Saturday • November 8 • 2025
Vol.XVII • No.XLV
Manchester, N.H.
How ironic is it that the Left would choose death as the political hill to die on? Killing unborn babies is so important to their voters that they are willing to abort the economy, public safety, national defense, property rights, and liberty itself in exchange.
What is evermore baffling is that Republicans would stay home instead of trying to stop it. The abortion issue isn’t just about some notion that own have a right to their bodies (Democrats have proven that to be a lie). It is that abortion candidates are a threat to our very existence. By supporting political candidates who promise to protect that “choice,” you have to give up the right to choose anything else, perhaps ever again.
Democrats who run on abortion are going to make every other aspect of your existence difficult, if not miserable, and our current circumstances are proof.
Housing costs, food inflation, energy prices, open borders, national security, printing money to pay for foreign wars, grooming children, harassing parents, the rising surveillance state, more mandates, higher taxes, a partisan police state that can’t even keep us safe, picking winners and losers, driving small businesses into failure and bankruptcy, unemployment, over-spending, the government medical industrial complex, loss of privacy, all of that, and more.
It’s not just about whether or not you are ending the life of an unborn child. By electing these candidates, you are aborting the ability to choose anything but what the government wants for you.
You abort opportunity.
You abort liberty.
You abort America.
The post Voting For ‘Abortion’ Kills America appeared first on Granite Grok.
There appears to be no issue that motivates voters as much as Abortion rights. You can maybe add the legalization of recreational Marijuana as a close second. There were a limited number of states with elections this year, but three states in particular should be warning signs for both Parties.
Ohio and Virginia showed the power of Abortion rights as voting was unusually heavy in both states. Voters in Ohio blocked any future restrictions on the phase of pregnancy that a woman can choose to terminate her pregnancy.
Virginia was a more significant blow to Republicans and shows where the priorities are for Democrats. Republican Governor Youngkin has been making incredible strides in the traditionally Blue Commonwealth by restoring the parent’s role in the education process and bringing stability and savings to Virginia’s financial condition. Youngkin had the House on his side and hoped to flip the Senate. Voters were motivated to stop Republicans from restricting Abortion to the first fifteen weeks of a pregnancy. They came out and voted for Abortion over their children, kept the Senate Blue, and took the House back from the Republicans. These results put up a roadblock for Youngkin’s agenda for the remainder of his only term as Governor. Virginia has a one-and-done law for Governor, and Youngkin’s term ends in 2026, meaning gridlock for two years in Virginia.
The Republicans did maintain the corner office in Mississippi as the Governor was re-elected. There was no abortion question on the ballot. The GOP has to solve several issues before 2024. They must develop a stance on Abortion that is palatable for both sides of the aisle. To say no to Abortion will no longer work. There must be a viable time frame and concessions for specific situations, such as rape and incest. Possession of Marijuana is still a Federal Offense, but the states are overriding the Federal Statute if it is the will of the people. New Hampshire is holding out on Pot Shops, but my adopted state of Maine has a pot shop every mile on state highways. The pot industry is now the third largest industry in Maine, behind only Lobster and Wood. Trust me, when you drive in Maine, you know pot use is far too prevalent.
Republicans also need to embrace early voting and strengthen their ground game. One is a concession or compromise, and the latter is a need to get onto the street and talk to the people. Republicans can solve this issue by rolling up their sleeves and doing the work. We cannot sit back and wait for Biden to fail so badly that we don’t win the election but Biden loses it. The polls continue to favor Trump over Biden, but Trump is one guilty verdict away from these polls being worthless. The Republican debates trudge on with the battle for second place. These debates and all of the second-tier candidates are insignificant as long as Donald Trump is a free man and the leading candidate.
With two candidates under such intense legal issues, Trump with his 91 indictments and Biden with his looming impeachment action and possible indictments, we have never seen a Presidential election with so many potential complications that may derail either or both leading candidates. The Republicans cannot fail in 2024 and need strong leadership from Ronna McDaniel, head of the RNC. A unified, concerted effort is needed to end this Biden/Obama destruction of America. As for the Democrats, unless there is a ballot question for Abortion or Marijuana, there is no motivation for their supporters. Killing babies and getting high is more important to Democrats than a solid economy, stopping inflation, returning us to energy independence, and getting our schools back to educating, not indoctrinating, our children. Democrats should be embarrassed by the message they sent to America last night, but you need a conscience to be embarrassed.
The post Off Year Elections Show Abortion Still Number One Issue appeared first on Granite Grok.
Prager U has published a “short” documentary on X titled DETRANS. “The Dangers of Gender-Affirming Care serves as a wake-up call to all of us: our children are in danger and it’s up to us to protect them.”
I’m adding it as an extra post with comments (which we can engage in below in comments), if you are interested.
WATCH NOW!
PragerU’s NEW short documentary DETRANS: The Dangers of Gender-Affirming Care serves as a wake-up call to all of us: our children are in danger and it’s up to us to protect them.
— PragerU (@prageru) November 8, 2023
The post Prager U (Short) Documentary – DETRANS appeared first on Granite Grok.
Olympic gold medalist Caster Semenya has set a new standard for small talk at meetings, banquets, weddings, or any gathering where you might encounter women you’ve never met before. And I’m sure it’s likely to catch on as quickly as the culture that justifies it.
Do you have testicles?
Maybe don’t lead with that one. I don’t think it is ready to be the ice-breaker opening, certainly not as a pickup line, unless you are looking for women with testicles, and I’m thinking with rare exceptions, you may not need to ask. But a growing number of women have them, testicles, and it’s not their fault. It is something with which they have to contend while robbing women without testicles – at least in competitive sports – of scholarships, opportunities, and even awards.
And none of that is their fault.
It is also unfair to judge them or limit them from competing with scrotum-less women. It is not (for example) Caster Semenya’s fault that “she” was born with testicles or the levels of testosterone they afford “her” or other “women” burdened with the deformity. But Athletic associations and national and international courts have noticed the difference and chosen to have a say in whether that “deformity” does, in fact, matter.
[A] Swiss court upheld 2018 regulations from the IAAF, the track-and-field world governing body now named World Athletics, barring Semenya and other athletes with “differences of sex development” (DSD) from running in certain races, including the 800-m, unless they lowered their testosterone levels to a certain threshold via medical intervention. Semenya refused, and she’s continued to fight the regulations.
Why would they step in?
On June 30, 2019, South African runner Caster Semenya—already a three-time world champ and two-time Olympic gold medalist in the 800-m—lined up at the starting line at Stanford University, to roars from the American crowd. She would win the prestigious Prefontaine Classic, with a time of 1 min. 55.70 sec., the fastest 800-m time ever run on American soil. It was her 31rd straight victory in the 800-m. Fans crowded around a fence after it was over to voice their appreciation for the superstar.
Caster’s testicles would appear to provide an advantage against textile-less women in – at the very least – the 800 meter, and after 31 consecutive victories, you’d be right to ask why women would even compete in this category. Sorry, I mean women without testicles. And so we see the problem. While Caster may be of the opinion that testicles don’t make him less of a woman, they do appear to make him a better athlete than women who lack them, sort of like a performance-enhancing drug.
Governing bodies have a vested interest in regulating the use of performance-enhancing drugs even when they are not your fault. As such – at least in the case of the IAAF – women with testicles will need to compete against other “equally impaired” individuals whether they identify as women or not.
By”equipment” advantage, if you like, to achieve the parity missing from, say, the women’s 800 meters.
The alternative is, of course, a more balanced women’s field in which they all have testicles, but then what about the women without them? What happens to their rights? Is this the new glass ceiling? The foundation of second-class citizenship, at least in contests of sport. And who will step up to defend them from this new discrimination?
And why did the women’s rights movement, after finally achieving most if not all of their aims, decide to toss women under the equipment bus?
“My testicles don’t make me less of a woman” – Caster Semenya
Of course, this outlandish statement went totally unchallenged this morning
Semenya is not a woman with high testosterone levels. He is a male with normal testosterone levels. pic.twitter.com/LKhkP7SnlN
— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) November 7, 2023
The post Night Cap: Women’s Olympic Gold Medalist says, “Testicles … Don’t Make Me Less a Woman” appeared first on Granite Grok.
In open defiance of several United States Supreme Court rulings on gun ownership, Illinois has enacted a ban on certain kinds of commonly owned firearms and has required owners of other kinds of commonly owned firearms to register them with the state.
So far, compliance with the registration requirement seems to be well under 1%. That’s the good news.
The bad news is that if you refuse to comply and you get caught the first time, that’s a misdemeanor, but the second time it’s a felony. Which means you lose1 your right to own any kind of gun.
In other words, if the government says you have to register your guns, and you decide that it has no authority to do so, you are no longer law-abiding. You are a felon — guilty of the ‘crime’ of believing that the federal constitution actually means what it says.
So according to the government — and for that matter, according to the NRA and the vast majority of ‘gun rights supporters’ that I’ve met — you can’t have guns.
And even when the Supreme Court gets around to striking down that law in a few years, your felony conviction will still stand. So unless you have a pile of money and several years to devote to having it overturned, that won’t be of much help to you.
It’s time for people who think that only ‘law-abiding Americans’ have the right to keep and bear arms to rethink that position, which is what allows laws like this to exist in the first place.
At the very least, simply refusing to be disarmed (or to give the government the information it would need later to disarm you) shouldn’t be grounds for disarming you. That’s the kind of thing that we should be reading about only in novels like Catch-22 and not in our law books.
¹ To be more precise, you don’t actually lose the right, because it is inalienable, which means it can’t be taken from you or even surrendered voluntarily. If you’re a person, you have the right to self-defense and to own the tools necessary for self-defense. But the state will punish you for trying to exercise that right.
The post Catch-223? appeared first on Granite Grok.
If you shop at convenience stores, you may have noticed that checking for proof of age during tobacco & alcohol purchases has quietly moved from viewing the customer’s driver’s license to electronically scanning our licenses. I first noticed this at Circle K stores and then found the same practice in others.
Our privacy is once again under attack in a seemingly “small” way, but I became alarmed enough to dive into the legality.
A trusted State Rep pointed me to state law RSA 263:12. The last section of this law prohibits the scanning of my driver’s license with all of my personal information on it without my consent (with an exception for pawnbrokers, scrap metal dealers, and other secondhand dealers).
RSA 263:12 states in part,
It shall be a misdemeanor for any person to:
I filed a complaint with the NH Attorney General’s office that the law – as well as my Constitutional Right to privacy – was violated. The response I received confirmed my concern as I was pointed to the phrase in RSA 263:12 X “unless authorized by the department.”
The “Department” referred to in RSA 263:12 is the NH Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), which is run by unelected bureaucrats and political appointees free to push their political ideologies with apparently no desire by the NH Department of Justice to provide any oversight or enforcement.
Below is how The Department of Motor Vehicles and the NH Attorney General’s office washed their hands of their responsibilities to monitor and safely regulate who can access, scan, and store our personal data. They closed the case in typical Jedi Mind Trick fashion, inferring “there was nothing to see here” – but as you will see, can not back up their finding of no wrongdoing.
The Attorney General’s office identified DMV “rule” Saf-C 5606.05 which was written by those ideological, political appointees in the DMV, to unconstitutionally violate our Right to privacy. Therefore, I was told that Circle K was “authorized” (by those appointed ideologues) to scan my license electronically, and the case was closed.
DMV rule Saf-C 5606.05 states:
(a) Notwithstanding any rule to the contrary, the department authorizes the scanning of personal information from any license in any electronic form or format so long as all the following conditions are met:
(1) The equipment used to scan such personal information does not visibly identify any personal information other than driver license number and name;
(2) The equipment used to scan personal information does not retain, store, or transfer any personal information, other than driver license number and name, for any period of time; and
(3) The equipment used to scan personal information does not store any personal information, other than driver license number and name, in a central repository disaster recovery central repository, such as a cold site or hot site, whether on-site or in a remote location.
So, I asked the AG’s office three simple questions:
Before closing the case, did you confirm the following:
It appears they did not.
Instead of answering my questions, they told me I had to talk with the DMV – but could not/would not give me a contact at “The Department.” I found that to be a strange response from an investigative body that is tasked with enforcing the law based on facts.
How could the AG’s office close the case and not have answers to the very pertinent questions I raised? Did Circle K violate the law or not?
Stay tuned…
The post Are Convenience Stores Violating Your Privacy? appeared first on Granite Grok.