We’ve all thought about it, some of us have written about it, and I think most of us understand the problems with the direction in which public education has gone. Scores are down, issues are up, and as with everything the political or cultural left touches, they are the ones that broke it.

I’d say on purpose, but it hardly matters how we got here from there if we’re talking about solutions. The systemic failure of public education is harming children. The politicization of the classroom is hurting children. The sex and gender cult (what I like to call Pubic Education) harms children.

Public education isn’t about education anymore. It’s not even about making children feel better. They are worse off academically and mentally, more confused, and at greater risk of self-harm than at any point in the history of government schooling.

If you’d like an excellent, condensed review, you might not be able to do better than this.

A parent, speaking to a school board, has the goods in a three-minute rant that includes this gem.

There is one goal for the educatioal system. It shoudl be to prepare children to enter careers to be productive members of society. It is not a counseling session. It is not a self-help area, it is not somwhere to find yourself, and we should not be lead by the children, for goodness sake.

You’ll want to hear the whole thing.

Here is the non-Twitter version for those who are averse to giving the platform their clicks.

BEST RANT EVER: This Mom speaks on behalf of the majority of American people and lets the school board know she’s seen enough of their woke policies and indoctrination of our children pic.twitter.com/6GgQsAPP3J

— • ᗰISᑕᕼIᗴᖴ • (@4Mischief) June 22, 2023

 

Boom.

Share It!

The post Almost Everything Wrong With Public Education Explained in One Parent’s 3-Minute Rant appeared first on Granite Grok.

To all those who are sending in memes, thank you!  Keep them coming please, as it helps me gather weaponry to fight the Left.  Please do share this post, and if you share an individual meme, consider mentioning you saw it on the Grok!

Speaking of, from this week, Monday Memes and Meme Overflow.  Also don’t forget my Survival Sunday feature.

 

*** Warning, a few possibly off-color ones, in case tender eyes are about ***

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

Ancient Roman Philosophers’ Life Lessons Men Learn Too Late In Life

 

 

I have become a big fan of stoicism, and read the book A Guide to the Good Life, about that life philosophy.  I was actually astonished at how much of it I was already practicing!

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

This video by Dr. Bill Warner of Political Islam about the Crusades is excellent:

 

Bill Warner, PhD: Jihad vs Crusades

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA

 

https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/brain-transparency.mp4

 

Ready for Brain Transparency? > World Economic Forum Annual Meeting | World Economic Forum (weforum.org)

In the US Constitution, the Fifth Amendment reads (bolding added):

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

You cannot be forced to testify against yourself.  But what if you can be forced to be mind-scanned to “be sure you’re telling the truth”?  Just to avoid perjury, you know.  Given the absolute rape of the Constitution that we’ve seen over the past years… the past decades… do you really believe that some pretext / rationalization for using this technology would never be found?

Orwell’s Thoughtcrime, indeed:

In contemporary English usage, the word thoughtcrime describes the personal beliefs that are contrary to the accepted norms of society…

Now, risking exposure.  (Sci fi aside: In “Songs of a Distant Earth” a suspect is interrogated by drugging them, then while they’re lacking control and awareness the interviewer asks YES/NO questions.  There’s little that can’t be ferreted out by unlimited YES/NO questions, especially when you don’t have the mental wherewithal to evade.  This looks to be well beyond that.)

Kind of related, at least to me, is this.  Not just Apple’s thing, now this.  Your entire life, from the moment you don them to when you doff them, recorded and doubtless analyzed.  Do they still hear what’s going on, as most smartphones – and certainly Alexa – does?  What you look at.  Where you go.  Etc.  Every single detail of your life, recorded – and analyzed.  And imagine if you have these on while you surf the web?  It sees what you see.

 

https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/alexa-glasses.mp4

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

I remember, not long after Trump was elected, hearing about some Dem bigwig saying that he needed to be taken down HARD, not just to get him out but to serve as an example so that “another one like him” never rises.  Related:

 

 

Remember this is their RELIGION.  This is not a war over politics or shades-of-grey on governance.  This is a life and death struggle for absolute power over the country, and the world.

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

On the Jab

 

How does anyone with a soul look at this and then say “Yes, sure, they’re ‘safe and effective'”?

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

An Inconvenient Truth: 24-1

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

   

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

This guy’s ducking all sorts of debates.  As I understand it, the pool of money that is available to go to this guy’s favorite charity if he goes on and debates RFK Jr. is over a million dollars (per the latest Tucker show – number 6 IIRC).

 

 

Dr. McCullough calls on Dr. Hotez to debate him on vaccine safety data – One America News Network (oann.com)

This reminds me of an interview, a few years ago, of Phil Jones of “climate change” fame who refused to even be in the same room with a climate change skeptic.  He physically got up and left the room while that critic was also interviewed.

People with the data and the courage of convictions don’t flee honest and free debate.  Indeed, my own personal experience is that people rally and rush to defend their point of view.  At least, people who honestly believe what they believe and think they have the data to prove it.

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

It’s OUR new world order

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

Pick of the Post:

 

 

Yes.  Yes they did.

And yet… there are people out there who are still holding out hope for 2024.

TINVOWOOT.

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

This is the last post for a while.

Please understand – I am “on” 24/7.  Even when dreaming, I’m seeing my America and my civilization under attack and even if sleeping I’m cogitating on how I can work to change things.  I spend enormous amounts of time gathering memes, organizing, posting.  Slowly writing too.  So I’m taking a breather for a few weeks.  I have to.  Stress from this is eating me up.

But don’t worry.  I’m not quitting.

 

 

I’ll be back.  I just need to massively detox and recharge.

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

Palate Cleansers:

 

 

All I ask is to win enough money in the lottery to have this, and to otherwise prove that having that much money won’t spoil me!

—

—

 

 

The post Friday Meme Overflow-Overflow appeared first on Granite Grok.

Read this.

Then ask yourself: If 70 or 75 percent of parents want (or don’t want) their children to be treated a certain way, how is it that teachers and administrators are able to ignore them?

It’s because we pretend that these positions are not political when in fact, they are.  So they are protected by things like unions and tenure in ways that can’t happen for positions like state representative, selectman, or school board member.

When you pay for something with taxes, it’s inherently political.  It’s delusional to pretend that it’s not. Someone teaching your child, helping decide how your child will be taught, or just interacting with your child in a tax-funded school is engaged in politics, and the only sane way to continue with tax-funded schools is to acknowledge this by putting those positions up for election.

It may take a little work to get your head around this, but consider that all the difficulties we’re seeing with respect to issues like gender and pornography — to say nothing of the fact that nearly 2/3 of students are below proficiency in reading! — are happening because we aren’t letting taxpayers have a significant voice in how their taxes are being spent.

Electing teachers sounds crazy… until you realize that the alternative is crazier.

 

The post Public Schools and Teachers Are Inherently Political, so Let’s Treat Them Accordingly appeared first on Granite Grok.

Are you looking for ways to spruce up your office? Whether in the home or the workplace, you all need a little inspiration when creating an environment that helps promote productivity and creativity. According to recent studies, having an inviting work area can help spark motivation and increase efficiency levels. Fortunately, there are many different solutions that you can implement into your workspace to jazz up your office space in no time. From vibrant colors to exciting textures, this blog post will provide unique ways to give your office an energizing makeover.

Hang Artwork or Photographs with Motivational or Thought-Provoking Messages to Inspire Creativity

Surrounding yourself with inspiration is a powerful tool. It’s easy to get bogged down in the day-to-day routine, and creativity can often get lost in the chaos. That’s where hanging artwork or photographs with motivational or thought-provoking messages comes in. It helps to keep creativity at the forefront of your mind. Whether it’s a quote from your favorite author or an image that sparks your imagination, having it on the wall in your workspace can help to motivate and inspire you throughout the day.

Switch Up the Lighting, Switch Out Any Fluorescent Bulbs for Softer LED Lights

Lighting is often an overlooked aspect of office space but can significantly impact productivity and mood. By switching out fluorescent bulbs for softer LED lights, you can create a more welcoming and comfortable environment for employees. Fluorescent bulbs can cause eye strain and headaches, while softer LED lights offer a more natural and calming light source. Not only will this switch improve the overall atmosphere of your workspace, but it can also reduce energy costs and be more eco-friendly.

Place a Few Plants or Flowers Around the Office to Bring Life and Color

Working in an office can sometimes be dull and draining, but adding a touch of nature can make a big difference. Placing a few plants or flowers around the office creates a refreshing and inviting atmosphere. The pops of color and fresh scents can boost your mood and stimulate your senses, ultimately increasing productivity and overall efficiency. Not to mention, plants have been known to purify the air, promoting a healthier work environment. So, why not bring a little bit of the outdoors into your workspace?

Invest in Comfortable Furniture That Is Both Stylish and Functional for Your Office Space

Your office space should be a reflection of yourself and your work ethic. You spend a considerable amount of time in your workspace, so it is essential to invest in comfortable, stylish, and functional furniture. This way, productivity is stimulated, and work can be accomplished without stress. A great way to achieve this is by investing in furniture that complements the look of your space while keeping your comfort in mind. When you are physically at ease, your concentration and creativity are exercised better, ensuring performance at its peak. So, explore various options and find the perfect mix of comfortable and stylish furniture for your office space.

Also, get some fun, comfy spaces for people to utilize and discuss ideas. A comfy bean bag chair is suitable for brainstorming and a quick break. If you’re on a budget, you can find an excellent alternative to Pillowsac that is just as comfy but can be cheaper. Additionally, opt for enjoyable activities, such as an arcade game table or a foosball table, to take a break from work.

Conclusion

Sprucing up your office space doesn’t have to be a difficult or expensive task. These simple solutions can quickly create an office atmosphere that promotes productivity and creativity. So, don’t be afraid to get creative and explore the possibilities of jazzing up your office space. Remember, a comfortable and inviting workspace can make all the difference in productivity.

The post Jazz Up Your Office Space with These Cool Solutions appeared first on Granite Grok.

It has been a couple of months since I have written about Nashua and the Court system. I continue to file RTK lawsuits, and the City continues to lock records down and limit access to City Hall.

The Court doesn’t have the responsiveness to address the Petitions that have come before it. So, for now, the City wins.

It is an election year, so Mayor Donchess wants to control the narrative, and the Mayor’s narrative is that a few people are destroying the City. Our Mayor is the unethical virtuous blame game expert.

The Administrative Office of the Court continues to be difficult to work with. The Office is not responsive, and it is unclear who should fix administrative problems in the Court. The Judges also play a role here, but it is nearly impossible to figure out what that is. The scheduling of RTK cases needs to be appealed to the Supreme Court for help. It is all so cumbersome.

As I wrote in the past, the Court was mis-scheduling Right-to-Know cases and creating expensive litigation trials designed to keep the public from accessing records. Administration Order AO 2013-08, directed by Justice Tina Nadeau, was intended to eliminate six court rules from cases that should be expedited. I am not a fan of Justice Nadeau’s performance in that she appears to have failed miserably in her oversight of the Court in verifying that orders are being followed. The abuse of this order has gone on for over ten years, and it has cost taxpayers millions of dollars and prevented litigants from achieving justice and fairness.

According to Judge Delker (Manchester), New Hampshire is the only state with language built into our Constitution (Part 1, Article 8) to protect our right to an open, accessible government. This, coupled with RSA 91-A, the Right-to-Know Law, was supposed to make our State something to marvel at. In 2015, New Hampshire ranked 49th, only beating out Wyoming by 1 point for the worst score on public access to information in the recent State Integrity Investigation published by the Center for Public Integrity. And this low score for New Hampshire is in “the worst performing category in the State Integrity Investigation,” according to an article on the report, where 44 states earned an F.

While 2015 may seem like a long time ago, it is not when it comes to improving records access in New Hampshire. The neutralizing of our unique complimentary Constitutional/Statutory rights has occurred at the hands of the Courts. They have created such high costs for access to information by ignoring the rules that only a select few can obtain governmental records. The opening of the Office of the Ombudsman will hopefully improve our access. In Nashua, the Court has worked handily with the City to stifle citizens. The City carries a reputation of long-standing corruption (a reputation I believe is well deserved), and ethical Attorneys don’t want to litigate here.

In May, Nashua citizens were able to get a series of RTK Petitions before the Court on May 8, 9, 10, & 11 (a hearing had been scheduled for the 12th as well.) as I pushed for corrections with the scheduling and was able to get the hearing schedules in line with AO 2013-08 and expedited.

It was a rather amazing week in Court in that there was Attorney Misconduct, Judicial misconduct, and a whole bunch of ridiculousness that has left me nauseated when recognizing that the legal/Judicial profession is largely unethical and dishonorable. That resulted in numerous complaints filed with the Attorney Discipline Office for misconduct against Attorney Bolton and Attorney Leonard. The ADO is not an office quick to fix problems. Cronies stick together, and they love applying confidentiality rules to threaten complainants into silence.

So, for everyone’s information, Nashua, according to our city website, is the “Welcoming City” and the “Transparency City.” Our Budget book puts Citizens at the top of the flow chart in the budget process – and -we are rated by WalletHub as the best of the best. It is the perfect place for like-minded people who like high property taxes.

In reality, citizens are threatened with arrest for standing in the public City Hall Hallways of Our Welcoming City, the doors to public offices are locked, records are hidden and destroyed, and citizens who don’t support the Mayor’s popular partisan position are treated like the gum on the bottom of a shoe. If you’re an independent thinker on the move, think twice about moving to Nashua.

 

The post Moving to Nashua – Think Twice appeared first on Granite Grok.

Are you bored with your current home décor and want to make changes but feel you can’t afford it? You don’t need a huge budget to revamp your home – just creativity, imagination, and the right supplies. This blog post will give you 4 simple tips that will help guide you on how to create an affordable look with dramatic results. Hopefully, these ideas inspire you as you embark on a redecoration journey. Keep reading for more information.

Make a Statement with a Colorful Front Door to Create an Inviting Entryway

Your front door is the gateway to your home, so why not make a statement with a pop of color? A colorful front door can instantly transform the look and feel of your entryway and create an inviting atmosphere. From bold reds to cheerful yellows, the possibilities are endless. Not only will a colorful front door make you stand out in the neighborhood, but it can also reflect your personality and style. Incorporating a unique and eye-catching front door is an easy way to add an exciting touch to your home’s curb appeal.

Change Out All Your Light Fixtures to LEDs for Energy Efficiency and Lower Power Bills

Are you tired of your constantly rising power bills? Lighting is one of the biggest energy guzzlers in a home, but there’s an easy solution – switch to LEDs. LED light fixtures use significantly less energy than traditional incandescent or fluorescent fixtures and can last up to 25 times longer. Imagine not having to change a light bulb for years. Plus, LED bulbs produce less heat, so your air conditioning won’t have to work as hard in the summer months. By changing out all your light fixtures to LEDs, you’ll save money and reduce your carbon footprint.

Add Decorative Accents, Such as Rugs, Pillows, and Lamps to Make the Space Look Cozier

Are you tired of walking into a room that feels cold and unwelcoming? Adding some decorative accents can completely transform a space and make it feel cozier in no time. Soft, plush rugs can instantly add warmth to a room and provide a comfortable spot to sink your feet into. Pillows add visual interest to a space and make it more inviting by providing an extra layer of comfort. Plus, let’s not forget about the power of ambient lighting. Lamps can create a warm, inviting glow that transforms a barren room into a cozy haven.

Rearrange Furniture or Switch Up the Layout of the Room for an Updated Look without Spending Money on Buying New Pieces

Sometimes, people get bored of the same old look of our living space. Yet, buying new furniture is not always an affordable option. Fortunately, there is a simple solution to give our room an updated look without breaking the bank. Rearranging furniture or switching up the layout can transform a room. You can completely change the vibe of your space by simply moving around a few key pieces. Perhaps you can move the sofa to a different wall or swap the position of your bed and dresser. Experimenting with new arrangements can help you discover a new perspective and appreciate your room differently. So, roll up your sleeves and get creative with your space.

Sometimes, this might involve getting a few new things, like a giant 7-foot foam bean bag or a set of nesting tables. This will help add character to your room and can even be used for storage. Plus, the best part is, you don’t have to spend a fortune.

Conclusion

Creating a new look for your home doesn’t have to be expensive. You can revamp your home with the right supplies and adjustments with dramatic results. Start by making a statement with a colorful front door, switch out your light fixtures to LEDs for energy efficiency and lower power bills, add decorative accents for a cozier look, and rearrange the furniture for an updated style. With these simple tips, you can revamp your home and make it a beautiful place without breaking the bank. So, what are you waiting for? Get creative and start sprucing up your home today.

 

The post 4 Ways You Can Revamp Your Home Cheaply appeared first on Granite Grok.

If we’ve said it once, we have said it a thousand times. When it comes to Democrats, there is no such thing as enough. They can’t spend, tax, nag, or infringe enough, and my “neighbors” to the Left continue to prove that true.

The Demolition majority legislature just took another tax wrecking ball to the people of Vermont. A move that Vermont Public Radio calls a $120 million boost to the State’s Child Care System. Translated, the legislature spent another 150 million on a problem very likely of their making. Another reduction in the free movement of capital in one of the most taxed states in America. And it is not the only hike.

 

“Despite these concerns and my efforts, legislative action this year has added a new, approximately $100 million payroll tax; $20 million in unnecessary DMV fee increases; hundreds of millions in additional cost pressures that will come as a result of the override of my veto of the clean heat standard bill; an unsustainable $70 million increase in base budget spending over my recommendation; an eventual doubling of their own pay and benefits; and more.”

 

Vermont is in the top 4 for the highest tax burden, behind New York, Hawaii, and Maine. New Hampshire, on the other hand, is ranked 48th (WalletHub, 2023). Only Alaska and Delaware have lower total tax burdens, and the Granite State has been lowering business taxes and just axed its Interest and Dividends tax. Our total tax burden is going down. An idea not lost on everyone in Vermont. 

 

Scott argued in his veto letter that the payroll tax is a regressive revenue source that will force low-income workers to contribute to child care subsidies for families of four with household incomes as high as $172,000 a year.

“If you are a lower-income Vermonter already receiving free childcare, you will have to pay a tax, with no added benefit to you, so that families with higher incomes get support,” Scott said.

 

He knew the veto wouldn’t survive, but kudos to him for making the case this time for a sliver of fiscal sanity in a looney bin of a state run by the Democrat majority inmates.

Taxing the poor to pay for childcare for the rich. But Demcorats are okay with the disparity. Proud is the word I’d use.

“That strong vote was a clear indication that we as a body recognized the need to do something, something significant about our broken child care system,” Brumsted said.

If it is broken, the government ruined it.

 

Aly Richards, CEO of Let’s Grow Kids, said in statement Tuesday that the override “is a monumental step forward for our state in addressing the ongoing child care crisis.”

“The legislation will result in a more affordable Vermont, increases access to quality, affordable child care for families, improves compensation and support for our essential early childhood educators, and provides much needed relief for child care programs in every corner of the state,” she said.

Did Aly have to get her snout out of the trough long enough to admire how much more taxpayer slop there will be in the coming years? And I guess she missed the memo on the already high tax burden. More affordable? No. A greater separation in wealth between the haves and have-nots? Yes. Just like everywhere else, Democrats are left in charge of the checkbook for too long.

 

 

HT | Vermont Public

 

Independent media is a rare and precious thing, even here in New Hampshire. Please consider the value we provide and then commit to a monthly subscription, a one-time online donation (via PayPal or GiveSendGo), or you can donate by check*.

We are looking for a few benefactors, but every donation helps.
Thank You for Your Support.

*For donations by check, please email steve@granitegrok.com for the address.

 

 

 

The post Dems Override Veto to Raise Taxes appeared first on Granite Grok.

Artificial Intelligence, AI, has been with us for years, so what about it has people so riled up? Is it fear that AI will take over and rule our lives, supercomputers will replace humans, or ignorance of the concept? I feel it is the latter, as fear of the unknown can take down the strongest among us, and it can be debilitating for people who will not do the work to understand a concept. We have been in a technology explosion for the last 100 years, and nobody can argue that this growth has enhanced most lives. Still, some advances have negatively impacted individuals and society. I point to the Smartphone as one that has done both. These tools give us an infinite amount of information in our hands, but that device has made us dependent on technology and disrupted social connectivity. AI is a tool, and we have to learn to use that tool for good, not evil. But that decision is not the government’s to make.

AI has been with us for years, from robots making cars to helping surgeons in the operating room. We have benefited from AI, and in some cases, it has replaced our job. Like any other phase of technology, the advances ebb and flow. We are in a dynamic stage that concerns people because they cannot keep up with the pace. Fear trumps knowledge. I have been using AI for my writing for years and would not compose anything, from an article to a text, without it. Sometimes it is unnerving how the writing assistant understands my thought process and recommends a more straightforward way of presenting it. It also is my grammar and spell check. That is simplistic compared to the programs that are writing books or songs. The ability of AI to “think” like a human is startling, but we have to be aware of the pitfalls and develop means to distinguish between AI and human products.

Fear and trepidation are not to be solved or assuaged by a government agency or an AI Council. I fear government intervention more than a free enterprise unchained to explore possibilities. That quest by free thinkers is the core of advances that make our lives easier and more enjoyable. We should not allow the government and its inherent politics to control this technology. The government is designed to represent us, but we are no longer free people when we enable the government to assume control of our lives. Over the last two years, we have seen the results of our government wielding its power. The restrictions and rules grow as our freedoms wane.

The fear is that AI will cost jobs and eventually control the human race. Progress has always forced the workforce to morph. Think of manufacturing if every item we use was made by hand. We would never have enough supply or afford the cost. Labor had to shift to other needs. As for computers taking our place in the hierarchy, computers are still machines, and we always have control of the delete or power buttons. I am excited about AI’s possibilities and hope we can embrace it and quicken our pace to understand and use it rather than fear the potential. The potential of Joe Biden, Diane Feinstein, or John Fetterman putting their fingers on AI should be our greatest fear.

The post A.I. Does Not Need Government Intervention appeared first on Granite Grok.

The U.S. Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, was in China last weekend. He was there to polish President Xi’s shoes. Before the trip, the White House said Blinken was not going with the intention of making any deal or conveying any information. No big results should be expected.

We want to thank Marc Abear for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.

True to form, Mr. Blinken underperformed his goal.

The goal of the White House was to reestablish an emergency line of communications with Beijing. The hope was to be able to avoid an accident that might lead to military conflict between the nations. President Xi turned the proposal down. As importantly, the manner and words Xi used in delivering his message declining the request are a personal affront to both Mr. Biden and Mr. Blinken. Mr. Blinken struck out in his appearance on this point.

Blinken was also looking for help from China in clamping down on Mexican drug cartels making fentanyl. Chinese pharmaceutical companies partner with Mexican cartels by providing the precursor ingredients needed to manufacture fentanyl. The fentanyl manufactured in Mexico is flooding into the U.S. The CDC has reported there have been over 100,000 deaths from fentanyl overdoses in the U.S. No commitment for help on the fentanyl issue was obtained from China. Mr. Blinken struck out again.

Mr. Blinken went to China with two big asks. He got nothing on either issue except insulted personally and nationally. What was accomplished on this trip? Mr. Blinken says he had a robust discussion on a range of issues, including North Korea, Ukraine, and human rights. There were no results of any sort on those issues either. Mr. Blinken struck out on these issues too.

It seems President Xi thinks Mr. Blinken and Mr. Biden have more kowtowing to do before there will be any possibility of productive talks. Incidentally, Mr. Blinken sold out Taiwan over the weekend. He said the U.S. does not support Taiwan’s independence. That would appear to be a change in position and a large one. Still, President Xi says Blinken missed a spot in polishing his shoes.

This trip was supposed to happen in February. But that was when China sent a spy balloon across America. Mr. Biden said over the weekend that he does not believe the Chinese knew where the balloon was or what was in it, or what was going on. That probably shows us that the leadership of one of the two countries, America or China, has a pretty loose grasp of what is happening or what is going on. Hint: it’s not China.

Biden’s statement is stupid. He is apologizing for Beijing and its spy balloon program. His intelligence community has told him otherwise. His Secretary of State was sharing this with dozens of countries around the world. It sure appears Joe Biden is compromised by the Chinese Communist Party.

China’s spy balloon operations have been monitored for years by U.S. intelligence. They are operated by the Chinese military. They have sent many spy balloons all around the world. Mr. Blinken said as much last February when he canceled his planned trip. He also said China’s spy balloon program has violated the sovereignty of nations on five continents. Now, Mr. Blinken says it’s time to close that issue…. Oh my, what a strong, decisive position… that would be derision.

China got exactly what it wanted from the meeting over the weekend. We got nothing. We gave China public assurances that we do not and will not acknowledge an independent Taiwan. China gave us the promise to study the possibility of a committee that might address China’s culpability in killing over 100,000 American citizens through fentanyl overdose. What can be taken away from what the world has been shown?

That is what the world saw over the weekend. America is as weak as Joe Biden. We gave tribute. We got a pocketful of mumbles in return. We are fools. Not just fools but weak fools. Countries around the world are deciding which power to ally themselves with. America looks as stupid, weak, hypocritical, and unreliable as our erratic, woke, leftist leadership is. That’s what the world saw.

 

Independent media is a rare and precious thing, even here in New Hampshire, where many in “new media” continue to carry the establishment’s water.
GraniteGrok.com is that exception. Please consider the value we provide and then commit to a monthly subscription, a one-time online donation (via PayPal or GiveSendGo), or you can donate by check*.

We are looking for a few benefactors, but every donation helps.
Thank You for Your Support.

*For donations by check, please email steve@granitegrok.com for the address.

 

 

The post Joe Biden’s Diplomatic Shoe Shine Boy appeared first on Granite Grok.

Don’t try this if you have an “R” after your name. The Gestapo … oops! I mean the FBI … will arrest you and your family and friends, in a predawn raid carried live on CNN and MSNBC and replayed endlessly, while the Regime-media and the useful idiots pretending to be Rs, like former Attorney General Bill Barr, sonorously express their dismay and disgust at your indefensible conduct.

Instead just keep on pretending that there is such a thing as “the rule of law” in America; that we can vote our way out of the authoritarian government this former republic has morphed into; that the 2020 and 2022 elections weren’t rigged and that the 2024 election won’t be as rigged as 2020 and 2022. After all, we know that the FBI can’t be the Gestapo because the Regime-media keeps telling us that Putin is Hitler.

Democrats throw a 5 minute temper tantrum in the well of the House chamber as the vote to censure Adam Schiff passes, yelling "shame" at Kevin McCarthy and refusing to allow him to finish reading the resolution. pic.twitter.com/kqQocSoZPi

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) June 21, 2023

 

The post The J21 Insurrection appeared first on Granite Grok.

In the next few weeks, the Supreme Court will be finishing up its October Term. The term gets its name from the fact that it begins Oct. 1. The next few columns will unpack some of the court’s most important decisions.

I will be focusing mostly (although not entirely) on cases interpreting the Constitution rather than on cases interpreting federal law.

It may not surprise you to learn that the media “take” on Supreme Court cases is frequently unreliable. The narratives pushed by nationally reported experts—conservative as well as liberal—often are unreliable as well. This is because their understanding of the Constitution is often limited, and because many have political agendas that cloud their analysis.

In addition to other comments, I’ll be assessing each case from the standpoint of whether it applies the Constitution correctly. And by “the Constitution” I mean the document as understood when it was ratified, together with all duly adopted amendments.

Accordingly, my analysis often will be very different from what you see elsewhere in the press.

Someone Didn’t Pay Her Taxes!

Geraldine Tyler owned a condominium unit in Hennepin County, Minnesota. She didn’t pay her real property taxes for at least six years. Eventually, she owed $15,000 in taxes and penalties. The county foreclosed on her unit.

The county sold the unit for $40,000. Following Minnesota state law, the county kept all $40,000. It did not return to her the $25,000 difference between the sum she owed and the sum the county received. She claimed the county’s conduct was unconstitutional. The case is Tyler v. Hennepin County (pdf).

On May 25, the justices unanimously agreed with her. They ruled that keeping the extra $25,000 was, at least for purposes of this dispute, an unconstitutional “taking” of her property. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion.

My first instinct was to cheer. Tyler is 94 years old, and (it seemed to me) the county was trying to rob an elderly lady by taking far more than justified—an unfair “forfeiture.”

But for many years before I switched full-time to constitutional law, I practiced municipal law; practiced, wrote, and taught extensively in real estate law; and was involved in the real estate markets in other ways. With that background, I scrutinized the case further. Now I’m not so sure the result was just.

Was The Result Just?

Justice rewards personal responsibility and punishes irresponsibility. The taxes on Tyler’s unit were very moderate. She knew about real estate taxes, since she had paid them earlier. After she stopped paying, she must have received many notices that her taxes were overdue. But she ignored her responsibility for at least six years—maybe longer.

What about her age? The court said she is 94, but her neglect began years ago. More importantly, the court never said she was mentally impaired. My mother (to cite one contrasting case) wrote all the checks for her property taxes until shortly before her death at age 101.

The court intimated that family members took an active role in assisting Tyler. Indeed, they’re likely the real beneficiaries of this decision because they will inherit her property after her death. But these family members also ignored her tax bills.

Then there’s another factor: The Minnesota forfeiture statute wasn’t new. The county didn’t spring it on Tyler. The statute had been in effect since 1935. Since the property was a condominium unit and there were almost no condominiums in the United States until the 1960s, the forfeiture rule almost certainly was on the books well before she purchased her unit.

That rule, like other aspects of real estate law, was reflected in the price she paid for her unit. In all likelihood, it lowered her price. Moreover, its application to other defaulters arguably reduced her own property tax bills.

So the court’s decision allowed her to benefit from the lower price and from application of the rule to others—but then allowed her to flout the rule herself.

Was This Result Correct Under the Constitution?

The Constitution reserves the primary governance of real property to the states (pdf), so for a federal entity to intervene it must have a constitutionally grounded reason for doing so. The court cited as its reason the “Takings Clause” of the Fifth Amendment, which is part of the Bill of Rights (ratified in 1791). The Takings Clause says “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” However, as the great Chief Justice John Marshall once ruled, the Bill of Rights was designed to regulate only the conduct of the federal government, not that of states and localities.

Other parts of the Constitution address state governments. One is the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868. It requires states to guarantee equal protection of the law, due process of law, and the “privileges or immunities” of U.S. citizens. The terms “due process of law,” “privileges,” and “immunities” appear earlier in the Constitution. As the Founders understood it, “due process” means if the government proceeds against you, it can’t make up the rules as it goes along. The Founders understood “privileges” and “immunities” to be certain important entitlements created by law, such as trial by jury (pdf).

The amendment doesn’t address “takings” at all.

But the court insisted that the Fourteenth Amendment applied the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause to the states through a legal theory called the incorporation doctrine. The incorporation doctrine is the view that the Fourteenth Amendment “incorporates” all or most of the Bill of Rights against state governments. This view was developed mostly by liberal justices during the 20th century.

Volumes and volumes have been written to justify the incorporation doctrine, but authors have uncovered almost no direct evidence that the state lawmakers who ratified the Fourteenth Amendment understood the amendment that way. Instead, authors rely on circumstantial evidence—most of it very weak or taken out of context—and they largely disregard the text and structure of the Constitution itself.

The Tyler case exemplifies one reason those who claim the current court is “conservative” are simply wrong: The court continues to apply a great deal of erroneous liberal precedent.

The Gorsuch–Jackson Concurrence

Justices Neil Gorsuch and Ketanji Brown Jackson issued a concurring opinion. They argued that, in addition to violating the Takings Clause, Minnesota’s forfeiture law violated the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause (“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed …”).

Treating the $25,000 forfeiture as an excessive fine does make more sense than treating it as a property taking. The problem with the concurring opinion, however, is that the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause is no more part of the Fourteenth Amendment than is the Takings Clause. It’s an entirely separate guarantee, as the Constitution’s text makes clear.

Conclusion

If I were a Minnesota lawmaker, I wouldn’t have voted for the forfeiture law. But the fact that a law is bad doesn’t make it unconstitutional.

The Tyler case also shows why it’s profoundly misleading to label this bench or its six non-liberal justices as “conservative.” Protecting property from unfair taking looks conservative. But other aspects of the case look anything but.

 

 

Rob Natelson  | The Tenth Amendment Center

The post The Supreme Court’s New Decision on “Taking Property” appeared first on Granite Grok.

There’s a rumor goin’ round that some in New Hampshire continue to accept and expend COVID cash to promote the mRNA vaccines because – according to the officials who decide such things – there’s no proof of harmful side effects. Talk about low-hanging fruit.

There is proof, and it comes from the people giving you the money.

There are over 1,830,000 adverse event reports, with over 35,000 deaths and over 66,000 permanently disabled. If even ten percent of the VAERS reported adverse events are legitimate, these are still the most dangerous vaccines in human history. But let’s not get caught up on that. The CDC has plenty of evidence of harm outside the VAERS system.

The CDC launched the V-SAFE App so that emergency use vaccine enthusiasts could report symptoms or side effects and their impact on daily life in real time. About ten million COVID jab enthusiasts signed up. Over 3 million reported an adverse event (that’s 30%), with 1.2 million reporting that they were unable to perform daily activities, 1.3 million missing work or school as a result of their adverse event, and 0.8 million seeking hospitalization, because of the vaccine—primarily white women and then white men in the Eastern United States.

Not far from home.

The App did not provide any easily traceable means for tracking more severe side effects like myocardia, stroke, or death, and that appears deliberate, but 7.7% of App users reported seeking medical care on the CDC’s App.

Not enough evidence of risk of harm. How about a Pfizer clinical trial?

 

In July of 2021, a study published by Pfizer explained that “during the blinded, placebo-controlled period, 15 participants in the [Pfizer vaccine] BNT162b2 group and 14 in the placebo group died.” Using FDA-style math, that is a 7% increased chance of death.

But it gets worse. After the placebo group was unblinded, an additional 5 participants who received the vaccine died. As Pfizer explains, “3 participants in the [Pfizer vaccine] BNT162b2 group and 2 in the original placebo group who received [Pfizer vaccine] BNT162b2 after unblinding died.”

 

Eleven out of twenty cardiovascular deaths. This fits hand in glove with recent admissions by the FDA and CDC of the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis around the VAERS safety signal. And that makes sense because both were recognized side effects before deployment and have been confirmed in public admissions since.

The EPOCH Times had to use a Freedom of Information request to uncover how the CDC was aware “that a much higher proportion of events after COVID-19 vaccination were serious. For adults, for instance, the proportion was 11.1 percent, compared to 5.5 percent after non-COVID-19 vaccines. The proportion of deaths for adults was 15.4 percent after COVID-19 vaccination, much higher than the 2.5 percent after other shots.”

Additionally, “Within the Pfizer documents is Document 5.3.6 (Post-Marketing Experience), a cumulative analysis of adverse event reports occurring in the 90 days after the public rollout of the Covid-19 mRNA injection. And within that report, 275 people suffered a stroke suspected to be attributed to the vaccine between days 1 to 41; 50% of these occurred within the first 48 hours after injection.”

Twenty percent of strokes were fatal.

In October 2020, “Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, a member of the CDC COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force and the Vaccine Safety Team, released a slide deck explaining the tools and safety protocols being deployed in advance of a COVID-19 vaccine rollout.” Included was a list of known Adverse Events which begins with getting COVID and Death.

 

CDC Scientists did not clinically review the VAERS AEs of special interest, and they lied about it when asked. We also know there was systemic or institutional pressure not to report Adverse Events, so the best data is incomplete.

We do know that the final list AEs is a good deal longer, and (as a reminder)this is official government material available before deployment and after, so not only is there evidence of harmful side effects it was known and hidden along with (drumroll please) the fact that they knew their juice was neither safe nor effective against infection or spread before the pandemic of the unvaccinated lies emerged to hide this truth.

They knew before the EUA was issued.

And this is the tip of an enormous iceberg whose water is frozen hard with evidence of harm. The proof is buried in thousands of documents that Pfizer and the FDA hoarded; only pried loose by court order. No one was supposed to know, but we do, and still, our elected leaders and public health officials who answer to them pretend all is well.

It sounds like a Pulitzer Prize-worthy exposé about a massive cover-up, but you couldn’t get a New Hampshire journalist to touch this if you paid them – and that’s a fact because they are paid and not a peep.

 

The post If NH Needs Proof The Vaccines™ Have Adverse Side Effects, Just ask the CDC and FDA appeared first on Granite Grok.

The subpoena is already at the Sheriff’s Department. Remember those folks that were arrested at that now infamous Executive Council meeting?

 

 

Details are coming my way soon as possible, but it’s in process.

To be Continued…

The post Breaking News: NH Governor Chris Sununu Being “Served” (Shortly If Not Already a Done Deal) appeared first on Granite Grok.

Did you know America now has city-sized jurisdictions operating under Sharia?  Got your attention?  The city council of Hamtramck, Michigan, has an all-Muslim governing body and mayor.  The local Hamtramck leadership voted unanimously to ban the display of LGBTQ Pride flags.

The resolution states the city’s commitment to representing the international character of Hamtramck. This is expressed by flying only the American flag and the flags of other nations.  Mayor Pro Tem Hassan told opponents of the proposal, “You guys are the ones making problems… I’m working for the people, what the majority of the people like.”

Mayor Amer Ghalib expressed support for the resolution. His position is the city serves everyone equally and does not discriminate… that’s why gays cannot fly their flag.  Ghalib says LGBTQ interests are represented on numerous boards and commissions.

Opponents accused him of hatred, to which his response is: He never terminated anyone from the LGBTQ community, which was deflection or maybe a threat depending on who you ask.

City Councilman Nayeem Choudhury said, “We want to respect the religious rights of our citizens… You guys are welcome… [but] why do you have to have the flag shown on government property to be represented? You’re already represented. We already know who you are. … By making this [about] bigotry … it’s making it like you want to hate us.”

Hamtramck’s decision to ban LGBTQ Pride flags, in their own estimation, stems from longstanding concerns about respecting Islamic religious rights. Mr. Choudhury’s words suggest the Pride flag’s presence on city property unnecessarily exacerbates divisions, which leaves unsaid the point of the disagreement; Islam does not tolerate gays.

During the public comment session, one woman suggested Hamtramck’s slogan should be altered to reflect the city “welcomes you if you’re straight.” She then engaged in a public display of affection with another woman. The incident shows the emotion around the debate.

A Muslim community leader from nearby Dearborn, Hassan Aoun, came to participate in the discussion. He voiced opposition saying, “Pride month, don’t put it down our throats… Do not put [the Pride flag] on city property.”

The corollary question from the opposition is: Why is it appropriate to have outside religious leaders participating in this local discussion at all?

The decision follows controversy surrounding Hamtramck’s Human Relations Commission Chair Russ Gordon flying a Pride flag alongside flags of other nations last year. Is Hamtramck now following Islamic theocracy or the American constitution?  That’s the question being posed.  Which side are you on?  It is coming to a town near you.

The post Hamtramck Today, Tomorrow Your Town appeared first on Granite Grok.

W.V vs. EPA is a REALLY big deal. The US Supreme Court seriously spanked the EPA for trying to use the Clean Power Plan to regulate greenhouse emissions in any or every industry it chooses.

 

Congress did not grant the Environmental Protection Agency in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan. Under the “major questions doctrine,” there are “extraordinary cases” in which the “history and the breadth of the authority that [the agency] has asserted,” and the “economic and political significance” of that assertion, provide a “reason to hesitate before concluding that Congress” meant to confer such authority. This is one such case, so the EPA must point to “clear congressional authorization” for the authority it claims. It cannot do so.

The EPA has admitted that issues of electricity transmission, distribution, and storage are not within its traditional expertise, yet it claims that Congress implicitly tasked it with the regulation of how Americans get their energy. Without “clear congressional authorization” for the EPA to regulate in such a manner, the agency lacks authority to implement the Clean Power Plan under the Clean Air Act.

A case where an Agency’s bureaucrats decided that its Administrative expertise trumped that of the law passed by Congress outlining what it actually could do – SCOTUS said, “No can do – stop and stay in your lane.” SCOTUS said that you can’t keep doing what the Executive Branch agencies have done for decades: mission or Powers creep. Bureaucracies ALWAYS want to do more than what Congress allowed them to do and have no problem in trying to “self-justify” their action and ignoring the Constitution and their authorizing legislation. In short, do something until slapped down. Lots of our elected representatives think the same way:

• NH State Rep. Debra DeSimone (R): “The Constitution is a guideline.”
• NH State Rep. Sandra Keans (R, now D): “I don’t try to justify anything by the Constitution, it’s not my job, and I don’t want to do it.”
• NH State Rep. Susan Almy (D): “Well, you don’t get to decide what is Constitutional, and I don’t get to decide what is Constitutional; the judiciary decides what is Constitutional.”
• President Obama: “The Constitution is an imperfect document, and I think it is a document that reflects some deep flaws in American culture” (BHO, 9/01)
• Fmr. Chancellor of Boston University John Silber: “I don’t believe anybody has a right to own any kind of a firearm. I believe in order to obtain a permit to own a firearm, that person should undergo an exhaustive criminal background check. In addition, an applicant should give up his right to privacy and submit his medical records for review to see if the person has ever had a problem with alcohol, drugs, or mental illness . . . The Constitution doesn’t count!”

NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Services decided that it, too, could pull an EPA and didn’t have to follow their authorizing Law and tried to force fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico to use GPS to tell NMFS where they were all the time ($3000 for the unit plus a $75 monthly monitoring fee. Their reason that NMFS believed they were right?

The ruling is major for many reasons, including that the government tried to claim that charter boat fishing is a “closely-regulated industry” to which the Fourth Amendment does not apply.

Sure, regulations beat Constitutional Rights. Good times, good times – not. Yeah, and all innocent people have to now buy their own ankle monitors, too. And NMFA was found guilty of “exceeded the authority granted by the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA), and was arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). NCLA also complained that the rule required reporting economic data that had nowhere been specified by the agencies in proposing the rule for comment.”

Make crap up, and who cares about the Constitution and Congressional-passed law. Well, in a snit, NMFS just got smacked again! Shades of Animal House: “Thank you, sir, may I have another?”

Maine lobstermen stirring the pots win bigly in federal court

Back in 2021, the National Marine Fisheries Service, part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), issued an opinion in pursuit of preserving the endangered right whale. As these edicts go, this “opinion” has basically force of law when it comes to imposing conservation-based measures, rules and restrictions.

The right whale, which has a population hovering at a tad less than 350 individuals, has been a focus of efforts for some years. The lobster industry, reviled by many environmentalists, became an easy target for a revised set of regulations when the Biden administration took over. And they hammered them.

…At the heart of the case is a set of much-debated regulations, including new gear-marking mandates, a reduction in the number of vertical lines in the water, the insertion of weak points in rope, and a seasonal closure of a nearly 1,000-square-mile area off the Gulf of Maine.

…The rules were the first of three phases designed to reduce the risk to the whales by 98% in 10 years. But opponents have said that level of risk reduction would simply shift the extinction scenario from the whales to the lobster industry. Fishermen have long contended that right whales are not in Maine waters, and there has never been a right whale death attributed to Maine’s lobster industry.

Environmentalists, however, have argued that just because a death hasn’t been linked to the fishery doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened; a historical lack of gear marking has made it difficult to determine where an entanglement occurred.

All documented entanglements from 2016 to 2018 were linked to Canadian gear.

“Doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened” – I agree with the author in that it’s the argument that stupid losers throw out when the see the Judge’s eye start to coldly narrow and the cast on his face is worse than your Dad’s when he caught you red-handed (although not as bad as your Mom’s face – THAT was a terrible thing to face!).

And THAT is a big problem for me. ENOUGH of this nonsense – Legislators NEED to write the laws and stop throwing their messes over the wall and allowing bureaucrats to make stuff up as “Administrative Law,” which is not found ANYWHERE in the Constitution. Enough of this “delegation of Powers,” which only results in bureaucrats taking that next mile. And having done it once, NMFS did it twice – and paid the price:

…The court’s ruling found NMFS overstepped its authority when it used worst-case scenarios and pessimistic assumptions in its crafting of its biological opinion, which required it to create new rules, which required lobster fishermen to switch to new gear.

…“This history shows the Congress did not want economic activity stopped in its tracks whenever complete data was lacking,” the court wrote. “To say uncertainty is a reason to veto a federal action is to say that many valuable activities must cease, even if the risk of jeopardy is not ‘likely,’ but speculative.”

The court added that the NMFS biological opinion was “capricious” and “contrary to law.

“The service’s legal reasoning was not just wrong; it was egregiously wrong” in that it based some of its legal arguments on legislative history rather than statute, Ginsburg wrote.

And here’s my favorite part from the Judge, which is ALSO my largest lament nowadays given what I see in Life around me in our erstwhile Constitutional Republic – CIVICS and how our political/history system should be working:

“As any high school civics student should know, legislators vote on and the president signs bills, not their legislative history,” Ginsburg wrote. “Statutory text and structure do not authorize [NMFS] to ‘generally select the value that would lead to conclusions of higher, rather than lower, risk to endangered or threatened species whenever it faces a plausible range of values or competing analytical approaches,” the court wrote. “The statute is focused upon ‘likely’ outcomes, not worst-case scenarios. It requires the Service to use the best available scientific data, not the most pessimistic.”

See my “Progressives

The tide is turning (yes, intentionally) on bureaucrats in that they, like us, MUST start to Follow the Law. You know, like us? I hope that SCOTUS continues this line that the LEGISLATURE makes the law – not them.

 

HT | Hot Air

 

Independent media is a rare and precious thing, even here in New Hampshire, where many in “new media” continue to carry the establishment’s water.
GraniteGrok.com is a rare exception. Please consider the value we provide and then commit to a monthly subscription, a one-time online donation (via PayPal or GiveSendGo), or you can donate by check*.

We are looking for a few benefactors, but every donation helps.
Thank You for Your Support.

*For donations by check, please email steve@granitegrok.com for the address.

 

 

The post NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Services Caught Pulling an EPA Overreach AGAIN?? appeared first on Granite Grok.

In what looks like another example of the government breaking it so it can pretend to fix it,  Maine has a ballot initiative set for November “launched by a citizens group called Our Power.”

Supporters want to buy out the assets of Central Maine Power (CMP) and Versant Power – which distribute 97% of the state’s electricity – and replace them with Pine Tree Power, a new, not-for-profit distribution utility.

 

Customers are reportedly unhappy with the high cost of electricity and the poor service during outages. If anyone thinks socializing the state’s power companies will improve that, I have some cheap vodka, a hammer, and a sickle to sell you.

And this isn’t some local municipality grabbing the reins; we’re talking about the entire state of Maine’s electric supply and infrastructure controlled as a not-for-profit collective committed to a faster greening of the grid and lower prices.

It won’t work.

Those two ideas are incompatible. Government interference to green the grid raised prices and manufactured this unhappy ratepayers crisis. The government broke it, and the communists say they can fix it.

Big Utility is, naturally, spending a small fortune to stop it. They are a business and make money, and the folks behind it want to keep making money.

 

Takeovers are rare, and usually involve cities, a process called municipalization. Since 2000, more than 60 communities have considered municipalization, but only nine proceeded, according to a 2019 study for the Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned utilities.

The fight in Maine is unprecedented in scope and potential losses. In smaller takeover battles, incumbent utilities lost a share of their business. In Maine, CMP and Versant are threatened with going out of business.

 

And money has poured into the battle but not always into the hands you’d expect. The Guardian reports that Democrats are being paid to stop the ballot initiative, including “$5m to a Democratic media and political strategy firm called Left Hook that regularly works with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and is staffed with Obama administration alumni.”

Obama alumni are taking paydays to prevent the socialization of Maine’s electricity. Strange bedfellows, indeed.

And what would Mainers get if the initiative succeeds?

 

The proposal for the new plan would create an elected 13-member board made up of a mix of residents from across the state and designated experts. The board would hire a private grid operator chosen through a competitive bidding process.

 

All in the advertised name of lower rates, but the plan is still handicapped. Pine Tree Power is focused on more green energy. That will cost them and not just in price. Reliability is a problem, and we can look to Germany for the solution. Burn more coal. And even then, people will be running gas generators and burning a lot of pine trees to keep from freezing to death in February.

The last time I checked, it wasn’t green but cheaper.

 

Independent media is a rare and precious thing, even here in New Hampshire, where many in “new media” continue to carry the establishment’s water.
GraniteGrok.com is a rare exception. Please consider the value we provide and then commit to a monthly subscription, a one-time online donation (via PayPal or GiveSendGo), or you can donate by check*.

We are looking for a few benefactors, but every donation helps.
Thank You for Your Support.

*For donations by check, please email steve@granitegrok.com for the address.

 

 

The post Maine Ballot Initiative Socializes the State’s Electric Utilities appeared first on Granite Grok.

You can call this absurd, but trust me; they will find something MUCH stupider. It’s a racist TREE. And it is, Of COURSE, it is another [il]liberal white female ringing the racist alarm bells. Can we PLEASE revoke their right to vote? And First Amendment?

Okay, let’s get ahold of yourselves – I would NEVER advocate for the latter to be pulled – we’d lose half the stuff we get to write about in a flash.

Is GROOT safe? Even tree mascots are racist now.

According to Robin Williams, a board member for the Sarastoa-Charlotte Democratic Progressive Caucus has decided that a TREE mascot is racist too!

 

 

Local affluent white female liberal claims that the New College mascot, a banyan tree, “closely resemble[s] an angry, threatening brown individual.”

Advice for white libs: if you see a tree and immediately think “looks like a scary minority to me,” you might be the racist. pic.twitter.com/mi2SuIXPc3

— Christopher F. Rufo (@realchrisrufo) June 19, 2023

There are a bunch of comments at the link below that put a smile on my face (from conservatives that tend toward the humorous and satirical with these kinds of issues).

The important thing to me here is that when someone (like white [il]liberal Progressive women) is constantly wearing “Race colored glasses”…

Sidenote: or as one college is now defining it, completely ERASING women by defining them as “non-man”. Imagine that – even erasing the WORD “woman”!  And the Trans-Authoritarian and Emotional Blackmailers keep screaming that THEY are being erased?  Hahahahahaha!

…and overuse and abuse the hyperbole, they become like the Little Boy That Cried Wolf  shouting “RACISM!” and “RACISTS!” It becomes meaningless. When the REAL Racism shows up, no one will care.

You know, if someone were to call me that (yes, Zandra Rice-Hawkins, I’m remembering you), my response would be, “Ayup – and don’t forget all the other names you call us, too!”

Really – a tree is racist?

 

I read this and just laughed, as the only person doing the “anthropomorphizing” of a logo to be racist is Williams.

The rest of us just see a (slightly) green tree. If you can get “racist!” outta that, you need help – serious help. This is a person, indicative of many, that see racists behind every tree so much that their racism has now melded with the tree. Talk about Tree hugging!

It should go without saying, but “trees aren’t racist,” even if you want them to be. Angry trees? I had 40 of them behind my house, and every time the wind blew really hard, they were MAD that the wind was moving them around – did that make the wind racist, too? Or because the trees were mad, they were racist?

Well, cry no more, Ms. Progressive race-baiting Williams, they’re dead; I had them cut down. Now I’m burning those racist trees to keep my family warm in wintertime – see, almost ANYTHING bad can be turned to good.

Just like you – you’ve said something stupidly bad, and now the rest of us are smiling.

See any wolves lately?

 

 

HT | Twitchy

 

Independent media is a rare and precious thing, even here in New Hampshire, where many in “new media” continue to carry the establishment’s water.
GraniteGrok.com is a rare exception. Please consider the value we provide and then commit to a monthly subscription, a one-time online donation (via PayPal or GiveSendGo), or you can donate by check*.

We are looking for a few benefactors, but every donation helps.
Thank You for Your Support.

*For donations by check, please email steve@granitegrok.com for the address.

 

 

The post When You Wear “Race Colored Glasses” Everything Looks Racist. Even … A Tree appeared first on Granite Grok.

Having learned nothing from the California Prison system, the Girl Scouts of America policy now states that boys who identify as girls can share tent space on campouts with biological girls.

 

Guidance for campers reviewed by LifeSiteNews indicates that boys who claim to be “transgender,” “non-binary,” or “gender-fluid” may be allowed to board with girls during Girl Scouts camping trips. While families can theoretically opt out of accommodations shared with gender-confused boys, policies in place at Girl Scout chapters allow shared overnight arrangements.

 

Given the number of “transwomen” still sexually attracted to biological women, that seems like an incredibly bad idea. But “sense” is no longer common when it comes to toeing the transgender agenda, and there is no reason for an organization that used to promote and protect girls and women not to put them in harm’s way. After all, nothing says 21st-century progressive girl power like getting raped by a Girl Scout with a penis followed weeks or months later by a secret abortion.

 

Meanwhile, Girl Scouts Black Diamond states that, for overnight events, members “who are LGBTQ+ can share a room and all facilities with other Girl Scouts.” Moreover, the wording of the guidance suggests that girls may not know whether or not they might end up boarding with a boy who claims to be female. 

 

Some more culturally center-left readers might say, what are the odds of that? Of a girl scout getting raped by a girl scout with a penis. To which I ask, how many rapes will it take to make you uncomfortable? One, one percent, give me a number. Sexual predators of all ages use the loopholes created by progressive policy to gain access to vulnerable victims. Someone will be sexually assaulted. How many girls are you comfortable with being raped to promote this agenda?

Liberal prison systems appear to be operating on a no-limit basis. Rape is a prison thing, so what’s the big deal. But this isn’t prison, or is it? I feel confident the girls are intimidated out of even whispering a jot of concern and will be encouraged to keep quiet should they be victims or witness to a transgirl raping an actual girl.

Hopefully, like the Left’s promise on abortions, they will be rare…and…and … something.

 

HT | LifeSite News

 

Independent media is a rare and precious thing, even here in New Hampshire, where many in “new media” continue to carry the establishment’s water.
GraniteGrok.com is a rare exception. Please consider the value we provide and then commit to a monthly subscription, a one-time online donation (via PayPal or GiveSendGo), or you can donate by check*.

We are looking for a few benefactors, but every donation helps.
Thank You for Your Support.

*For donations by check, please email steve@granitegrok.com for the address.

 

 

The post Will the Gender-Bending Girl Scouts be Adding a “Raped at Camp” and “I Hid my Abortion” Patch Combo? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Listen to pretty much any of the idiocracy (members of the press designated by the ruling class to outsmart my chickens), and not a single one cared to look at the actual laws cited by the King’s lawyers (Biden’s attorney general) to indict Trump.

Nor did they care one iota to look at any of the cases that have interpreted the laws (believe it or not, Judges in other cases have interpreted these laws and explained what they mean). Nor did they ask why other Presidents, who have done the exact same thing as Trump, never got charged (not a political issue but an issue of interpretation of the applicable law-if prior Attorneys Generals-like his honor, the all-knowing, all-seeing Lord Barr who failed to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her possession and outright theft of top secret documents- did not prosecute former President’s for doing what Trump is charged with doing, does that not mean that the proper interpretation of the law is that Trump is not properly charged).

Well, here is a thought: why don’t we blaze a new trail and actually look at the laws being used to indict Trump. (Whoops! Be careful. Looking for stuff like the actual laws may get us blacklisted by …oh, who cares? My newest chicken is named Hunter. We will just say he did it. They will only slap his wrists, no matter what we say. And what little pain they will inflict will be fleeting-he doesn’t even have any wrists, so hah!)

1. THE ESPIONAGE ACT OF 1918: Trump is charged with violating 18 U S C 793e. This law was enacted in 1918 as a part of the World War 1 effort to capture and punish spies. It was upheld under the war powers act by the then Supreme Court (the same Supreme Court that said that sterilizing “the weak and feeble-minded” was necessary to purify the white race- a fact I add here to emphasize that what the Supreme Court said in 1918 probably would not pass muster today. Consider Plessy v Ferguson upholding racial segregation in schools, and Brown v Board of Education outlawing it).

Under section e, the law provides (with redaction of surplusage- sorry, my grandson told me to use that word; it means extra and largely unneeded words that lawyers add to statutes because they get paid by the word):

“e. Whoever having unauthorized possession of any document…relating to the national defense willfully communicates …(same) to any person not entitled to receive it…or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it…shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than ten years or both.

My newest chicken, HUNTER, points out this brilliant thought: this whole statute turns upon

1.The key word “unauthorized; and

2. The key words “person not entitled to receive it;”

3. The key words “employee of the United States entitled to receive it.”

Astute and learned scholars might note: to prove that Trump committed a violation of the espionage act, the government must prove – beyond a reasonable doubt – that Trump’s possession of the subject documents was not “authorized”; that he showed them to a person not entitled to see them; and that he willfully refused to return them to the person-Government employee-who was “authorized” to possess them.

In analyzing this whole mess, two concepts are critical before looking at these elements:

This is a criminal charge. The Government has the BURDEN to prove-BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT- each element of the case asserted. That means if the jury has any doubt, they must acquit.

Second, because this is a criminal case, the verdict of the jury in federal court must be unanimous. Most likely, there will be either 6 or 8 jurors. If anyone says, “I don’t think so,” the Government loses.

With these thoughts in mind, take a look at the PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT. (44 USC 2201-2209). Under this statute, there are two types of records, PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS, and PERSONAL RECORDS.

PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS: these are “documents…created or received by the President in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have the effect upon carrying out (his)…duties as the President. (44 USC 2201(2))

PERSONAL RECORDS: these are all documentary material…of a purely private or non-public character which do not relate to (his) duties …as President. (44 usc 2201(3)).

Under 44 USC 2202, all Presidential records belong to and are owned by the United States Government.

Question: who decides whether a record is PRESIDENTIAL or PERSONAL?

The National Archivist? Nope!

Attorney General Garland? or Barr?Nope!

Prosecuting attorney Jack Smith? Yea, right.Nope!

Under Article II of the United States Constitution, the President of the United States is the head of the military, is Commander in Chief, and by the admission of all legal scholars, is afforded total and complete control over all records. He and he alone decides what is a government record, what is a PRESIDENTIAL RECORD, and what is a PERSONAL RECORD. He does not derive his power in this regard from Congress. He obtains his power directly from the Constitution. And because his authority comes from the Constitution, Congress cannot deprive him of the power, cannot modify his power, and cannot regulate it. Neither can the Supreme Court.

While he is in office, the Presidential power under Article 2 to designate a document, Presidential or Personal, cannot be regulated by Congress. This means that he and he alone, without any regulation from anyone, defines what is a PRESIDENTIAL RECORD and what is a PERSONAL RECORD. When he leaves office, these designations remain as again; no one can go back and say that while he is in office, he categorized a record improperly.

To fully grasp this concept, it is a useless act to go back and look at 44 USC 2201(2) and (3). Why? Re-read what I just said. Congress has no right to tell the president what a PRESIDENTIAL RECORD is or what is a PERSONAL RECORD. Those provisions define non-binding categories on the sitting President. But they don’t constrain the President in any way.

In that regard, consider  44 USC 2203(b): “Documentary materials produced or received by the President, shall to the extent practicable, be categorized as Presidential records or personal records…”( In other words, Congress is saying to the sitting President, please tell us what is a Presidential record and what is personal?)

Under 44 USC 2203(c), the “President may dispose of those Presidential records…”(In other words, Congress is recognizing the President’s total control over all documents. He can even destroy them. That is his power under Article II. It’s not something Congress has any say in or control over).

Under 44 USC 2203(f)…”The President shall remain exclusively responsible for custody, control, and access to such Presidential records”( yea, just like I said. He has Article II power; he has unlimited power over all the documents and can do whatever he pleases with them. He can certainly decide if something will be called a Presidential record or a Personal record. And no matter what 44 USC 2201 (b) or ( c) says, his determination is final and complete. No appeal. No pointed-headed bureaucrat can overrule him by saying, “Wait,  Mr.President, I have decided that you made a mistake on designating the subject documents. I am changing your designation and now making what you designated personal as presidential.)

Indeed, the archivist has no such power to change what Trump did while in office. His sole power is to take custody of records that Trump, while in office, designated as Presidential:

Under 44 USC 2203(g), “Upon conclusion of a Presidential term of office, the archivist …shall assume responsibility for the control, custody…of the Presidential records.

Consider: while in office, the sole determination of what is a Presidential record belongs to the sitting President. To fully grasp this simple concept, turn off the section of your brain that controls logic and reason.  Turn on the part of your brain that focuses on the Power of the ruling elite. The question is one of power, not logic. Not statutory language. Nor reason and logic. Trump-while President- had the sole power to declare a record–any record–to be personal. The language of 44 usc 2201(b) and (c) is merely definitional but cannot overrule the decision of the Article II Presidential Exercise of Power.

With all this in mind, go back to the Espionage ACT of 1918. Under the Presidential Records Act, Personal records belong to Trump, and he is free to take them with him to his home after he left office. As such, his possession of his own personal records is not “unauthorized.”

Consider the following: prior court decisions have affirmed everything I just said.

The most famous one is the CLINTON SOX case.

In 2012, former President Bill Clinton was being charged with pretty much the same charges now being made against Trump. He took what many at the time felt were Presidential records-many marked “top secret”- and hid them in his sock drawer. Judge Amy Jackson ruled in Clinton’s favor for the very same reasons I set forth.  In ruling that Clinton had not violated the law because he, while he was President, had designated the Documents in his possession as personal records, even though under 44 USC 2201 (b), they would best be described as Presidential records. She explained her confirmation of the Clinton decision that his records were all personal records, as follows:

“Under the statutory scheme established under the PRA(Presidential Records Act), the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the Presidential term, and in his sole discretion…Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even disposal of the Presidential records…it would be difficult for this court to conclude that Congress intended he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers his personal records…”

Of interest, she also ruled that the “penalty” for violating the Presidential Records Act was not criminal. The act only allowed the archivist to bring a civil action to obtain the records.

In another case, the Supreme Court ruled consistent with the Clinton Sox ruling. In United States Navy v Egan, 484 U.S. 518, the United States Supreme Court was asked to overrule the President in his exercise of his Article II, section 2 responsibilities:

 

Section 2

The President shall be the Commander in Chief of the Army and the Navy…

The issue presented was the authority of the President, under Article II, section 2-his authority as Commander in Chief, to issue security clearances to employees of the Government. In other words, does the President have the power to decide what records an employee can see and what records he cannot see? The Supreme Court held that under Article 2, section 2, the President has this power, and it cannot be overturned by an act of Congress. The Constitution itself confers the power and cannot be controlled by Congress or the Courts except in extreme circumstances. The Supreme Court said:

“As to these areas of ART. II duties, the courts have traditionally shown great deference to Presidential responsibilities…Thus, unless Congress specifically provided otherwise, courts traditionally have been reluctant to intrude upon the authority of the Executive in military and national security affairs…”

Conclusion: don’t think logic. Don’t think reason. Think Power. While in office, Trump has the power, under Article II, section 2, to, as Commander in Chief, designate any record he wants as a “personal record.” That the record he designated as personal looks and acts like a Presidential record as defined under 44 USC 2203 (b) makes no difference. He has the power to call it anything he wants and certainly the power to call it a personal record. If it is a personal record, then his possession is not “unauthorized” under the Espionage Act of 1918. The Presidential record act specifically confirms that he has the right to take his personal records with him when he leaves office. So far, Trump has affirmed to anyone who will listen that the records he took are all personal.

Looks like the Government sucks on this one. Especially when they have the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt and get a unanimous verdict from all jurors to affirm that the sitting President does not have Article II, section 2 powers.

 

Anxiety attack: How am I going to explain this to my chickens? My daughter says they will understand as they already understand that a rooster can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants. Don’t matter what anybody says.

Ok, so I just got to keep it clear for them: Trump is the rooster. He defines what happens in the coop. No pointy-headed bureaucrat can change that.

Anxiety attack 2: how do I tell them to stop chanting, “Let’s Go, Brandon.”

 

 

The post Woke in the Third Degree: My Chickens Decide to Actually Read the Statutes Indicting Trump appeared first on Granite Grok.

It is hard to think of a more important time to have your business online than right now. After all, this is an age when people look first on the internet for businesses, services, and products than in their local area.

This means that by not having a strong presence online, you are almost certainly missing out on potential customers and, therefore, more revenue. Of course, there are different paths you can take to go about getting more focus on your business, but by concentrating on the right areas, you can get off to an even better start.

#1 Use social media

With over 4 billion people accessing social media platforms every day, you would be foolish to turn your back on this highly useful tool. Even though this is a potentially large audience, it is important to know your target market. It has now been noticed that certain demographics use different social media platforms, with older people predominantly on Facebook and younger ones on Instagram and TikTok. Targeting your attention, therefore, on the wrong platform can mean missing out on the lion’s share of your market.

#2 Use SEO services

Undoubtedly any engagement you get from your social media posts will be directed back to your website, but your website will need more traffic driven to it than just your social media audience. The best method of getting this valuable traffic to your website is to invest in some quality SEO services.

An SEO and link building agency provides all sorts of services to boost quality traffic and heighten search engine rankings for relevant niche keywords. As most of your potential customers will be searching online for whatever it is that you have to offer, an agency can be crucial in those people finding your business instead of the competition.

#3 Create a Brand

One of the easiest ways to get that attention is to create a brand for your business. This can make your products, services, and even your business become more memorable to the public. It can potentially also make it easier to sell your products or services due to association. Brands are seen as having heightened quality, desirability, and longevity over non-branded items, even though, in some cases, this is not so.

You will soon find that if you offer quality products and services to your customers, they will show more loyalty to your brand and will, therefore, sing your business’s praises and purchase further items simply because they are made or sold by your brand.

A few final thoughts

If you haven’t considered it before, you really should divert some time and effort into boosting your online presence. The internet is considered to be an indispensable tool in the business world, with customers located all over the globe actively searching for the products and services that you provide. Turning your back on these important customers or failing to make your business known to them is simply throwing money down the drain.

Of course, there are the right ways of going about it to present the right image, and this is where professionals come into play, such as SEO agencies, social media experts, and brand creation businesses.

The post How To Boost Your Online Presence appeared first on Granite Grok.