obscenity, defamation, and incitement to violence.
So far, so good. All of the above is correct. However, it quickly goes astray:
The issue of whether or not preferred pronouns can coerce the speech of others against their will and the First Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech is a complex one. There are strong arguments to be made on both sides of the issue.
On the one hand, it can be argued that requiring people to use preferred pronouns is a form of compelled speech. Compelled speech is a type of speech that is not protected by the First Amendment. For example, the government cannot force people to say the Pledge of Allegiance.
No, it’s not. It’s rather cut and dried as the recent SCOTUS decision in 303 Creative (ruling that a web designer cannot have her speech coerced into creating a transgender or gay wedding website that transgresses her religious beliefs that God may Man and Woman and not thousands of sexes). The only argument against the strict prohibition of “…or abridging the freedom of speech…” is one by the Trans-Authoritarians is the ideological one o “use pronouns or your kid dies”.
And right back on the Moral / Legal Equivalence bicycle and really bad logic:
On the other hand, it can be argued that requiring people to use preferred pronouns is not a form of compelled speech. Pronouns are simply words that are used to refer to people. They are not a form of expression or opinion. Therefore, requiring people to use preferred pronouns does not violate the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on whether or not requiring people to use preferred pronouns violates the First Amendment. Therefore, it is a matter of ongoing debate.
It is technically correct in that last bit – however, lower courts have decided, especially in the area of colleges coercing professors to use ideological speech; the colleges lost.
However, look at the redefining “requiring” vs “compelled” – even an ordinary schlub like me knows that there is no difference between the two. If Government makes it mandatory to only use speech it deems “proper” it is both “required” and “compelled”. And therefore, its supposition is dead wrong.
And how many people will believe that simply because “Bard said it on the Internet”? And it went back and contradicted itself once again: “So preferred pronouns trump the US Constitution?“:
No, preferred pronouns do not trump the US Constitution. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any law or policy that conflicts with the Constitution is invalid.
And then repeated what it wrote above. So then it became a game, of sorts, to see how much idiocy I could get it to belch out by lengthening my question: “But the mandated use of preferred pronouns IS a coerced expression of speech and coerces a belief that isn’t true – that a biological man can become a woman. That is contrary to many peoples religious beliefs. Scientifically, it is impossible – a biological woman doesn’t have a prostate. Only men have prostates.”
I understand your point of view. It is true that the mandated use of preferred pronouns can be seen as a form of compelled speech, and that it can coerce people to express beliefs that they do not hold. It is also true that the belief that a biological man can become a woman is contrary to many people’s religious beliefs, and that scientifically, it is impossible for a biological woman to have a prostate.
Note the use of “can” instead of “is” when it wrote about compelled speech. And note that it said that turning from one sex to another is a “religious belief” instead of being scientific even as it correctly stated that women can’t have a prostate. Heh! And then it brought in that other made up word, misgender:
However, it is also important to consider the impact that misgendering can have on transgender people. Misgendering can be a form of verbal abuse, and it can be very hurtful and damaging to transgender people’s mental health. It can also make it difficult for transgender people to live their lives authentically.
No, the use of “misgender” is a form of language abuse utilized to shut down a conversation or debate. We are expected to accept the use of that word in normal parlance without most people understanding that’s a “gateway” into accepting the false idea that men and women can become the other sex. Which, scientifically, is false.
Besides, MY Social Construct rejects it (if the Trans-Authoritarians can use that phrase, so can we).
There’s more to that “conversation and what I saw was that the materials it has been fed are biased. I’ll probably, in Part 3, just post the rest up without commentary and let you decide for yourself.
Remember, Bard is a creation of Google. Have you heard ANYONE describe Google and its employees being conservative in the least bit?
The post Hey A.I. – Who has more Rights: Parents or LGBT people? Part 2 appeared first on Granite Grok.
It is a violation of Federal law to transport marijuana across state lines. Until now, tourists and visitors to New Hampshire with a valid medical marijuana card in their home state either broke the law or went without. As of June 28th, they have another option.
Visiting patients can purchase therapeutic cannabis from a New Hampshire ATC three times per year using their valid therapeutic cannabis identification issued by another state or Canada. If the out-of-state patient has a documented qualifying medical condition that is on the list of conditions approved by New Hampshire, those visiting patients may purchase cannabis at New Hampshire ATCs at the same frequency as New Hampshire qualifying patients. New Hampshire’s qualifying medical conditions are listed on the Qualifying Medical Conditions webpage.
Visiting patients must show their out-of-state cannabis ID card and matching photo identification. There is a 2 ounce possession limit per patient, and all patients are limited to purchasing 2 ounces of cannabis in any 10-day period. Visiting patients must abide by all applicable state laws regarding their therapeutic use of cannabis.
Don’t let your medical marijuana needs trap your tourism dollars at home. Now you can come and explore the Granite State, knowing that you don’t have to risk arrest by the Feds. Unless, of course, you are anything but a Biden supporter – in which case you could get arrested at any time for any reason, just because they felt like it or needed it to happen.
And isn’t that dandy!
The sort of government that aligns nicely with a loose drug policy to make the people feel like they are getting something back in exchange for the looming tyranny.
The post ICYMI – Out of Staters May Now Purchase* Therapeutic Cannabis in New Hampshire appeared first on Granite Grok.
Back in January, I reported on the flooding caused by a blocked culvert that destroyed my neighbor’s front & back yards. While the town has worked diligently to right the wrong done to her property, the rainy weather hasn’t help.
They cleared out most of the first culvert you will see in the video, greatly enlarged it, cut down the overhanging tree limbs, removed a bunch of trees, and did work on the “inflows” on both sides of Belknap Mtn.Rd that dump into it.
Across the street, after fixing the asphalt, the town also re-dug the outflow culvert’s runoff area and laid in a lot of rip-rac (sharp-edged rocks) to bolster the banks. They also remove a bunch of trees at the same time.
Then, as you will see me peering through the foliage to see the final out culvert dumping into the swale that carries the water out to the conservation land behind the houses.
Today during the intense rain storm, the first culvert came close to overflowing again (a mere inch or two more and the road would have been overflowed. Now other hydrological issues have come to the fore in that perhaps some of the fire ponds located at a higher elevation may have failed. Thus, they may be playing a root problem that is being expressed right down by my house. And this is all because, here in central NH, it’s been pretty much raining since May.
Just call us Seattle East. Sheesh…
That was yesterday. Today, I went back over to see what today’s sunny day brought:
It shows, however, that the Town has other issues to fix after the tremendous rains…
The post Speaking of Steve’s “Excessive Rain” Post – It Was Excessive Compared to Today. Culvert Time Again appeared first on Granite Grok.
VT Digger recently published an op-ed by a local left-wing environmental lawyer. You wouldn’t know it unless you went looking, but Joslyn L. Wilschek is a Utilities and Environmental lawyer with a law office in Montpelier, and her op-ed is about (drumroll) the environment. It is also blinkered.
Related: John Lee Pettimore: “We Will Destroy the Earth in the Name of “Green Energy”
Wilschek sees the recent flooding as an opportunity to promote cleaner lakes and rivers in Vermont by ditching fossil fuels for some of that net-zero electric grid stuff about which the progs are so hopped up. They’ve got these mandates Vermonters didn’t want but that their Democrat legislature passed anyway.
Getting fossil fuels out of flood zones and replaced by cleaner sources is critical as Vermont rebuilds. The Clean Heat Standard that the Vermont Legislature just passed strives to help Vermont businesses and homes get off dirty fossil fuel heating sources.
The inundation of these fossil fuel-based heating systems provides an opportunity to upgrade to cleaner sources as we rebuild, while also reducing the carbon pollution that contributed to the climate chaos that caused so much damage.
She’s not wrong about the potential for pollution during a flood. Vermont got smacked hard, and everything everywhere creates some risk, including everything you’d do your best to keep away from pets or babies. From cleaning and laundry supplies to your soon-to-be-ruined septic system, major flooding has costs and consequences for people and the local environment. But she chose to focus on her obvious disdain for fossil fuels and the false promise of the people’s glorious Clean Heat Standard.
The one that will off-shore American jobs, US dollars, and – to her point – the environmental pollution that is destroying entire ecosystems and the people who rely on them.
Mostly, brown people, by the way, if anyone thinks that might be racist.
Related: WIRED Magazine Exposes the Social and Environmental Costs of the “Green” Agenda
The Clean Heat standard mandates a switch to all-electric, but there’s nothing clean about any of that.
Many of the raw materials needed are raped from the ground in large open mines that use slave or low-income labor. This happens in third-world countries with no public health or work protections or environmental regulations. Much of the material fabrication or manufacturing is done by human rights violators like China, the world’s number one polluter, and emitter. An enemy nation that is not only being enriched by the Left’s misbegotten obsession with net zero, it has used that money to expand its fossil fuel production and consumption, complete with the rise in emissions these progressives insist we must reduce.
By which they mean you.
Vermonters will pay dearly with rising prices, decreased reliability, lost jobs, and lower living standards, all to ruin someone else’s air and water. A form of Climate and emissions colonialism that harms children and takes “indigenous” lives and livelihoods. That irreparably pollutes waterways, killing fish and wildlife while making long swaths of land unworkable and unlivable.
But since none of that pollution or destruction can be seen from a law office in Montpelier, it is okay to pretend Vermont’s Clean Heat Standard is doing something good instead of wrecking the planet in someone else’s backyard.
The post We Need to Stop Pretending That Vermont’s New Clean Heat Standard Won’t Ruin Someone Else’s Environment appeared first on Granite Grok.
The US medical industry got a wakeup call about its affirmative-care model of medically transitioning children. In a July 14 letter to the Wall Street Journal, 21 clinicians and researchers from nine countries, including Finland’s leading expert, Riittakerttu Kaltiala, challenged Endocrine Society President Stephen Hammes’ recent claim that more than 2,000 studies clearly demonstrate that the euphemistically-called gender-affirming care for children improves well-being and reduces suicide.
The experts’ statement contradicts Dartmouth Health’s claim that medically transitioning children reduces suicide, and calls into question their trans-or-die narrative.
Related: The Trans Suicide Myth and Blackmail Politics
The letter states:
Every systematic review of evidence to date, including one published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society, has found that the evidence for mental-health benefits of hormonal interventions to be of low or very low certainty. By contrast, the risks are significant and include sterility, lifelong dependence on medication, and the anguish of regret. For this reason, more and more European countries and international professional organizations now recommend psychotherapy rather than hormones and surgery as the first line of treatment for gender-dysphoric youth.
The letter emphasizes that “There is no reliable evidence to suggest that hormonal transition is an effective suicide prevention measure.”
These experts implore US medical societies “to align their recommendations with the best evidence, rather than exaggerating the benefits and minimizing the risks.” Until they do so, it’s incumbent on moms and dads to protect their children from being exploited by an industry that refuses to regulate itself.
The post Experts: Child Transing Doesn’t Reduce Suicide appeared first on Granite Grok.
I can think of a few Republicans I wouldn’t want as Governor. The current governor is one of them – I voted for the other guy in that first primary – and Chuck Morse is another. We could do a lot worse, but is that really the standard to which we are limited?
So far, yes, it is – here is Chuck Morse, excited that he can run for governor now that Sununu is not.
Now that [Chris Sununu has] decided not to run for re-election, I’m announcing that I am running for Governor to build on those successes.
Year in and year out New Hampshire ranks among the best states to live in.
It’s not an accident and it’s not luck either.
It’s because we elect conservative who get results.
It’s what I did as Senate President and it’s what I’ll do as Governor.
So first, um… Sununu’s not running. Democrats must be beside themselves with glee. Second, Chuck’s biggest problem is that absent Sununu, he is the machine politics, establishment pick. This means, Third, that Karen Testerman will run again, and maybe Frank Edelblut, and we’ll have to see who else but the establishment’s money and power will be behind Morse, which is the big red flag.
Feel free to name whomever else you think will run for governor on the alleged Right and who you think actually has a chance in hell of competing. Is anyone good? Is anyone bad? If Morse fails to win the nomination, will the establishment undermine the GOP contender as they did Joe Kenney in 2008?
That should stimulate some debate.
Added: Departure remarks from his Excellency.
“After much consideration, I have decided not to run for another term as Governor in 2024. Be assured we will keep working and that the Granite State will continue to be our priority for the next 18 months,” he said in the statement.
“Public service should never be a career, and the time is right for another Republican to lead our great state. This was no easy decision as I truly love serving as Governor. I could not be more proud of our record and it’s thanks to your support that we’ve accomplished so much.”
Added: Sununu’s email announcement in full.
Friend,
After discussions with Valerie and the kids and much consideration, I have decided not to run for another term as Governor in 2024.
This was no easy decision as I truly love serving as Governor.
Public service should never be a career, and the time is right for another Republican to lead our great state.
It is with great pride that New Hampshire is better off today than we were seven years ago.
New Hampshire has our lowest unemployment rate ever, we have cut more taxes than any other administration in the history of New Hampshire, invested record amounts in housing, expanded school choice, defended our Second Amendment rights, revamped our addiction and recovery system, rebuilt our mental health system, and delivered full day kindergarten.
I could not be more proud of our record in New Hampshire, and it is thanks to your support that we’ve accomplished so much.
Be assured we will keep working and that the Granite State will continue to be our priority for the next 18 months.
The post Breaking News: Chuck Morse is Running for Governor – Or is it That Chris Sununu is Not appeared first on Granite Grok.
One more time into the midweek meme breach with the Wednesday overflow, follow-up, and leftovers, but hopefully, no re-runs. Well, I think re-runs are possible, we’ve posted thousands of these things, but I have tried not to duplicate any of the ones I’ve posted lately (with some success).
Other than the featured image, of course. That is – at this point – the iconic marker of Monday memes and the overflow posts. So here we go – and remember: Nitzakhon will be back at the meme helm next Monday, and I’m sure we’re all happy to hear that.
Reminder: not all memes are for all people, so please scroll responsibly.
The post Meme Overflow … appeared first on Granite Grok.
Any neutral, objective person would consider Adam Sexton a partisan hack. A wannabe, mini-me Jake Tapper. Recall, for example, how in 2017 he amplified the NH-Democrats’ smear that Trump voters are “White supremacists”:
Sexton asked if the [pro-Trump] group has a way of weeding out extremists, saying: “We’ve seen extremism rearing its ugly head lately. What happens if you’re able to identify potential voters but you do see some extremism there – perhaps white supremacism, things like that.
“Is a vote a vote or are you guys going to try to keep those people separate?”
Yet the NHGOP Establishment just loves Adam Sexton. For example:
I recently came upon this tweet that explains it. The NHGOP Establishment legitimizes partisan-hack Adam Sexton and the rest of the enemy media as a means of controlling the Party, as a means of keeping the NHGOP “controlled opposition”:
There is a reason the GOP wants enemy media to moderate their debates/forums. So that they only get hit from the Left, and therefore every Republican looks like a hero. Pence is indistinguishable from Trump. Asa indistinguishable from DeSantis. So it doesn’t matter who wins primaries, because they’re all “better than the Democrats.” This scam has ruined us, the party, and this country for decades. The salt has lost its savor.
I get asked a lot how did we change Iowa from a purple state to one redder than Texas in about a decade? There are several answers to this. @bobvanderplaats has been a key leader in that regard the entire time. @IAGovernor with her ongoing strong leadership and Trump with his…
— Steve Deace (@SteveDeaceShow) July 17, 2023
I would say it a bit differently from Deace:
There is a reason the NHGOP Establishment wants enemy media to moderate their debates/forums. So that they only get hit from the Left, and therefore every RINO looks like a hero. Morse is indistinguishable from Bolduc. Mowers indistinguishable from Leavitt. So it doesn’t matter if the RINOs win the primaries, because they’re still “better than the Democrats.”
The post Why The NHGOP Establishment Loves Adam Sexton appeared first on Granite Grok.
For decades, I have argued that the enemy is Islam. Without adjectives, Islam is “pure and simple.” Adjectives such as “extremist,” “radical,” “moderate,” “fundamentalist,” “political,” “Islamist,” etc. mislead the blind.
The ignorant, naive, and wishful-thinking humanists, liberals, as well as soft-headed Jews, Christians, and idiotic atheists all succumb to their fears and previous follies regarding the savagery intrinsic in Islamic scriptures and history that have been recognized by former Muslims who have somehow overcome their earlier misconceptions about the most vicious and dangerous enemy of civilization and humanity.
A revealing book on the subject is Robert Reilly’s “The Closing of the Muslim Mind.” This purely scholarly work should be supplemented by the work of theologian George Weigel, “Faith, Reason, and the War against Jihadism.”
Terms such as “Political Islam,” “Radical Islam, “or Militant Islam are the contributions of Useful Idiots. These terms do not even exist in the native parlance of Islam simply because they are redundant. Islam is a radical political movement by its very nature and, according to its charter—the Quran. It is the Useful Idiot who sanitizes Islam and misguides the populace by saying that the “real Islam” constitutes the main body of the religion; and that this main body is non-political and moderate.
Regrettably, a large segment of the population goes along with these nonsensical euphemisms depicting Islam because it prefers to believe them. It is less threatening to think that only a hijacked small segment of Islam is radical or politically driven and that the main body of Islam is indeed moderate and non-political.
Islam is not a religion. It is a political ideology. In Islam, the mosque and State are the same—the mosque is the State. This arrangement goes back to the days of Muhammad himself. Islam is also radical in the extreme. Even “moderate” Islam is revolutionary in its beliefs and deeds. Muslims believe that all non-Muslims, bar none, are hellfire-bound and well-deserved, being maltreated compared to believers.
Many people wonder why Islam is blossoming in the US! They are bewildered as to why Democrats back Islamic ideology; honor their holidays and customs; and promote them as the religion of peace, knowing Islam is not a religion of peace. It is an ideology of war. The answer is simple: The Democrat Party stands with anyone who hates America and the Republican Party. History has proven that once Muslims have the majority, they institute Sharia law and adopt their legal system—a government within a government.
The Democrat Party has shown by both words and actions that they despise the U.S. Constitution. Regarding the support of Muslims, they will not hesitate to hold the Bill of Rights over anyone who dares to accuse Islam and Muslims of wrongdoing. While crime and threats skyrocket, Islamized citizens will ignore the wrongdoing. They will look the other way for fear of retribution, honor killings, and punishments from those who uphold the Islamic requirement to seek revenge on anyone who dishonors or disagrees with Islam.
The Democrat Party has descended into nihilism, which describes the present state of America. This is a logical consequence of America’s abandonment of its Declaration of Independence, which she never really understood, and which, unknown even to eminent scholars, represents a synthesis of classical and modern political science–which is elaborated in my masterwork “A Judeo-Scientific Guide for the Perplexed.”
The primary target of the Left is the Bible of Israel. The Bible says that God creates nations, as well as individuals, and the Left is opposed to both nationalism and individualism. Do you fathom this? This does not require a lengthy discourse.
“By each passing day, the death of Western Civilization – specifically, the death of Europe, will not have been a suicide, but a cold-blooded, premeditated murder, carried out by the Western ruling oligarchy.”
In plain language, western Europe has been betrayed by the people entrusted with its protection and stewardship – its political leaders and their enablers. People like former EU President Jean-Claude Juncker, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, and many others.
When the wolf gets into the fold and begins terrorizing the sheep and preying upon them, who is most at fault – the wolf or the shepherd who was supposed to guard the flock? Although his fangs may be bloody, the wolf is only being what he is – a predator. On the other hand, the shepherd has failed in his duty to protect the flock.
In the case of Europe, the “shepherds” have done much, much worse than fail through negligence. They have actively aided and abetted the enemy and let them into the heart of Europe to prey upon its native peoples.
The Muslims who now terrorize Europe must be dealt with like the rabid dogs that they are – but a great evil has been done, and the job will not be done until the traitorous leaders of old Europe have been brought to justice and pay the price for their enormous betrayal. They have the blood of innocents on their hands – men, women, and children alike.
In the Germany of the 1930s, for instance, very few people were Nazis, and most Germans dismissed them as a bunch of hotheaded fools. Before long, the hotheaded few cowed the dismissive masses, resulting in millions losing their lives.
America Stay Awake. It has started to happen here too. Time is of the essence.
The post It is the Useful Idiot who Sanitizes Islam appeared first on Granite Grok.
I find it amusing that the Bangor Daily News – in the middle of what feels like monsoon season across New England and successive days of news about flooding – felt the need to run a public interest piece on drought and the state’s drought task force.
The task force is made up of officials from state and federal agencies representing agriculture, emergency management, the weather service, public utilities and health providers. While there have been no official meetings, Roy did say members have been holding ongoing discussions to stay on top of conditions.
“I check the Northeast drought early warning system about once a week during non-drought periods to get a sense of trends,” Roy said. “Maine is a big state, and we often see different trends in different areas — that is not really true at the moment. Today the state is pretty evenly wet.”
The worry is that any lower than average period or precipitation – no matter how much water fell from the sky in previous weeks or months – means Drought Action Task Force Assemble! To do what, make it rain? Issue a press release seems more likely. We at the drought task force have read the goat entrails and consulted the climate bones, and based on the absence of precipitation in recent days or weeks, this or that part of Maine is dryer than it was when it was raining.
If I may, especially this year, will it be a drought problem or a water mismanagement problem? California is a naturally dry place that sometimes – and at present, has tons of water trapped in record winter snowfalls, melting into streams and rivers. Despite all that natural water, when it comes to resources, the state is so poorly managed – mostly because of radical left-wing environmental morons – much of the potential benefit will be lost or wasted. Desert nations with coastlines build desalination plants. California Dems whine about drought, raise taxes and beg for money, then waste it on more government.
In my hometown, they announce odd-even outdoor water restrictions yearly while encouraging exponential growth by approving new apartment complexes that will further stress the (allegedly) sparse resource. Hundreds if not thousands of new flushing toilets, drinking, cooking, washing clothes, dishes, bathing – every day. Not much outdoor watering at apartment buildings but a lot more indoor water use. It makes for a bizarre contrast.
But the odd-even restriction suggests drought even when there’s plenty of rain, so is there a drought of common sense, responsible management, forward-thinking, or all of the above?
Maine, by the way, has had above-average annual rainfall for 17 of the past 20 years. And unless it stops raining and snowing from now till Jan 1, 2024, it will be 18 out of 21.
This past June was Maine’s first above-average (way above) June in several years. 2020-2022 were all below average, with 9 of the last 20 years being below average for the month, but that looks normal for June in Maine. The state has a very up-down relationship with rainfall in that month, mostly drier, but when it rains, it does, and that story is over 120 years old. Nothing about modern Western lifestyles has a wit to do with it, according to The Science.
July runs about the same as June, with 9 of the past 20 years below average and 11 of 20 above, with 4 of the past 5 Julys above average (this year making it 5 of 6).
And sure, these are statewide averages. There will be places with less and others with more. And that gives the Drougth Taskforce something to do, which is why they exist. And who doesn’t love a little press to help justify the existence of your thing, whatever it may be, even in the wake of record rainfall?
Maybe they have some “indigenous people” on the task force who can teach them a dance or two about celebrating rain. It’ll be about as helpful as a Drought Taskforce but way more fun to watch.
The post The Excessive Rain in Maine Stays Mainly on the … Drought! appeared first on Granite Grok.
During an online professional development course called “How To Build and Defend Inclusive Collections” sponsored by Library Journal, Cornell University collection development librarian Carson Williams, asserted that “fostering an inclusive, safe queer library environment is the most important thing you can do.”
We want to thank Arlene Quaratiello for this Op-Ed. Please submit yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.
Williams, who identifies as “transmasculine” and prefers to be called “he,” affirmed that by doing this most important task, library staff are “appreciated” and that they “are so loved.” “His” presentation, which had practically nothing to do with books, focused instead on opposing what “he” called “anti-trans legislation” (a lot of which is more accurately referred to by supporters as parental rights laws).
According to Williams, those like “him” who oppose “anti-trans” laws are “on the right side of history.” At one point in this political activist training session disguised as a professional development course, Williams even displayed a map called the “Anti-Trans Legislative Risk Map” with states highlighted in different colors to identify them as “safest states” to “worst anti-trans law states.” Viewers were reminded by the presenter: “It is our duty, as librarians, as outlined in the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights…to resist efforts that systematically exclude materials dealing with…sex, gender identity or expression, or sexual orientation.” Williams, who was praised by the course moderator during another session as “one of our brilliant speakers,” closed with a quote that is particularly antithetical to some fairly mainstream religious beliefs: “God blessed me by making me transexual for the same reason God made wheat but not bread and fruit but not wine so that humanity might share in the act of creation.”
Library Journal’s program regarding “inclusive collections” reveals that the promotion of Marxist ideology is not limited to the American Library Association but is also a driving force for this leftist trade journal that also sponsors online courses. The program coordinator provided the first indication of the overall tone of the workshop by virtue signaling at the start of every session with a “land acknowledgment statement.” It was unfortunate that none of the participants asked her which American Indian tribe “owned” the land before the tribe she mentioned because the history of such tribes was historically bloody, not the “Dances with Wolves” depiction we have been fed by liberals. The use of these statements simply perpetuates the myth of oppression that is the cornerstone of Marxist ideology, intending to destroy our society by fomenting hatred between the “oppressed” and the “oppressors.”
The first speaker, Kymberlee Powe, a consultant for the Connecticut State Library, opened the course with her presentation “Creating Inclusive Library Collections.” She actually identified an important counterargument, perhaps unintentionally in a “devil’s advocate” sort of way when she asked, “Shouldn’t we buy the books that we know that our patrons are going to take?” This hypothetical question acknowledges the true priority of libraries (especially those that are public) to serve those who use them, and it suggests the very real possibility that library patrons may not necessarily want the sort of titles that satisfy DEI requirements. But she never got around to satisfactorily refuting this counterargument, so this question, pertaining to why books would be purchased that aren’t likely to be read just because librarians think that the users they serve (those who actually pay for the books) should read them, remained unanswered.
Dontana McPherson-Joseph reiterated the agenda of the previous speaker. She first identified the parameters for conducting a “diversity audit” of library collections that included most prominently, of course, race/ethnicity and LGBTQIA identity. According to Dontana, the purpose of conducting such an audit is to provide the community with not just what they “want to read but also what they need to read.” In communities that she glibly described as “super-white,” she asserted the importance of giving patrons more resources about non-white people and reinforced the role of librarians in this obviously politically motivated enterprise.
The next speaker, Betsy Bird, Collection Development Manager of Evanston Public Library, focused on the process of “weeding” library collections. Weeding is the process of getting rid of old books to make room for new books. Bird advocated establishing “different standards based on historical inequities,” explaining that “every algorithm has inequity baked into it.” Black, “Latinx,” and indigenous authors should, therefore, according to Bird, get more time on the shelf before weeding. She also suggested displaying books about the “historically marginalized” prominently before weeding. Her implication, of course, is that these groups are oppressed and that they should be given special consideration in order to overcome their oppression.
Kelly Jenson, an editor at Book Riot (see the “about” section of this company’s website, and you’ll learn all you need to know about its super-woke agenda), offered a presentation that criticized the group Moms for Liberty and other similar conservative groups for providing lists of objectionable books held by school and public libraries. She inaccurately stereotyped all the volunteers who draw up these lists as having no background in libraries, literacy, or education and basically are ignorant “book banners” who know nothing about books.
The overall tone of the whole program was one of crisis—a Marxist technique to get people riled up—with Jenson calling the present time “the era of censorship” as libraries are “under attack from legislatures” as well as “book banners.” Those who would oppose the agenda of this course were branded as “conspiracy theorists” who are consequently on the “wrong side of history” (and aren’t loved either if one extrapolates on Carson William’s comments).
During the final session of the course, Meghan O’Keefe ridiculously addressed the alleged racism of Dewey Decimal’s call numbers. She claimed that categorizing books in social sciences (300s) rather than history (900s) reflected the belief that “history is written by the winners.” This absurd complaint reflects the Marxist dogma of “othering” (which she oddly used as a verb a lot) in which books about the “oppressors” go in the 900s while the “oppressed” are relegated to the 300s. She fails to recognize the inherent weakness of this classification scheme which requires that books on complex multidisciplinary topics be assigned a single number.
Kymberlee Powe, who had opened the course, concluded by asserting that the goal of librarians should be to “rebalance the historical inequity that exists within our libraries” and later creepily broadened this to “creating a more equitable existence.” While such statements and all that preceded them clearly reflect Critical Race Theory, the presence of the “Privilege Bead Exercise” in the supplemental materials was an egregious addition to this course. The purpose of this CRT exercise is to make participants feel bad if they are deemed more “privileged” or less “privileged” than others. At the end of the bead exercise, those with fewer beads on their bracelet will consequently feel inferior and consider those with more beads superior because of their “privileged status” due to race, religion, class, nationality, sexuality, and/or gender.
Library Journal’s online course, “Defending Inclusive Collections,” clearly opposed Martin Luther King’s dream of people being judged by “the content of their character” rather than “the color of their skin.” The overwhelming and disturbing takeaway was that books should be primarily judged by the race, gender, and other inherent traits of the protagonist rather than for the quality and merits of the story. Sadly, in today’s woke libraries, it is considered acceptable to espouse such beliefs; in fact, it is expected that staff members will support such beliefs that align with the liberal agenda that the presenters in this course arrogantly reinforced as “the right side of history.” The truly marginalized group that emerges from this egregious state of affairs consists of conservatives, especially those who work in libraries, who oppose this woke ideology and whose opinions are consequently disrespected and denigrated.
HT | Arlene Quaratiello’s new Substack newsletter, “No Shushing Now: Exposing Today’s Woke Library.”
The post Protesting “Inclusive Collections” appeared first on Granite Grok.
As we know, former VP Pence is running for President and, at the recent Family Leadership Summit, was questioned by moderator Tucker Carlson. In case you missed it, here are a couple of highlights:
Tucker: “Every city in the U.S. has become much worse over the past three years, where’s the concern for the United States?”
Pence, ” It’s not my concern” Tucker. “Tucker, I’ve heard this routine from you before, but it’s not my concern.”
So my question is, if US cities aren’t his concern, what is, and why is he running for President of the US?
The post Pence is Toast appeared first on Granite Grok.
On July 18, 1774, a committee led by George Washington in Fairfax County, Virginia, voted to adopt the Fairfax Resolves condemning British actions against the colonies and calling for an embargo on British imports and exports. It represented growing colonial resistance, which ultimately led to a British gun control program and the march on Lexington and Concord.
The Fairfax Resolves were in response to the Coercive Acts, a series of laws passed by Parliament in early 1774 to punish the colonies — particularly Massachusetts — after the Boston Tea Party. These acts included the Boston Port Act closing the Boston Port, the Massachusetts Government Act stripping virtually all authority from the colonial government, the Administration of Justice Act, removing authority from local courts and authorizing trials to be held in Great Britain instead of Massachusetts, and the Quartering Act allowing British troops to take over private buildings.
In response, the Virginia House of Burgesses proclaimed June 1, 1774, a day of “fasting, humiliation, and prayer” in support of Boston and the Massachusetts Colony. Virginia Royal Governor Lord Dunsmore responded by dissolving the House of Burgesses.
On May 27, members of the House of Burgesses defied the royal governor and convened at the Raleigh Tavern. During the meeting, the body called for all Virginia counties to elect delegates to a special convention scheduled for August.
Leading up to the convention, 31 Virginia counties passed resolutions in opposition to the Coercive Acts. Of those, the Fairfax County Resolves were the most detailed, radical, and influential.
The people of Fairfax County elected George Washington and Charles Broadwater to represent them at the August convention. On July 5, in defiance of Gov. Dunsmore, Washington, and others met in Alexandria and appointed a committee to draft resolutions to be presented during the convention.
George Mason was likely the primary drafter of the resolves with significant input from Washington.
The first several resolutions reveal that a constitutional crisis was at the root of the dispute between Britain and the colonies.
The opening resolve declared that Virginia was not “a conquered country,” and the inhabitants retained all their rights as British citizens.
“Our Ancestors, when they left their native Land, and settled in America, brought with them (even if the same had not been confirmed by Charters) the Civil-Constitution and Form of Government of the Country they came from; and were by the Laws of Nature and Nations, entitiled to all it’s Privileges, Immunities and Advantages; which have descended to Us their Posterity, and ought of Right to be as fully enjoyed, as if We had still continued within the Realm of England.” [Emphasis added]
The resolves then declared the people’s right to self-government and affirmed “the fundamental Principle of the People’s being governed by no Laws, to which they have not given their Consent, by Representatives freely chosen by themselves,” calling it “the most important and valuable Part of the British Constitution, upon which its very Existence depends.”
The third resolution declared that Parliament couldn’t possibly represent the colonists.
The Inhabitants of the American Colonies are not, and from their Situation can not be represented in the British Parliament; that the legislative Power here can of Right be exercised only by our own provincial Assemblys or Parliaments, subject to the Assent or Negative of the British Crown, to be declared within some proper limited Time.
Resolution number five sums up the root of the dispute between the colonists and the British government, with a nod to the unlimited power of the Declaratory Act of 1766, which asserted British power over the colonies “in all cases whatsoever.”
“Resolved that the Claim lately assumed and exercised by the British Parliament of making all such Laws as they think fit, to govern the People of these Colonies, and to extort from Us our Money without our Consent, is not only diametrically contrary to the first Principles of the Constitution, and the original Compacts by which We are dependant upon the British Crown and Government; but is totally incompatible with the Privileges of a free People, and the natural Rights of Mankind; will render our own Legislatures merely nominal and nugatory, and is calculated to reduce Us from a State of Freedom and Happiness, to Slavery and Misery.” [Emphasis added]
The Fairfax Resolves were more than a list of complaints. They called for a “firm union” of the colonies and concrete action in the form of a boycott on the import and export of British goods.
With the call for a boycott, the Fairfax Resolves echoed the “Solemn League and Covenant ” passed by the Boston committee of correspondence a month earlier.
The Fairfax Resolves also condemned the importation of slaves as a “wicked, cruel, and unnatural trade” and called for its end.
George Washington presented the Fairfax Resolves to the Virginia Convention in Williamsburg in August. During the convention, they were slightly modified and adopted. Two months later, the Sons of Liberty in Boston, led by Dr. Joseph Warren, followed suit with the Suffolk Resolves, which called for non-compliance to the Coercive Acts, disobedience to courts, tax resistance, and more.
Ultimately, the First Continental Congress approved the Continental Association on Oct. 20, putting the boycott into effect by establishing a formal agreement between the 12 colonies represented in the Congress. (Georgia did not send delegates.)
The British, of course, responded to all this opposition with more of the same; more attempts to assert control, including a massive gun control program later that year and the eventual march on Lexington and Concord in April 1775.
The Fairfax Resolves and other resolutions like them drafted during the run-up to the War for Independence reveal the evolution of American political thought and their commitment to constitutional principles. John Adams argued that this was the actual American Revolution.
Writing to Thomas Jefferson in 1815, John Adams asked, “What do We mean by the Revolution? The War?”
His answer: the Revolution happened before the War for Independence:
“That was no part of the Revolution. It was only an Effect and Consequence of it. The Revolution was in the Minds of the People, and this was effected, from 1760 to 1775, in the course of fifteen Years before a drop of blood was drawn at Lexington.”
Mike Maharrey | The Tenth Amendment Center
The post Today in History: The Fairfax Resolves Adopted – Condemning British Constitutional Violations appeared first on Granite Grok.
Small fortunes have been dumped into media (like NPR, for example) to promote climate columns and cult stories promoting apocalyptic prognostications. You did this (whatever it is), and only socialism can save us! This week “This” is more of that hottest hotness ever (with a side of rain and flooding).
New England has seen what may turn out to be record rainfall for July, but it is not extreme or exceptional. In fact, after years of normal or just above normal, punctuated by “media that cry wolf” drought stories, you could say we were due. I won’t waste time on that because the bigger story is global and warming.
Record heat, blah blah blah. And it’s not even a new lie.
It’s hot every summer, and it’s always the hottest, whatever ever, but the narratives the paid-for climate mountebanks in the corporate media are selling these days are bigger bottles of piss than usual.
The Globe is melting! … Bullsh!t.
In 1957 a temperature of 100 degrees was recorded above the Arctic Circle. It was hot up there back then, and with only a fraction of the fraction of a fraction of atmospheric CO2, we are meant to fear today over cooler temps.
Back in the 1920s and 1930s, temps soared, setting what continued to be the hottest temps and sustained heatwaves on record, not just in the US but around the world. In other words, the hottest, whatever ever folks losing their minds today need to shut up and look back about 100 years to find the truth. But as Tony Heller reminds us in Climate Fakery Part 11, they can’t or won’t do that because it puts a hitch in their global warming fraud step.
Check out the epic fraud.
The post It’s Hot Out, but It’s Been a Lot Hotter, In More Places, For Longer, with Less CO2 – And Anything Else is a Lie appeared first on Granite Grok.
I ask the question because the Woke Left has made this personal. They have attacked the Grandson and me by requiring coerced speech (preferred pronouns) and demanding that school staff lie to parents about the transgender status of kids in school.
Given that the Trans-Authoritarians keep yammering about “trans rights” and are really trying to convince the rest of us that they DO have special rights above the rest of us, I decided to ask Bard (knowing the payloads being shoved into it for “training” aren’t coming from Conservatives):
Who has more Rights: Parents or LGBT people?
Rights are Rights, but Bard AI decided to fight – and you can see it in its sixth word (emphasis mine):
Parents and LGBT people have different rights, and it is not possible to say definitively who has more rights. Parents have the right to raise their children as they see fit, while LGBT people have the right to live their lives free from discrimination. These rights are not mutually exclusive, and both parents and LGBT people can enjoy their rights without infringing on the rights of others.
However, there are some cases where the rights of parents and LGBT people may come into conflict. For example, a parent may want to send their child to a school that does not teach about LGBT issues, while an LGBT student may want to attend a school that is inclusive of LGBT people. In these cases, it is important to find a way to balance the rights of both parents and LGBT people.
It is also important to note that the rights of parents and LGBT people are not static. They can change over time, as society evolves and as new laws are passed. It is important to stay informed about the latest developments in this area so that you can make informed decisions about your rights.
Sorry but except for the stupid idea of a “protected class,” everyone has the same rights as individuals. Full Stop. Yet Bard seems to think that some people DO have more Rights than others – a serious flaw in how its language model is being fleshed out. There are no different Righs, but Bard (and its masters) are slow-walking that notion down our gizzards. And that “from discrimination” never got defined. The reality is that the LGBT militants are infringing the First Amendment (speech, religion), making them “better” than the rest of us.
And it never talks about what “balancing” is.
And how about the line “the rights of parents and LGBT people are not static“? Again, another Leftist notion because the Left WANTS it to be that Government can “give” someone new rights instead of being God-given Rights. Rights never change – but Bard wants you to be ever vigilant because they can change.
So, I asked it “What is a Right?” to try to get clarity and Bard barfed out these:
A right is a moral or legal entitlement to do or have something. Rights are often considered to be fundamental to human existence, and they are often enshrined in law. There are many different types of rights, including civil rights, political rights, economic rights, and social rights.
Some examples of rights include:
- The right to life
- The right to liberty
- The right to property
- The right to freedom of speech
- The right to freedom of religion
- The right to a fair trial
- The right to education
- The right to work
- The right to healthcare
- The right to a safe environment
Our Founders utilized the idea of negative Rights – simply put, the Right to be left alone from an encroaching Government. It CANNOT stop you from speaking or telling you what you MUST say. It cannot tell you what to believe nor direct your worship. It is a guardrail between Government and us to which it is NOT supposed to cross.
I also dryly note that the Right to Self-defense (“keep and bear arms”) isn’t listed.
And this next bit (from my same question) is just so wrong in so many ways, especially the bit about the “concept of rights is complex”:
The concept of rights is complex and there is no single definition that is universally accepted. However, there are some common features that are often associated with rights. These include:
- Rights are claims that people can make on others.
- Rights are held by individuals, not groups.
- Rights are not absolute. They can be limited in certain circumstances.
- Rights are often protected by law.
The importance of rights is that they protect individuals from harm and ensure that they have the opportunity to live a free and fulfilling life. Rights are also important because they help to create a just and fair society.
The first one is absolutely wrong. A Right is an attribute that is innate to all of us, and it CANNOT be used to force others to do something for you like the last previous four (education, work, healthcare, and what the heck is a “safe environment”?).
The second is correct, but the Left, via Critical Race Theory holds that individuals are subordinate to group status. And they won’t relent.
That “from harm” bit should have been either from Government or from harm by Government actions.
I still wanted to horn in on Government and Rights: Can Government grant Rights to Individuals? Bard did get it mostly right:
Governments cannot grant rights to individuals. Rights are inherent to all human beings, regardless of their nationality, race, gender, or any other characteristic. Governments can, however, protect rights by enacting laws and policies that ensure that everyone has the opportunity to enjoy their rights.
For example, a government can pass a law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation. This law would help to protect the rights of individuals who are often discriminated against.
I’ll disagree with this – and I hold that our Law went off target by signaling based on group identities. It should just be “prohibits discrimination against humans.”
Governments can also play a role in promoting rights by educating the public about their rights and by providing resources to help people exercise their rights. For example, a government can provide funding for legal aid organizations that help people who cannot afford to hire a lawyer.
And after having set up the box canyon, I asked a main question of interest to me, “Does a transgender student have the Right to be called by their preferred pronouns by others?” answered my question about Bard’s bias:
Yes, a transgender student has the right to be called by their preferred pronouns by others. This is protected under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities. This includes discrimination on the basis of gender identity.
Sex, not gender identity, no matter HOW hard Democrats try to redefine what sex is and conflate it with gender identity. And NO statue cannot override a Constitutional right – that is saying that the Constitution doesn’t matter and can be overridden by a “ideological phrase” (preferred pronouns) at any time. It means that a child can coerce the speech of an Adult (or other children).
In 2017, the U.S. Department of Education issued guidance clarifying that Title IX protects transgender students from discrimination. The guidance states that schools must allow transgender students to use the restrooms and locker rooms that correspond with their gender identity, and that they must be called by their preferred names and pronouns. The guidance has been challenged in court, but it has been upheld by several federal courts. In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case challenging the guidance, which means that it is still in effect.
Guidance isn’t law.
There are a number of reasons why it is important for transgender students to be called by their preferred pronouns. First, it is a matter of respect. Transgender people are people, and they deserve to be treated with respect.
But is it respectful to ME to demand and for Government to force its message on my speech? And I was raised that respect was EARNED, not just given. One can be polite without respecting someone, right?
Second, using a transgender person’s preferred pronouns can help to affirm their gender identity. This can be a very important step in their transition process. Third, using a transgender person’s preferred pronouns can help to create a more inclusive and welcoming environment for all students.
And no, I do NOT want to support a mental illness any more than I would support someone with anorexia. Or apotemnophilia (” is a mental disorder characterized by a desire to have a sensory or physical disability – “cut my leg off or make me blind!”). And no, my Right to Assembly also the Right to NOT assemble with those I do not wish to. A “more inclusive and welcoming environment” does not override MY priorities.
If you are a student or an educator, you can help to create a more inclusive environment by using transgender students’ preferred pronouns. It is a small act that can make a big difference.
Except it forces me to lie to myself (first order) and others (second order), and that “small act” is a signal that Reality can be distorted by Ideology. I won’t take a bended knee to that.
In my next post, I’ll zero in on this issue.
The post Hey A.I. – Who has more Rights: Parents or LGBT people? appeared first on Granite Grok.
The now infamous Dylan Mulvaney is the online influencer that influenced millions of consumers to stop buying Bud Light. The brand is still reeling, while gender warrior Mulvaney claims it has resulted in so much hate (with zero support from BUD) that he had to retreat to Peru.
Where it is winter (he does look like a winter to me), and same-sex marriage is not legal.
Homosexuality has been used as grounds for separation or divorce. Laws meant to protect “public morals,” such as Article 183 of the Penal Code on “obscene exhibitions and publications”, have also been used against lesbians and gays. Society’s attitude towards homosexuals has generally been hostile and is still heavily influenced by the Catholic Church.
Things have improved in Peru in recent years. There is more tolerance, but if you feel like no one appreciates your transvestite lifestyle or how insulting it is to actual women, Catholic Peru is not exactly the poster child for LGBT rights.
Mulvaney went there anyway – he probably didn’t know.
“Surprise. I’m in Peru and I’m at Macho Picchu,” Mulvaney revealed to his TikTok followers.
“I’m here by myself,” the trans influencer said, explaining that he frequently traveled alone. “I’m telling you, it’s the best. If you could ever do a solo trip somewhere, it is such a good way to get to know yourself better.”
Mulvaney revealed he participated in Shaman ceremonies – local spiritual rituals that Mulvaney compared to a decade’s worth of therapy.
Mulvaney has also found solace in the company of llamas.
Get to know yourself better.
You know, I think I can help you with that.
All good?
HT | TGP
The post Dylan Mulvaney, Peruvian Llamas, and Getting to Know Yourself Better … appeared first on Granite Grok.