Saturday • July 27 • 2024
Vol.XVI • No.XXX
Manchester, N.H.
The concept of a fascist arrangement at Gunstock has been long in the making:
Kinda harsh thing to say about those who are now your best buddies, eh? What EVAH will they think of you know?
This email, from now Gunstock Area Commissioner Doug Lambert (of DGF Industrial as well) was in a bunch of stuff that I had received from a Right To Know (RSA 91A) demand that I had put in. Now, if you read the quote, you’d think it was the “current” Doug that has been yammering and bringing the political pressure onto Peter Ness (who resigned) and is still trying to pressure Commissioner Dr. David Strang to follow suit.
Sidenote: Lambert has been ALL ABOUT that Ness and Strang violated their Oath of Office, screaming it like a verbal cudgel. Yet, to date, neither he nor Jade Wood (current NH GOP Area 5 Vice Chair) have indicated HOW they violated such:
But I digress. Here’s the email. The newspaper story from the Laconia Sun is below.
And LOOK at who Lambert is fingering (emphasis mine)?
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Doug Lambert <dlambert@dgfindustrial.com>
To: david strang <davidstrangmd@yahoo.com>; Mr Peter Ness <petergness@yahoo.com>
Cc: Mike Sylvia <mike@mikesylvia.org>; Norman J Silber <njs@silbersnh.com>; Barbara Comtois <bcomtois2016@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022, 06:56:03 PM EDT
Subject: Gunstock From 2007The concept of a fascist arrangement at Gunstock has been long in the making:
https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news/local/investors-wanted-bring-your-millions-and-civic-duty-to-gunstock/article_fa3c8344-598d-5dff-a35f-2495fb7cf813.html
I sure would like to know if some company or LLC has already been set up to achieve this goal.
The way these people are fighting, there HAS to be something. And Kiedaisch must be the ringleader along with Day and White.
Doug
So you believed that former Commissioner Gary Kiedaisch, General Manager Tom Day, and Chief Financial Officer Cathy White were in cahoots over something? Did you find out more about that German website you told me about in a phone conversation that mentioned a possible hotel project at Gunstock?
I never got an answer to that question because that was about the time that you went, may I dare say it, went rogue and stabbed those in the back that put you onto the GAC? Did you have a purpose BEFOREHAND, Mr. Lambert? Questions keep swirling about about your Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde transformation before our very eyes.
Questions, questions, and more questions. And I’ll ask more, too. Like what ARE you and Jade, and now Denise, hiding by squashing both the Legal and the Audit GAC sub-committee?
From the Laconia Daily Sun (emphasis mine):
Investors wanted: bring your millions and civic duty to Gunstock
Private-public partnership requires patient partner
There is money to be made for the right partner for Gunstock. However, the right partner can’t be too concerned with making big money.
In the “request for information” that Gunstock Mountain Resort plans to publish soon in local and statewide newspapers as well as ski industry publications, Gunstock General Manager Greg Goddard makes it clear that any potential private-sector partners will have to maneuver through a bevy of priorities, and profit-making isn’t on the list.
The request for information document is intended to invite private equity or real estate holding firms to send in suggestions as to how they might be able to partner with Gunstock to add amenities in keeping with the stated goal of transforming the ski mountain into a four-season destination resort.
“The declared purpose of the Gunstock Area Commission is to operate, maintain, develop, improve and promote Gunstock Mountain Resort for recreational purposes, and to further the public interest thereby,” reads the request. Throughout the request, the interests of the general public and county residents are mentioned, as is maintaining a good relationship with the county government and protecting the scenic and historic characteristics of the property. It almost sounds as if it was written in a way to deter a potential partners who would be interested in achieving the largest and fastest return on their investment.
“It’s going to be a fairly complicated process,” said Goddard in an interview yesterday. Because Gunstock is owned by the citizens of Belknap County, and has received federal and state grants, any project proposals would have to be approved by several layers of approval processes, including passing muster with the people of the county.
So, who would be willing to take on such a complex project, while accepting a lesser profit for all the trouble? Goddard said, “It would have to be someone who is interested in the recreation industry and recognizes the uniqueness of this property, and someone for whom making the biggest profit isn’t the most important factor.”
This certainly isn’t the first time that private dollars have been invested in a public project, but given the unique ownership structure of Gunstock — administered by Goddard, with the five members of the Gunstock Commission providing fiscal management, and bottom-line oversight by the Belknap County Convention — Goddard said he couldn’t think of another example to use as an organizational model. “We’re really kind of plowing our own road in more ways than one.”
That being said, he’s not concerned that Gunstock won’t find a partner for the dance.
Part of his assuredness is because of Peter Knight, president of Connecticut River Valley Holdings. Knight said his company specializes in real estate holdings and public-private partnerships. In such cases, he acknowledges that “your life is ultimately easier” when choosing a less complicated, more straightforward investment. But not everything can be measured in dollars. “The impact that you’re able to have in concert with the community is significant. Is this the highest profit scenario? No, almost never,” Knight said. When asked why he would get involved anyway, he said it would be “tremendously interesting and gratifying.” It’s not all altruism, though. “There will be some economic gain. We wouldn’t step into a partnership to lose money.”
Knight, who has experience in the skiing industry, said he has a vision for Gunstock that is greater than what is currently on the mountain. He declined to say exactly what he would propose, saying he would wait to see what the public and other local parties suggest would be a benefit to the greater community.
What would a private partnership with Gunstock look like? Goddard said he’s not exactly sure what would be the best arrangement, but he’s sure that a “synergy” could be created to benefit both the ski mountain and new business ventures.
For example — and this is just hypothetical — if a private firm approached Gunstock with the concept of a grand resort hotel and conference center, Gunstock could draw up a long-term site lease that would allow the private partner to build and operate the hotel, paying Gunstock annually for the use of the land. Because Gunstock already employs people to plow snow in the winter and maintain the grounds in the warmer months, then the arrangement could be written so that Gunstock’s employees provide those services for the hotel’s grounds, too.
Having a hotel on the grounds would not only be a boon in terms of the yearly lease payments, the guests would also be likely to buy lift tickets, rent equipment, and buy food at the ski mountain.
In an effort to increase activity year-round, one of the amenities Goddard has suggested is a golf course. Gunstock’s grounds crew could assist with maintaining the greens and fairways, and the general manager said many ski pros work as golf pros during the summer.
These are simply examples of how such a relationship might work, he was careful to emphasize. In any partnership, Goddard said the first step would be a market study to see what amenity would be most successful for both parties and palatable for the community.
This will be the eleventh year for Goddard as Gunstock’s general manager. He spend about as much time as the director of finance and administration for the mountain resort prior to that. He still lives in the Gilford house he grew up in, just a short distance from the mountain. For Goddard and the Gunstock Commissioners, proposing this change will undoubtedly bring about more headaches. “We would like to keep doing what we’re doing, we just don’t see a long-term viability in it anymore.”
In a good year, Gunstock will see gross operating revenues of about $7.5–million. In recent years, due to poor skiing weather, the annual gross revenues have been about $6.5-million, the level at which Goddard said the resort is “treading water.”
One of the difficulties for Gunstock is that is currently seen by most as a one-day destination. Visitors can decide on the very day of their visit if they’ll go, depending on the weather. Compare that to destinations further away, or ones that require lodging with deposits, which guests plan weeks or months ahead of time. For those destination resorts, their guests still show up even if the weather is poor.
In an average winter, Gunstock sees about 170,000 skiers and about 20,000 tubers — tube riders that is, not potatoes. Another 25,000 will come to the resort, but won’t take to the slopes or tube hill.
With development of RV camping sites and summer events like Ribfest, SoulFest, Oktoberfest and the Timberman triathlon’s Timberfest, summer visitors are up to 80,000 per year. However, for a resort in an area known for warm weather recreation, Goddard would like to see more people at Gunstock whether it’s cold outside or not.
A bit interesting that Doug would have dredged this up from 15 years ago – and that it hasn’t been the first time that plans were discussed to expand beyond the original mission statement of a Government Agency – happens all the time.
But it IS interesting that it surfaces yet again when monied people were on the GAC, that former Commissioner Rusty McLear is a developer of some note locally, Kiedasich boasting about his skills and money, and Tom Day working at the Rt 93 Rest stop that McLear and Alex Ray put together, and that Alex Ray does restaurant development.
And JUST BY COINCIDENCE, a new Master Plan for Gunstock was proposed….timing, timing, timing.
The way these people are fighting, there HAS to be something.
And is there something, Doug Lambert (of DGF Industrial)? Wwhy all of a sudden you flipped from being the guy I knew that always wanted to ferret this kind of stuff out to now being the guy that is keeping everyone from finding it by killing of the sub-committees that could have found out?
Inquiring minds want to know…because you, since violently switching sides, have been working VERY hard in continuing to deflect attention away from this and putting the public’s attention onto those that WERE looking for that “something”.
Is THIS the “why” you had to get rid of them?
Why, Doug, why?
And, in no small manner, why you were leaving comments on GraniteGrok about me? Not to worry, I have them all. I need to start doing some more DIQUS Doodling posts again. Thanks Doug, for reminding me.
The post Oh Doug? Did you really mean to say “fascist” millions? appeared first on Granite Grok.
UPDATE: NO MATERIALS HAVE BEEN SENT TO ME BY JESSICA OR ADMINISTRATORS IN SAU21:
Sat, Aug 20, 12:25 PM (SENT)
jessica@seacoastoutright.org Hello Jessica, Thank you for taking the time to talk to me this week about the upcoming teacher training in SAU21. You mentioned that you had sent the materials that you will be using during the training to the SAU prior to our conversation. If those materials, videos, etc. can be sent to me via an email, I would appreciate it. I know you said that the training would not be open to the public to view. I do think it would help to make this as transparent as possible. I’ve heard from parents who are assuming that there is going to be material or information presented that would be controversial. By making this all transparent, you might be able to address their concerns. A videotaped session posted on the school district website could also be another option to making all of this transparent. While I do understand that you want to make sure that teachers are in a “safe place” to discuss the LGBTQ children, let’s not forget that those children belong to the parents, and not the teachers. Everything that involves their children, should be made transparent unless there are extenuating circumstances where they’ve gone through due process. I also hope in the future, you will consider adding experts to these presentations. As we discussed, including someone to offer legal, medical and mental health advice would support our teachers and students. You brought up how this training session saves lives. When I hear that, I think that something like this calls for a non-biased Phd Child Psychologist to be present. Since you are referring to the serious nature of anxiety, depression or suicide, we really don’t know what would save a child’s life. But a Child Psychologist with the education and clinical training would have the background to offer the best advice. If this kind of training is truly about helping the LGBTQ kids in the schools, then politics has to be removed and those with the best medical, legal and psychological training need to be the ones to help them. While I am sure that you believe you are offering the best advice possible, sometimes those without expert credentials, either leave important information out of a discussion, or add something that can cause harm. While that may not be your intention, that is why we have experts in those fields who can draw upon their expertise to make sure that the teachers, or the children, are not being put in harm’s way. For instance Seacoast Outright includes Planned Parenthood as a resource but as you can see from this video from an upcoming film, the young ladies who went through transitioning to become a boy now have regrets. They talk about their suicidal thoughts, self harm and depression. Planned Parenthood prescribed testosterone but didn’t offer them the psychological help they needed. That’s the danger in policizing this important subject. Will our teachers and students see the whole picture, or just someone’s politicized viewpoint? Nothing on this page includes any information about the warning from the CDC on puberty blockers, or that a hospital in Sweden stopped prescribing puberty blockers because of the physical harm that they’ve caused to some of their patients. On one hand you acknowledge the self harm, serious mental health issues and that your training saves lives, while at the same time you are telling me that the training doesn’t include any presentations by non political or biased experts in the field of medicine or mental health. When scrolling through the website, I noted the list of medical resources but those resources have put some of the girls in the video in harm’s way. They did not step in to make sure that these girls were seen by the best physicians and Child Psychologists available. I’m not sure how one can make the claim that these trainings are saving lives. I hope we can continue this dialogue because I don’t want to see the teachers put in a vulnerable position with their students. I don’t want to see our children shuffled along a path that leads them to regret or even worse, medical procedures that are irreversible. Nothing on the website includes any videos or information on detransitions or testimony from those who now regret some of the decisions they’ve made. By withholding this information, I’m not sure how anyone can claim that they are helping LGBTQ children. Thank you again for your time and your thoughtful consideration.—
TRUST REQUIRES TRANSPARENCY
The post Seacoast Outright: Political Org. Hired to Train Teachers in SAU21, What are They Hiding? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Once more unto the breach, as they say, with a (small) mountain of mockery. Memes are the gift that keeps on giving, and we’ve got more than just a few here to stimulate your Monday.
Trigger warning. Sometimes memes can appear offensive but then, that’s the point.
The post MONDAY MEMES appeared first on Granite Grok.
The world of finance and investment is something that is of keen and particular interest to some people, and you might find yourself to be firmly within this group. If that’s the case, the subject of online trading is also likely to have piqued your interest. However, taking something that you know and love and digitizing it might not make it as immediately accessible and familiar as you might expect.
Therefore, conducting some research into what this new form of your familiar interest entails can help you to get a better grasp of the situation and to decide what action you want to take moving forward.
What Do You Trade?The first question that might pop into your mind could be related to the contents of the trading itself. Well, in many ways, this might be an aspect that you’re familiar with. If you’ve got experience with investing, or stocks and shares, this could all be a familiar landscape, with the main difference simply being how you access these means in the first place. This is due to the convenience that comes with modern technology, and how even something like this has been made as easy as possible for you by your smartphone and the many apps available on that platform.
That’s not your only option, though, and you might be more interested in the likes of cryptocurrency, embracing the digital format to its fullest. In this case, you might be looking for the best place to begin, which could have you browsing the various forms of cryptocurrency, and perhaps checking the live price of Dogecoin, amongst other examples.
Control Your EmotionsIt might also be that you’ve heard of online trading as a form of ‘getting rich quick’, which might give you the wrong perception about it and how it’s going to work. Before you get started, it’s paramount that you understand what you’re getting into, but it might be even more important to ensure that your emotions are under control when you get involved. It’s always easy for tempers to flare whenever money is involved, but you must know that things aren’t always going to go your way here – that’s just the way it is. That doesn’t mean that you should necessarily turn away from it if you’re interested, but realistic expectations can better help you to manage your emotions.
The Right People to Listen ToIf online trading is something that you’re serious about, you must have some good sources of information that can help to inform your strategy. It’s tempting to just listen to your friends and go with your gut, but without the proper knowledge to back this up, you might just be putting yourself in a bad situation for no reason. This is a popular field, and as a result, there are many people to who you can go for information. They might be authors of books on the subjects, but they could also be active on platforms such as YouTube if you find that to be more appealing to you.
The post Everything You Need To Know About Online Trading appeared first on Granite Grok.
Previous RINO Reports mentioned some of the good guys who are in primaries with RINOs. This report mentions more of the good guys who are in primaries.
Ratings are based on candidates’ RINO scores (good is low) and also on HRA (House Republican Alliance) scores (good is high).
RINO scores are a calculation looking at every single vote. Votes where (a majority of) Republicans and (a majority of) Democrats vote the same are ignored. When a Republican votes with the Democrats against Republicans, that is a RINO vote. The RINO score is simply the percentage of RINO votes of scored votes.
We want to thank Spec Bowers for this Press Release. Please direct yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.
The HRA scores are calculated from recommendations that are based on the Constitution and the Republican platform. See NHHRA.org.
These candidates have very good to excellent voting records.
Belknap county
District 5 (Laconia 1, 3, 4, 5, 6)
Dawn Johnson has the best voting record of all Reps this term. (She tied with Sue DeLemus who was not able to run this year.) Johnson has a RINO score of zero. She did not vote even a single time with Democrats against Republicans. She also scored 100% on the HRA scorecard.
District 7 (Alton, Barnstead)
Paul Terry scored in the top 3%, with a RINO score of 1.6% and an HRA score of 100%.
District 12 (Merrimack)
Of 6 Reps running for reelection, only two are in the top tier.
Melissa Blasek scored in the top 3%, with a RINO score of 1.6% and an HRA score of 100%.
Jeanine Notter made the top 20%, with a RINO score of 2.1% and an HRA score of 97%
District 32 (New Ipswich, Wilton, Temple)
Diane Kelley and Jim Kofalt both made the top 2%, with RINO scores of 1.4% and HRA scores of 100%
District 42 (New Boston, Mont Vernon, Lyndeborough)
Bill Foster has the third best voting record of all Reps. His RINO score is a piddling 0.8% and his HRA score 100%.
Lisa Post made the top 10% with a RINO score of 1.6% and an HRA score of 97%
District 43 (Milford)
Vanessa Sheehan placed in the top 15% of Reps, with a RINO score of 1.9% and HRA score of 96%.
District 8 (Henniker, Warner, Bradford)
Annie Kennedy made the top 10% with a RINO score of 1.6% and HRA score of 97%
District 25 (Franklin, Northfield)
Kenna Cross is in the top 10% with a RINO score of 1.4% and HRA of 97%
District 35 (Londonderry, Windham)
Julius Soti made the top 1% with a RINO score of 1.1% and HRA score of 100%
The post NH Republicans in Primaries – These Candidates Have Very Good to Excellent Voting Records. appeared first on Granite Grok.
I sometimes just go surfing around for “different stuff” as even I, being the political junkie I am, grow a bit weary of a non-stop political diet.
And yes, this made me laugh:
And she has, ever since. The last laugh.
(H/T: Pleated Jeans)
The post Palate Cleanser – Yes, She Knew All Along. Now Everyone Else Does Too! appeared first on Granite Grok.
We have known for some time that one of the multiple ways that the 2020 election was rigged is that the Hunter Biden laptop … which in addition to showing that crack-head Hunter was a crackhead and lawbreaker, showed that the “Big Guy” was into Hunter’s grift up to his eyebrows … was censored. We recently learned that the wellspring for the censorship was the FBI:
BREAKING: Mark Zuckerberg tells Joe Rogan that Facebook algorithmically censored the Hunter Biden laptop story for 7 days based on a general request from the FBI to restrict election misinformation. pic.twitter.com/llTA7IqGa1
— Minds (@minds) August 25, 2022
The FBI knew that the laptop was legitimate. It interfered in the 2020 election in order to get Biden elected. Polling shows that Trump would have won going away if the voters had been aware of the laptop.
This is totally indefensible. You don’t have a fair election or a democracy when the FBI is putting its finger on the scale.
Yet … as far as I can tell … not a peep about this outrage from NH-NeverTrumpJournal. Apparently, Michael Graham would rather live in a Police State than allow the voters to have the President they want.
The post Hey NH-NeverTrumpJournal … Any Comment On The FBI Rigging The 2020 Election? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Ending Free Speech and the protections enshrined in the First Amendment is both a journey and a destination for the Left. Message control is essential to any authoritarian rule. You must make examples of anyone who dares to contradict the approved narratives.
So, why not “hide” your ministry of truth inside the IRS?
And I use the word hide with a touch of sarcasm. The political left is proud of its speech suppressing powers, but repeated efforts to ensconce a ministry of truth under the executive branch have been unsuccessful. Obama tried it repeatedly (remember AttackWatch?), and now Biden’s effort failed to take flight.
Related: Loving Left Propose Commission to Cleanse America of Political Opponents After They Win
See something, say something, rat out neighbors who have parties during the lockdown. Calling the cops on businesses that don’t enforce mask mandates or individuals who are unmasked. These are all progressive shades of the authoritarian tick.
Do what we say, or there shall be consequences. Hello, IRS!
It started with Hate Speech (which is whatever they say it is), and it has elevated to arming a battalion of IRS agents (you thought that was to collect taxes?). We’re getting an additional 87,000 Lois Lerner’s with urban combat training. All, I posit, to establish the ministry of truth by other means. Sure, they’ll audit a few returns, but most of them will belong to people who lack the ability to remain silent.
Related: “Defending Free Speech” Has to Mean More than Just Opposing Efforts to Silence It
Those among us whose words can be construed or misconstrued as a threat to the Republic. Think, Mar-a-Lago but instead of a former President, it’s your neighbor’s house or maybe yours. J6 but from your laptop or smartphone instead of contrived on the Capitol campus.
Swatting will become a matter of public policy because the Left will do anything to shut you up. Compliant AGs will determine that the shootings were justified. Agents of the regime may end up dead.
I’m not hoping or asking that’s just a likely side-effect of the coming storm. And no, those will not be deemed justified self-defense. That’s another right to which they believe you are not entitled, so if you are talking up 2A, the IRS will be coming to visit you too.
They may pick on a few rich folks, but parents speaking out at school board meetings should expect to get audited first, followed by school choice advocates and homeschoolers. The government’s monopoly on education is essential to securing the minds of future generations.
Related: U.C. Irvine Prof. Calls For Selective Censorship to Reign in ‘Cheap Speech’
They won’t go after anybody too terribly high-profile, mind you, not at first. That might raise red flags. And I’m not saying I’ve got this nailed, but I think I’m close to the mark.
It will be up to the states to push back. Local sheriffs, AGs, State Police, and your chief executive. If they don’t step in and defend you from this federal overreach, you’ll be defenseless. They will come to make examples of you (CNN will probably be there, their ratings could use some help). The cover story will be about tax evasion, or along that vein, but I’d bet money that the real threat is free speech.
They can’t make the amendment disappear, but they can terrorize people until they shut up, and a free-standing ministry of truth has proven difficult to pull off. So, why not embed it into the ministry of finance? Pretend that politicians who could care less about debt and spending want to ensure everyone pays their fair share.
They’ll take the money but what they are after is Free Speech.
The post Those 87,000 Armed IRS Agents Are Actually Coming for Your Free Speech appeared first on Granite Grok.
And no, it wasn’t George Hansel, Sununu handpicked maiden – he (like Matt Mowers in CD-1) didn’t get a single vote. Remember, he refused to participate in our GrokGauntlet series by saying that it would be a “gotcha” interview; I’m betting that not ONE of those candidates that DID participate would say that any gotcha questions were ever asked. Some hard ones, some multi-leveled ones, and perhaps some they didn’t want to field, but not a single gotcha. Then he claimed, from what I’ve been told, that we had sent out a survey – my response at the time was, to the effect, “hardly as most of our questions are done on the fly”.
So, that left Bob Burns and Lily Tang Williams to evaluate. Bob came in early in our process and Lily was second to last. And don’t forget that we always add another candidate when we Groksters vote: “No Endorsement in this race”.
As I said I would, here’s their videos:
Bob Burns:
Lily Tang Williams:
What’s surprising me is that this election cycle, GraniteGrok has endorsed in another race. That would be:
Lily Tang Williams
We wish her well in the Primary coming up on September 13.
The post Announcement: GraniteGrok Endorsement for NH Second Congressional District appeared first on Granite Grok.
During a recent trip to a BoSox baseball game at Fenway Park I was thrilled to see 81-year-old Red Sox pitching legend Luis Tiant visiting the old ballyard. He naturally received a big ovation when his presence was acknowledged.
But as I looked around at the applauding fans, it occurred to me that most of them weren’t even born when “El Tiante” threw his last Red Sox pitch at Fenway against the Toronto Blue Jays.
It was Sunday, October 1, 1978—the last day of the regular season, and Boston trailed the Yankees by one game. It was obviously a must-win for Boston, and there was no better pitcher to have on the mound for such a game than Tiant. The wily Cuban twirled a two-hit shutout. Boston’s 5-0 win was its eighth straight triumph as the Sox desperately chased the Yankees for the American League East title. The Yankees had won six straight going into their Sunday finale.
All the Yankees needed to do was win at home that day against the lowly Cleveland Indians to clinch the pennant. As Tiant shut down the Jays, fans kept checking the score from Yankee Stadium.
Somehow the Indians prevailed. Fenway Park’s giant screen flashed the news. And then the simple words: “Thank You Rick Waits.” Waits was the Indian pitcher that day, and like Dave Roberts, Bernie Carbo, Malcolm Butler, and Gerald Henderson, he earned New England sports immortality with his effort that October 1. And he didn’t even play for Boston! I’m sure that even today, Red Sox fans thank him and buy him drinks.
It all set up a one-game playoff with the Yankees the next day at Fenway. The Bucky Dent game.
(No need to relive THAT!)
The next year Tiant signed with the Yankees.
(No need to relive THAT either.)
But it was especially cool to see El Tiante again because I’d gone to that July game with fellow legislator Jose Cambrils, who like Tiant, is a refugee from Communist Cuba.
State Representatives Mike Moffett and Jose Cambrils at Fenway Park
So, I pondered baseball’s Cuban connection. Cuba’s always been a baseball hotbed—perhaps producing the highest percentage of MLB prospects per capita anywhere. Indeed, Cuban dictator Fidel Castro especially loved baseball. But contrary to legend, he never really had a tryout with the Washington Senators. He was never that good. Which is too bad because had he been a great baseball player, he may not have become a murderous Communist tyrant.
The 20-year-old Tiant was pitching in Mexico in 1960 when Castro consolidated his Communist control in Cuba. Luis wouldn’t see his parents again until 1975—another special year for El Tiante when he helped the Red Sox advance to a memorable World Series.
(In fact, while the Red Sox lost to the Cincinnati Reds in seven games, Boston won all three games that Tiant started.)
But with Castro now gone, what’s happening with modern-day Cuban baseball prospects?
One such prospect was Rusney Castillo, whom the Red Sox signed on August 23, 2014, for $72.5 million. That was a lot of money in those pre-inflation days. Castillo essentially had to defect from Cuba to get that MLB shot, as the Communists still wouldn’t allow their stars to play elsewhere.
The 27-year-old Castillo wore the same number 38 that he’d worn in Cuba. He’d get his first MLB hit that September 17 at Fenway. But he’d spend most of those seven years playing Triple AAA ball in Pawtucket. MLB stardom eluded him.
Which brings us to a new documentary: The Last Out. This film chronicles the trials and tribulations, the heartbreak and frustration of Cuban baseball players chasing MLB dreams despite oppressive Communist tyranny.
A lucky few found their way to stardom, like Houston Astros superstar Yordan Álvarez. But thousands of others were unable to navigate the political shoals separating Cuba from the USA. It’s a (mostly) heartbreaking saga—but an important one for those interested in sports sociology and the world beyond box seats and box scores. It’s also a reminder regarding the true nature of Communism—a totalitarian ideology that so many “progressives” seem to want to gloss over.
The stories portrayed in The Last Out remind us how blessedly lucky we are to live in America—which truly remains a land of opportunity. Just ask Jose Cambrils.
Gratitude is good. That’s why the “Thank You Rick Waits” message at Fenway that long ago October 1 still resonates with those of us who watched the BoSox that day.
And “Thank You Luis Tiant” too!
The post Cuba, Communists, Castro, Cambrils … And El Tiante! appeared first on Granite Grok.
Each Sunday, I take a step away from daily politics and focus on someone who has done extraordinary things or who we may need to know a little better. This week’s focus is on a highly complex individual, which is a very refreshing occurrence in this day of Right/Left, Black/White, and Wrong/Right.
This Spotlight is on the Comedian, Activist, Actor, Political Commentator, and Man of Many Hats, Bill Maher.
For years, I saw Bill Maher as a cheerleader of the Left. He was a Bernie Bro before he jumped on the Hillary Wagon and was a staunch and often harsh critic of Donald Trump. He supported Joe Biden but seemed to catch on very early that what the country got in Joe Biden did not live up to the hype we were served in 2020. Bill Maher still claims to be a Liberal, but as evidenced by the number of times FOX News has used his comments criticizing the Left, he may be the most conservative Liberal in America. Bill Maher will not be speaking at a Trump Rally or the Republican Convention in 2024, but his voice may be vital as we try to bridge this widening chasm between the Left and Right.
Maher has never been afraid of touching the third rail of hot topics. He is Pro-Choice but came out recently to push back against the attacks on Pro-Lifers by the Radical Left. Maher points to far more restrictive European countries as proof that we are not going back to 1973 with the overturning of Roe vs. Wade. He also blasted The NY Times for not covering the attempted assassination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
It is interesting to see how Maher can live in the Middle while the country is obsessed with being either Right or Left. Some of his recent stances show a reasonable and logical view that we should all strive for. He is a gun owner while also a supporter of PETA. He thinks the Second Amendment needs limitations, a position many on the Right are starting to adopt.
This past Friday, Maher took on the FBI, Social Media, and the mainstream media for burying and censoring the Hunter Biden Laptop Story. In a heated discussion with his guest Rob Reiner, Maher went off on the conspiracy to keep the Hunter story buried to ensure that Joe Biden would replace Donald Trump in the White House. Reiner questioned where Maher was getting his info, and Maher counterpunched, telling Reiner that he would know the same information if MSNBC were not the sole provider of his news. In one short exchange, Maher took on the FBI, Mark Zuckerberg, the media, and the Left, who cannot see the facts before them. It was a sound bite that will be used by many Republicans running in this election cycle.
Maher is teaching us a valuable lesson. You can have your beliefs and principles, but you must keep your eyes and ears open. I think Maher is winning over more people with his voice of reason than turning away his supporters on the Left. We would all be in a better place if we dared to drift away from our respective corners and explore the middle ground between us. It is a familiar place where most really want the world to reside.
The post Sunday Spotlight: The Enigma That is Bill Maher appeared first on Granite Grok.
Mann has made a name for himself by famously postulating things that have not come true. That makes him a perfect keynote speaker for a group that exists to mislead people by ignoring anything that contradicts their Dogma.
Dr. Mann is also well known for suing people who refute his hockey stick, the data for which he then refuses to provide in defense of his claims of legitimacy. He sued Dr. Tim Ball. That ended with the case dismissed and Mann being ordered to pay Ball’s court costs. Mann sued National Review, a case that muddled about for eight years before being dismissed. They have also sought court costs, as has CEI, which I believe was accused of harming Mann’s livelihood – proof that Mann also refused to produce.
And he has a “girlfriend” in Canada. Just don’t ask for any pictures.
Mann has refused to pay the court costs (by the way) of either Ball or National Review (they asked, not sure if they were awarded). So, aside from being quick to sue, he is also a sore loser who doesn’t pay the legal bills of those he tries to ruin through lawfare when they contradict “sources and methods” he refuses to release.
I guess The Forest Society is just another bunch of Mann-Boys (Mark Steyn’s name for his fan club), which includes the troglodytes at Penn State who hid the sexual antics of Jerry Sandusky and who continue to pander the musing of Michael Mann, probably because they make money from it.
And Mann is coming to Concord, New Hampshire, on September 24th, so we whould expect the Climateers and their corporate media stenographers to embrace the Mann-Love while ignoring the controversy surrounding him, his “science,” and Penn State.
We look forward to the experience.
One final note. I will give the “Forest Society” this much credit. Their over-the-top promotion (the Mann Bio) never mentions his “winning” the Nobel Peace Prize. That happens from time to time, and in this, at least, they got it right.
The post NH TreeHugger’s Will Feature Michael “Hockey-Stick” Mann for Keynote Address in September appeared first on Granite Grok.
In my post a couple of days ago (“Laconia State Rep Gregg Hough: With All His Other Political Enemies, He’s Decided to Anger GraniteGrok, too?“), I presented his allegations to the Belknap County Republican Committee as to why its Executive Committee (e.g., Chair, Vice-Chair, Treasurer, Secretary (who was absent from the hearing), and At-Large member) should no longer allow GraniteGrok to be present as the lone media representative at its meetings.
Even as GraniteGrok is at least as Conservatarian as anyone else that attends, and in a number of cases, quite a bit MORE so.
So anyways, having been notified of his document and their willingness to honor Due Process, I was sent Hough’s document against which I could mount a defense of both myself and GraniteGrok. Again, while I thought it was to be a three-party process (Hough, myself, and the BCRC-EC), I learned that he had forwarded HIS document to the entire delegation (more on that later).
So, I am going to share what I wrote. FAR longer than his as he just “threw crap against the wall in hopes it would stick”, my defense went more on a point-by-point basis. And yes, I will admit, throwing in a bit of snark in return. Yes, I could not help myself even if this was a bit of a “legal” type document but I think that it was needed to make additional points to show what should have remained to be a private spat between a private person/constituent and his elected representative. Unfortunately, at this point – and he obviously will not be getting my vote – he went public, and so shall I.
I guess he hasn’t inculcated the phrases “Be careful of what you wish for” and “Don’t pick a fight with a guy that buys his pixel at a fixed price per month”. Throw in the Law of Unintended Consequences and he’s earned the Trifecta of bad mistakes.
So, here it is. Now, the original intent was to just read this entire document to the BCRC-EC but it became clear while the BCRC-EC members were grilling questioning him, a lot of what I had written became “old ground” so I passed over it (I had emailed it to the Chair earlier and was told each would be reading it afterwards) so I “ad hoc’d” it and read some but not all. But now Hough gets to read it all – if he wants. And yes, it is lightly edited from the original version as I “ad libbed” a bit so I added some back in.
Yes, it is long – 8 pages of my rebuttal and a couple of pages outlining the relevant parts of RSA 91A and RSA 24 that Hough decided to ignore in declaring for, helping to structure, assisting in running, and voting in, the illegal meeting of the Belknap County Delegation – the root cause of this whole thing in which he didn’t like getting called out over.
Good afternoon.
Isn’t this a sordid affair – no, not for me but for the NH Government’s Agent, NH State Rep Gregg Hough. And yes, I am recording this Due Process session of the Belknap County Republican Committee Executive Committee (“BCRC-EC”) as there is a real probability that Rep. Hough is going to end up in a legal proceeding – I have already retained legal counsel. Thus, for both his protection and mine, cameras are rolling.
My defense here before the BCRC-EC will be in three parts. First is with the Executive Committee, the second is in interrogating Rep. Hough as to his insipid and shamefully hollow allegations in his accusation brought before the BCRC-EC concerning me and GraniteGrok, and then thirdly, returning to the BCRC-EC.
Addition after the hearing: The post that has NH State Rep Gregg Hough so twisted: On Keeping One’s Word – Or Not. Not Cool to Lie to a New Constituent, Gregg Hough (Laconia Ward Two)!
Phase I: BCRC – EC
Madam Secretary:
Mister Treasurer:
To the Executive Board as a whole:
Phase 2: Rep Gregg Hough
You are accusing me of several issues. Your remedy for these allegations is that you would have the BCRC stop my reporting on BCRC meetings. Is this correct (Yes or No)?
Let us walk through every one, shall we? I wish to understand your vapid positions on these. And if you are in horror of how your positions are being labeled, remember that I am a Private Citizen and you are a Government Agent by your actions and desire. Do you even understand why this point is so important?
And lest I forget, this question lurks – why are you even involving the BCRC-EC in what is a personal spat? Or have your political ambitions so blinded you?
Given the answers from the BCRC-EC, there is one word that describes your actions:
Chutzpah.
However, before delving into each of your allegations, let me remind you of your oath of office (NH Constitution, below), in part:
… agreeably to the rules and regulations of this constitution and laws of the state of New Hampshire.
Would you agree?
Let’s also go to the root cause of this kerfuffle – that illegal meeting of the Delegation and your part of it. Contrast and compare the relevant portions of RSA 91A and RSA 24 in calling and having that meeting. Demonstrate, for us, that you are being faithful to the Laws you invoked in this regard.
Addition after the hearing – the relevant portions of both RSAs follow this defense document have been added at the end.
As to your allegations:
You have provided no proof as to this allegation.
You have provided no proof as to this allegation. As I have said for years and over countless posts – we are all political activists and report from that viewpoint. We do, however, participate in citizen journalism in which we do not opine, just put up the video as with the BCRC meetings.
Addition after the hearing – Said. No. Grokster. EVAH! I challenged Rep. Hough to find such amongst the over 47,000 posts on GraniteGrok. Heck, even Senator Elizabeth Warren had a1024th chance at being an American Indian – he’s got less chance than that in proving his allegation.
“Speak Truth To Power” – why the adoption of such a Democrat/Progressive phrase, Representative Hough? Again, you present no “truth” to this allegation in the form of specific instances to support your allegation. In this, the previous two allegations and those that follow, YOU are the one “making stuff up” and expecting that others will believe you simply by dint of the Power of your Government Agent’s position of being an NH State Rep? Projection much?
Very slovenly thinking and reasoning, wouldn’t you agree? This is what I want in my elected representative?
Addition after the hearing – These allegations had me remember that old joke about consultants: “fly in, drop a load of crap, and fly away”.
Or was it just to easy (and lazy) adopting the technique that was used against Peter Ness and Dr. David Strang – make up an allegation:
THEY VIOLATED THEIR OATHS!!!! GET RID OF THEM!!!!
and then present NO proof at all that they did such things. Do YOU have any proof that they did? So why are you trying to use “The Big Lie” here?
In fact, we have a history at GraniteGrok of when we believe we are wrong, we state such AND we do so in a post that appears on our front page and not buried deeply like other media sources. And I have corrected multiple authors of posts when they have been in the wrong.
Whether you question things or not is your right but immaterial to your remedy you are seeking. Yours is but a personal opinion. A limp one.
By whom? Just you, Doug Lambert, Jade Wood, The rest of the “Lang Gang”? Because I pose a threat that must be dealt with? I see a relationship pattern developing here – and that you are now working to further sow dissension within the GAC, the Delegation, and Republicans in Belknap at large.
You DO realize that the new Commissioner that you voted for, Denise Conroy, wants you GONE, right?
Yes, that’s her sign (color version on GraniteGrok). The one you missed when you failed in your obligation as a member of the Delegation to properly vet the candidates simply because, in my humble opinion, you wanted to be “seen to be doing something” and do it fast. Just like the Citizens for Belknap PAC wanted.
Addition after the hearing – And why the Citizens for Belknap is now calling for your electoral defeat?
You have provided no proof that this has happened. Name a specific instance where a video recording has been misused. I’ll say it again – you’re lying, again. Proof? Not once has the BCRC-EC accused me of such.
Addition after the hearing – And we’re back to 1/47,00 chance of proving it.
This has already been addressed (above) and at this time of meeting, most likely already answered and decided. Especially since it has already been determined that you haven’t bothered to show up much at all since the change in administration of the BCRC. Thus, HOW WOULD YOU KNOW what the purpose of the gatherings are?
Addition after the hearing – you keep building that “Hough Jenga Tower” and then pulling out the first piece that causes your case to fail and fall immediately
Past history proves you wrong. If there was NO reason, why did the BCRC-EC allow GraniteGrok to start doing so in the beginning of their term? And allowed such video recording to continue? Again, only your personal opinion.
Well, isn’t that gratuitous of you? And rife with several problems. First, if you knew ANYTHING about GraniteGrok, you would know that no one WORKS for GraniteGrok, we all volunteer. We have no payroll so we have no employees – that’s what real NH political activists on the Right are – volunteers.
However, you leave a question dangling – are you stating, in your position of being a Government Agent, that while are you giving us leave to attend, like the aristocracy of old, BCRC meetings, are you meaning that you are using your position of Government Authority to not allow us our Freedom of Speech and ability to write about those meetings afterwards?
How would you have that enforced? Tell me, Rep. Hough – which RSA would you now torment that you would obviate the First Amendment and Articles 22 and 30 to disallow any GraniteGrok author from writing about a given meeting?
You DO know that a number of GraniteGrok authors attend BCRC meetings/events, right? Oh wait, you wouldn’t – you don’t show up.
I ask that you consider the afore mentioned [sic], as I for one will still attend when my availability allows, however if there is press there, I will not participate in my full capacity, nor do I believe other [sic] will, with the Granite Grok [sic] or any other press presence
Is that a threat or simply a statement of your past performance? And if the former (as the latter has already been proven), who do you think even cares?
Addition after the hearing – Lenin purportedly the creator of the phrase “useful idiot”. You now are a living, breathing example. You single handedly allowed that illegal meeting happen and YOU are upset that a constituent is bringing the hammer down on you for breaking the Law by saying that I’d work for your defeat? You helped in dividing the Delegation. Conservatives are looking at you sideways. Sununu called for you to be defeated. The Citizens for Belknap PAC, now that your usefulness is at an end, is actively campaigning to defeat you.
And now you’ve ticked off GraniteGrok with baseless allegations? Congratulations, welcome to your Participation Trophy.
Phase 3: BCRC – EC
He has wantonly and with purpose, he showed a callousness toward the Law contra his Oath of Office.
Thus, I ask the following questions:
Isn’t this a matter in which a Government Agent, NH State Rep Gregg Hough, is asking the BCRC to met out a remedy for what is truthfully an action that is solely between a citizen and his Elected Representative outside the purview of the BCRC’s purposes and activities?
That he is purely adopting the tactics of that Democrat based PAC that has so roiled Republican politics in trying to silence, not only GraniteGrok, but also that of the BCRC in trying to get its messages out without undue editorializing that is often been done in the past by other media?
I ask that you consider and deliberate on those two question and the allegations that Rep Hough has brought forward today in the following light:
I, A.B. do solemnly and sincerely swear and affirm that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all duties incumbent on me as …………………………………………., according to the best of my abilities, agreeably to the rules and regulations of this constitution and laws of the state of New Hampshire. So help me God.
Summary:
Therefore, I ask for the following actions by the BCRC-EC:
And know that I will be writing about him with peals of laughter over this supercilious attempt to co-opt the BCRC-EC in his vendetta as a Government Agent in trying to deny MY Freedom to Free Speech in writing/recording about any BCRC meeting/event that I wish to attend (being a registered Republican) as I am protected AGAINST him by both the NH and US Bill of Rights incorporated into both Constitutions.
In this, he is showing an abuse of Power and a careless disregard of responsibilities of his duty to faithfully protect and defend the Constitution and the Laws of this State (see Oath of Office, above).
https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-mrg.htm
Section 91-A:2
91-A:2 Meetings Open to Public. –
I. For the purpose of this chapter, a “meeting” means the convening of a quorum of the membership of a public body, as defined in RSA 91-A:1-a, VI, or the majority of the members of such public body if the rules of that body define “quorum” as more than a majority of its members, whether in person, by means of telephone or electronic communication, or in any other manner such that all participating members are able to communicate with each other contemporaneously, subject to the provisions set forth in RSA 91-A:2, III, for the purpose of discussing or acting upon a matter or matters over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. A chance, social, or other encounter not convened for the purpose of discussing or acting upon such matters shall not constitute a meeting if no decisions are made regarding such matters. “Meeting” shall also not include:
(a) Strategy or negotiations with respect to collective bargaining;
(b) Consultation with legal counsel;
(c) A caucus consisting of elected members of a public body of the same political party who were elected on a partisan basis at a state general election or elected on a partisan basis by a town or city which has adopted a partisan ballot system pursuant to RSA 669:12 or RSA 44:2; or
(d) Circulation of draft documents which, when finalized, are intended only to formalize decisions previously made in a meeting; provided, that nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed to alter or affect the application of any other section of RSA 91-A to such documents or related communications.
II. Subject to the provisions of RSA 91-A:3, all meetings, whether held in person, by means of telephone or electronic communication, or in any other manner, shall be open to the public. Except for town meetings, school district meetings, and elections, no vote while in open session may be taken by secret ballot. Any person shall be permitted to use recording devices, including, but not limited to, tape recorders, cameras, and videotape equipment, at such meetings. Minutes of all such meetings, including nonpublic sessions, shall include the names of members, persons appearing before the public bodies, and a brief description of the subject matter discussed and final decisions. The names of the members who made or seconded each motion shall be recorded in the minutes. Subject to the provisions of RSA 91-A:3, minutes shall be promptly recorded and open to public inspection not more than 5 business days after the meeting, except as provided in RSA 91-A:6, and shall be treated as permanent records of any public body, or any subordinate body thereof, without exception. Except in an emergency or when there is a meeting of a legislative committee, a notice of the time and place of each such meeting, including a nonpublic session, shall be posted in 2 appropriate places one of which may be the public body’s Internet website, if such exists, or shall be printed in a newspaper of general circulation in the city or town at least 24 hours, excluding Sundays and legal holidays, prior to such meetings.
An emergency shall mean a situation where immediate undelayed action is deemed to be imperative by the chairman or presiding officer of the public body, who shall post a notice of the time and place of such meeting as soon as practicable, and shall employ whatever further means are reasonably available to inform the public that a meeting is to be held.
The minutes of the meeting shall clearly spell out the need for the emergency meeting.
When a meeting of a legislative committee is held, publication made pursuant to the rules of the house of representatives or the senate, whichever rules are appropriate, shall be sufficient notice. If the charter of any city or town or guidelines or rules of order of any public body require a broader public access to official meetings and records than herein described, such charter provisions or guidelines or rules of order shall take precedence over the requirements of this chapter. For the purposes of this paragraph, a business day means the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding national and state holidays.
III. A public body may, but is not required to, allow one or more members of the body to participate in a meeting by electronic or other means of communication for the benefit of the public and the governing body, subject to the provisions of this paragraph.
(a) A member of the public body may participate in a meeting other than by attendance in person at the location of the meeting only when such attendance is not reasonably practical. Any reason that such attendance is not reasonably practical shall be stated in the minutes of the meeting.
(b) Except in an emergency, a quorum of the public body shall be physically present at the location specified in the meeting notice as the location of the meeting. For purposes of this subparagraph, an “emergency” means that immediate action is imperative and the physical presence of a quorum is not reasonably practical within the period of time requiring action.
The determination that an emergency exists shall be made by the chairman or presiding officer of the public body, and the facts upon which that determination is based shall be included in the minutes of the meeting.
https://gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/II/24/24-mrg.htm
RSA 24
24:9-a First Meeting. –The chair of the county delegation shall set the time and place for the first meeting of the county convention to be held during the week of the second Wednesday of December of each even-numbered year and shall notify the clerk of the house of representatives prior to the first Wednesday of December. The time and place of the meeting shall be announced by the clerk of the house of representatives on the first Wednesday of December of each even-numbered year.
Section 24:9-c
24:9-c Further Meetings. –The chairperson of the convention or a majority of the members of the convention may, and the chairperson of the convention upon the written request of the county commissioners shall, call a further meeting or meetings of the county convention. On a day on which there is a meeting of the house of representatives such meetings may be held only in the city or town in which such meeting of the house of representatives is held. On days when there is no meeting of the house of representatives such meetings may be held at any place in the county.
Section 24:9-d
24:9-d Notice. – The clerk of the convention, or his or her designee, shall mail to each member of the convention a notice stating the time, place and purpose of further meetings at least 7 days before the day of the meeting and shall cause to be published a like notice at least 7 days before the day of the meeting in a newspaper of general circulation in the county. Mailing such notice is not required during any session of the general court, if the notice is printed for 2 legislative days in the journal of the house of representatives.
The post My Response to Laconia’s NH State Rep Gregg Hough’s Allegations To Have the BCRC throw GraniteGrok out of their meetings appeared first on Granite Grok.
NH GOP Platform: We believe in free people, free markets and free enterprise.
Unions make it UNfree.
So in my last post (“So, Look Where Brodie Deshaies Is Getting His Campaign Money From! Hint: Right to Work“), we found out WHO is funding Brodie Deshaies’ Political Action Committee, Common Sense PAC. If you go to the site, it talks about “Support the NH Advantage”, “Defend the 2nd Amendment”, “Back Our First Responders”, “Have a Bipartisan Attitude”, and Support Election Integrity & Access”. That first item has this as part of its explanation:
…We must continue our dedication to having some of the country’s lowest taxes and highest economic opportunities…
Well, it is clear that this is, as best, a misdirection as unions only have two things as their purpose – to elevate their members’ (and union bosses’) “economic opportunities” over that of other Americans. They seek to acquire economic advantages over others that they otherwise wouldn’t be able to achieve and that is by “locking out” those people who refuse to join a union where such unions have created a “closed shop” environment. No join, no work. This is what Brodie Deshaies is protecting with the $20,000 from the NH AFL-CIO COPE and the Painters Allied Trades DC#35 PAC.
Now, is he KEEPING all this money to himself? No, as the last page of his filing for Common Sense PAC shows (see below) but there is a question on that bit that I’ll return to later. So where has the bulk of the money gone to? SURPRISE! RINOS! And we’ve been talking about them for a while.
And then, with NO surprise at all, we come to some members of what I and other Belknap County conservatives (and now, more outside of the County), are calling the “Lang Gang“. That would be Tim Lang, btw, who has decided to move from being a State Rep to running for State Senator (with Dave DeVoy and John Plumer being his main Primary rivals – I’ll end voting for one of them over Lang but haven’t decided which yet).
So, that old phrase comes into play “you know a person by the friends you keep” and it seems that a number of his posse, all running for reelection for the NH House like those above, are ALL IN on getting that laundered money through Brodie Deshaies’ Common Sense PAC:
And all that adds up, according to the the filing (below), to $14,000…oh WAIT! My match is wrong! I’m off by $5,000; oopsies, I forgot someone that I’m REALLY surprised at the last person standing (or is that kneeling?):
That’s a bunch of union influence there, isn’t it, that Brodie Deshaies, the cherubic faced one?
Now, I did mention that not ALL the money has been spent – there’s still $6,000 left unspent from that $20,000 haul from the unions…
…where did THAT go (if anywhere)?
The actual Report:
Brodie Deshaies Common Sense PAC Disclosure ReportThe post So, Look Where Brodie Deshaies Is Speading His Union Campaign Money To! One of Them Surprised Me appeared first on Granite Grok.
The Knead pizza chain in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, recently decided to close for good.
This may have been in response to an effort by its employees to form a union. The owners aren’t saying. (They did say that the closure would happen regardless of how the vote to unionize came out.)
The employees have filed a charge with the National Labor Relations Board, which is curious since it’s unclear what the NLRB can do to a business that no longer exists.
Apparently, the employees are claiming that the owners ‘unlawfully closed the business.’ Which is a pretty startling claim, when you think about it. Is there a law that says the owners of a business can’t quit? That would be something right out of Atlas Shrugged.
What I found especially interesting was this comment by one of the former employees:
They chose to close the business rather than sit down as equals and discuss the things that would significantly improve our lives.
But owners and employees aren’t equals. And I don’t mean that in a political or social sense, but in an economic sense.
Here’s how you know that’s true. Only the owners can lose money on the business. The most an employee can lose is his job.
When you see employees offering to share in any losses incurred by a business — as opposed to collecting compensation regardless of how well or badly things are going — then they can start talking about discussing things as equals.
(‘Sorry, but next week, instead of paying you, we’ll need you to come up with a thousand dollars to help cover some unanticipated expenses.’)
Until then, they’re vendors, who happen to be selling their time, knowledge, and expertise. And, as this incident shows, they forget that at their peril.
The post Are Owners and Employees Equals? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Our government is broken at all levels, and many believe that Democrat Congressman Chris Pappas is someone that needs to be held accountable and replaced. One of his potential challengers is Republican candidate Matt Mowers.
Mowers is an engaging, warm, charismatic person, and he comes across as a very a nice guy. Those are important attributes for someone who serves in government and needs to work with others – but making good decisions is even more important.
We all have flaws and make mistakes. All of us. But we’re not making decisions that will impact our federal government. Matt Mowers is asking that we elect him to do just that.
However, when I look at some of his past decisions I scratch my head and wonder “what was he thinking?” Voting twice in the same election is just one example.
Related: Are Some “America First” Candidates Who Support Kevin McCarthy Deep State Enablers?
This past April, the Union Leader reported that Mowers voted twice in the 2016 presidential primary – once in NH, and then again in NJ.
According to this article (emphasis mine),
“Election records show Mowers, state director of 2016 presidential candidate Chris Christie’s campaign, voted in the New Hampshire primary by absentee ballot in February 2016.”
“Mowers left the state and returned to his native New Jersey, gave his parents’ address to register to vote there in March and then voted for Donald Trump in New Jersey’s presidential primary on June 7.”
“Federal law bars voting more than once in any election, including in separate states for the same contest like a presidential primary, but the statute of limitations for voter fraud is five years, which has run out in this case.”
During a Meet and Greet in July, Mowers admitted he voted twice in the 2016 GOP Presidential Primary. Whether you are a Mowers supporter or not… the optics are not good. Especially since Mowers has embraced election integrity as part of his campaign platform.
“We need to make sure we have confidence in our elections“, Mowers told WMUR in January, “It is one of the most sacred obligations that we have.”
His actions and words do not align. They appear to reflect a “do as I say and not as I do” attitude that we see in so many elected officials at so many levels of government. I reviewed federal election law 52 United States Code Section 10307 – Prohibited acts, subsection E, which appears to confirm the article linked above.
With all this in mind, if Republicans want to defeat Chris Pappas, I believe they will need a stronger candidate – especially with election integrity being a significant election issue. Mowers admitted he voted twice in the same election, and I believe that crosses the line for many voters. That single issue is all that Chris Pappas needs to defeat Mowers if he were to become the GOP nominee for CD-1. There are other controversial decisions that will peel off other voters away from Mowers
Related: WATCH: Where Does YOUR CD-1 Congressional Candidate Stand on the Important Issues?
Fortunately for NH, there are some excellent alternatives in the CD-1 Congressional race who would serve NH well. If NH voters want a real change in our Congressional Delegation in Washington, they should do their own research and then cast an informed vote for someone who can beat Pappas.
The post Why I Believe CD-1 Candidate Matt Mowers CANNOT DEFEAT Congressman Chris Pappas appeared first on Granite Grok.
At this point, it is undeniable that the FBI rigged the 2020 election by spreading the LIE that the Hunter Biden laptop was “Russian disinformation” and is trying to rig the 2022 and 2024 elections by, among other things, lawlessly raiding the home of President Trump.
The FBI is a rogue institution that answers to nobody but itself and functions as a modern-day Praetorian Guard choosing our “elected” leaders for us.
Kevin Smith’s solution … useless Congressional hearings:
Smith is somewhere between naive and clueless if he really believes Congressional hearings will fix the FBI. Decisive action is needed immediately. That Smith does not see this disqualifies him from serving as an effective Senator.
The post Kevin Smith’s Support Of The FBI Is Disqualifying appeared first on Granite Grok.
The other day I was reading George Washington’s 6th State of the Union Address (typical beach reading when you are running for office) and was surprised to see this bit:
“The devising and establishing of a well regulated militia would be a genuine source of legislative honor … I therefore entertain a hope that the present session [of Congress] will not pass without [establishing] the power of organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and thus providing, in the language of the Constitution, for calling them forth to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions.”
However, on delving further into the matter, I have come to a sad conclusion. Namely, that in that year — 1794 — both the President and Congresspersons put too much faith in a called-up militia. Where is that militia today? Who can “execute the laws of the Union?” I know a lot of laws that need execution, and there does not seem to be anyone willing to carry out that task. (Example: the crime of evidence tampering — one of my faves.)
We want to thank Mary Maxwell for this Content. Please direct yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.
The title of this article, “Mary’s Moral Militia,” is a guide to the fact that I will be presenting a new sort of militia here (actually, it’s mostly an old sort, but a well-forgotten sort). I do not plan to run any militia myself; the reason for calling it Mary’s is to distinguish it from existing governmental ones. The reason for calling it a MORAL militia is to announce its mission of protecting the nation against governmental criminality.
Don’t have a heart attack thinking I will be unconstitutional, OK? Couldn’t happen. There’s lots of scope in the US Constitution for new arrangements, and that’s without even mentioning Article 10 of the Bill of Rights, which gives “to the states or to the people” everything but the kitchen sink and, quite possibly, the kitchen sink.
Our Current HoldingsPer the parchment, Congress may construct an army and a navy, and they did so. As well, Congress (marginally unconstitutionally) made an Air Force in 1948 and a Space Force in 2019. Thus, we can defend against attacks by other nations. Piece o’ cake.
But also, there’s a provision about militias in Article I, sec 8, Clause 15: “Congress shall have the Power to … provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”
And where would that militia arise from? It comes from the militia of each state: Per Clause 16: “Congress shall have Power … to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States….”
Wow. It looks like Congress can do a lot. What about the President? Can she call up the militia? Well, first of all, please note that the militia mentioned in the Constitution soon morphed into an entity that we call the National Guard. All right, then, can the president call up the national guard? Nope. As we just saw, that is the responsibility of Congress.
But she can command them once they have been handed over to her, so to speak. Hence Article II, sec 2: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States when called into the actual Service of the United States.”
StatutesThe speech I quoted from George Washington occurred in 1794. He had already called up a pre-National Guard militia. That was a bunch of willing citizens; there was no conscription, per se. He needed to put down a tax-related rebellion in Pennsylvania. I quote him:
“I ordered the militia to march. …I put into motion 15K men… It has been a spectacle to see the most and the least wealthy of our citizens standing in the same ranks as private soldiers undeterred by a march of 300 miles over rugged mountains.”
The authority on which President Washington relied was the fact that Congress was not in session. He said he received a letter from a Justice that “laws were opposed [in Pennsylvania], and the execution thereof obstructed by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings [the miscreants had shot at a marshal].” So he deployed the militia.
In this 1794 State of the Union speech, the President said he had tried to confer and even offered pardons but ultimately had to act. He exhorted Congress to pass a law, as his involvement could extend to only 30 days once Congress was back in session. The need for a new law was based on the fact that, in May 1792, Congress created a statute with a built-in limit of two years. Its Section 2 did authorize the aforementioned kind of decision by a president.
Our Dual Fears TodayThis article on MMM will be published in Five Parts. I am trying to find ways to handle two simultaneous fears that are in the American population today. One is fear of physical losses or dangers. Might disease get us all? Might weather patterns spoil the crops? Might money disappear?
The other is a fear that the grounding of society’s moral order is getting obscure. For centuries, we have had institutions to deal with the fact that people compete with one another and may cheat. But those institutions have stopped talking their usual language (or maybe they still talk it, but with blatant insincerity). In their stead comes a new brutal authority. It is accountable to no one, and it won’t help you sort out your differences with your neighbor. It doesn’t care about that stuff.
I am presently running for Congress (the Republican primary looms on September 13, 2022, in New Hampshire). This gives me the opportunity to scream “Constitution” when I’m on the hustings and get actual responses. This five-part series on Mary’s Moral Militia will deal with questions folks ask about martial law, SWAT teams, the law of self-defense, and so forth.
But first, in Part Two, I will deliver the persuasive argument by Edwin Vieira, Jr, that “the militia” referred to in the parchment is, basically, you and me. A later part will reflect my career-long research into the role of morality and its relation to power and force.
Now to end this Part I, I quote from an 1842 pamphlet by SS Nicholas of Kentucky. It’s an admonishment delivered to his contemporaries. I love admonishments (could you tell?):
“Our institutions are framed upon the broad principle, that no rightful authority can exist in any department … but by the assent of the governed. Other governments derive their powers from usage and implied assent. Not so with us. [Thank you, Mr Nicholas]….
“Listen, then, ye degenerate sons, to the warning voices and commands of your fathers while I evoke the very embodiment of all their patriotic virtue and intelligence [not mind controlled!] through their [state] constitutions: …
“New Hampshire. — In all cases and at all times, the military ought to be under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.”
Oh, to be in New Hampshire, now that Article 26 is there!
The post Mary’s Moral Militia, Part 1 appeared first on Granite Grok.
Emphasis mine:
As Charlotte Twight has shown, the essence of fascism is nationalistic collectivism, the affirmation that the “national interest” should take precedence over the rights of individuals. So deeply has the presumption of individual subservience to the state entered into the thinking of modern Americans that few people have noticed – and no doubt many would be offended by the suggestion – that fascism has colored countless declarations by public officials during the past fifty years. Unfortunately, as Friedrich Hayek noted during World War II, “many who think themselves infinitely superior to the aberrations of naziism, and sincerely hate all its manifestations, work at the same time for ideals whose realization would lead straight to the abhorred tyranny.”
Robert Higgs (Crisis and Leviathan)
Much of our politics has the Left calling the Right “fascists” and showing a complete lack of knowledge of what they are saying. They are always yammering about “our community” and “our democracy” and calling those of us quoting the Constitution and the individual Rights it enumerates, along with the fact that it protects individuals AGAINST the “collective” (i.e., Government) extremists as well as fascists.
I get called such all the time over at Treehugger simply because of the above. That is both an example of not knowing what they are talking about as well as yet another example of our redefining our common language for their political gain.
So ANY time, make sure to point out WHAT the differences are.
There is also Economic Fascism which, simply stated, in where there is private ownership of the means of production but where the Collective (Government) seizes “control” over that private means by dint of Law, regulations, and rules. Thus proving that old saw of “why bother to own a cow when you control the production and distribution of milk?”.
Last century’s Italian dictator, Mussolini, states the actual definition:
And that part was true, but where true Western Liberalism (and the democracies that philosophy gave birth to) were all about the Rights and emphasis on the Individual, Mussolini’s Fascism was all about the primacy of The State over the Individual. In fact, as with Socialism and Communism, Fascism’s aim is the complete absorption of the Individual into the collective:
- “Liberalism denied the State in the name of the individual. Fascism reasserts the rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual.”
- “It is a question of organizing the state to ensure the greatest individual and social well-being.”
- “We demand the right and proclaim the duty to transform Italian life,”
- The Fascist conception of the State is all embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State — a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values — interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people.
And of course his most famous quote:
Everything Within the State, Nothing Against the State, Nothing Outside the State
So as we see the American scene, isn’t it the Left that is assuming the mantle of Fascism now in its emphasis and “urgency” in transforming (thanks, Obama!) Americans into their own image instead of just leaving the rest of us alone? More and more we see their emphasis on “community” where the Individual becomes just a cog in their social machine. Only groups matter, no longer the individual within such a group.
(H/T: Cafe Hayek)
The post Notable Quote – So What Is Fascism? appeared first on Granite Grok.