Texas shares approximately half of the 1,954-mile U.S.-Mexican border, making it a primary entry point for illegal immigrants.

In 2011, the U.S. Border Patrol apprehended 125,821 illegal immigrants in Texas alone. This high volume of illegal immigration presents significant challenges to Texas and the entire U.S., including economic, social, and security concerns.

Economic Impact: The influx of undocumented immigrants can strain public resources and social services, leading to potential economic challenges. It is essential to find a balance between humanitarian concerns and fiscal responsibility. Economically, illegal immigrants impose a significant burden on the state’s resources. They account for about 14% of the students in Texas public schools when U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants are included, costing the state around $3.75 billion annually. Furthermore, illegal immigrants are more likely to live in poverty, with about 58% taking advantage of welfare programs, which cost the state an additional $803.3 million annually.

National Security Threat: Open borders can be exploited by criminal organizations, smugglers, and potential terrorists. Ensuring national security becomes a formidable task in such a scenario. From a security perspective, the long Texas-Mexico border requires significant resources to secure, including workforce, equipment, technology, and infrastructure. The overall budget for all agencies and operating costs in 2011 was $56.3 billion. Despite these efforts, illegal immigration continues to be a significant issue.

Rule of Law: The rule of law is fundamental to the stability and functioning of any society. Ignoring illegal immigration can undermine the integrity of legal immigration processes and overall societal trust. The open border policy rewards those who break the law by entering the country illegally, undermining the efforts of those who seek to immigrate legally. Moreover, it threatens national security, as it may allow criminals and potentially dangerous individuals to enter the country undetected.

Public Health: Health concerns, especially during pandemics, are exacerbated by unchecked immigration. It is vital to have measures to ensure the health and safety of the incoming immigrants and the resident population.

Social Cohesion: Large-scale, unregulated immigration can strain social cohesion, as it may lead to cultural clashes and increased polarization within society. Socially, the rapid growth of the Latino population in Texas, primarily due to illegal immigration, threatens to influence state politics and immigration policies. This demographic shift could lead to policies enabling unlawful immigration, exacerbating its associated issues.

Addressing illegals

Immigration and open border issues require a multifaceted approach. It involves ensuring border security, reforming immigration laws, and creating stricter laws for immigrants to enter the country. Maintaining border security is essential to prevent criminal activities and ensure national security. Investment in advanced technology and personnel can be part of the solution.

It should be different from what the Biden administration has done. For instance, it has expanded the Title 42 policy that allows for increased expulsion of migrants while also granting humanitarian parole to 30,000 people from each country monthly, as long as they apply for asylum legally. Under President Trump, the plan required adult asylum seekers to book a meeting with U.S. officials and remain in Mexico or claim asylum in another country first before reaching the U.S. Failure to comply would make migrants ineligible if they subsequently go the border.

The issue of illegal immigration and open borders in Texas and the United States has become challenging. Under President Trump, there was a simple solution: Close the borders!

The circumstances of their arrival are intriguing in that unlike other illegal aliens, most OTMs  (other than Mexicans) promptly turned themselves in. Why is it not known for sure? There can be no doubt, however, that the scheme has given Mexican drug cartels and — potentially — terrorists a promising opportunity to simply step over the invisible line that is our border undetected by border tax adjustments or BTAs because the agents processing the new arrivals could not handle their posts.

To most Americans, the perception has long been that most of those illegally crossing our southern border are Mexicans, people coming here in search of work, looking to join family or a gang. While that may have been the case in the past, it is no longer supported by the latest immigration numbers today. According to a study done by Pew Research, detention of illegal Mexican aliens is at an all-time low. The primary reasons cited for the reversal are current mixed economic conditions, fewer job opportunities in the U.S., increases in deportations, and better border enforcement.  However, the number of illegal aliens has not diminished. As more Mexicans have opted to stay home, children from Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Honduras have quickly filled the vacuum. Numerous sources indicate that President Obama’s and President Biden’s executive actions have helped spur these children to make the dangerous journey through Mexico and ultimately up to our border.

The question should be asked is if their parents are poor, how can they come up with as much as $10,000 to have coyotes (people paid by cartels to smuggle drugs and humans across borders) or others bring their child up to the Rio Grande, the natural boundary flowing between Mexico from the U.S. No sources could be found to suggest that terror groups are funding the trips, but one must wonder who is.

That would be understandable if they were arriving in a group of five. But they are coming in droves and in the same timeframe. There is no question that the children are diverting Border Patrol agents from covering their guard posts so illegal border crossers, in particular members of the Mexican drug cartels, their “mules” (people hired to smuggle drugs into the U.S.), as well as gang members and Special Interest Aliens (SIA) can cross the border unapprehended. SIAs are of considerable concern to our intelligence and law enforcement agencies for obvious reasons. Stories are appearing with greater frequency on various news websites and blogs about how radical Islamists are being stopped as they try to enter the country.

In short:  Active cells could attack critical electric-grid substations, the failure of which could compromise or cripple our entire electric infrastructure. Other obvious threats are car bombs, improvised explosive devices (IEDs) placed on busy highways or train tracks, bridge collapses, and other devastating attacks. We must close our borders now.

The post Biden’s Open Border Policy Is Compromising Our National Security appeared first on Granite Grok.

In New Hampshire, it is illegal to treat gender dysphoria. By law, you cannot advise any patient to consider their birth sex, only whatever else the culture can imagine, and I think, someday soon, someone should sue the state. There is no evidence that transition is the best choice, and there is increasing proof it is not.

Therapists have no choice, so the only remedy would be to take the government to court as a means to use discovery to correct this miscarriage of science, therapy, and injustice. Sadly, it will likely take the parents of a child who, after being encouraged to transition because no other consideration is permitted, has committed suicide or suffered harm from hormone treatments or surgery.

The legislature lacks the will to fix it, while I see that GraniteGrok continues to report a cascade of revelations about the serisl fraud being committed in the name of gender science and social justice.

The most recent revelations come again out of England, where a study was commissioned into the research upon which gender “therapy” for children is based. The summation of this analysis says it all. The majority of it is of low quality, lacks developmental rigor and transparency, and the pillars of gender medicine are built on shaky foundations.

In the foreword to her report, [Dr. Hilary] Cass said while doctors tended to be cautious in implementing new findings, “quite the reverse happened in the field of gender care for children.”

It’s almost as if actual science was hijacked to advance some other agenda.

Cass commissioned the University of York to conduct a series of analyses as part of her review.

Two papers examined the quality and development of current guidelines and recommendations for managing gender dysphoria in children and young people. Most of the 23 clinical guidelines reviewed were not independent or evidence based, the researchers found.

A third paper on puberty blockers found that of 50 studies, only one was of high quality.

Similarly, of 53 studies included in a fourth paper on the use of hormone treatment, only one was of sufficiently high quality, with little or only inconsistent evidence on key outcomes.

Stories from or about genderbending from the UK, France, Netherlands, WPATH, and others point to the unraveling of a conspiracy based on what amounts to garbage. Whether those truth bombs keep falling or not depends on a lot of things, including what we do with the information seeping between the clutched fist of the transgender agenda. We’re not talking emergency use vaccine money, but the payday is substantial and without continued pushback from parents, school boards, towns, and legislatures, the children are not safe.

The gender warriors will not leave them alone while accusing anyone who contradicts their program as bigoted. That’s a lie. You have just as much right to speak your opinion as they do and based on this new analysis, most of what has been passing for gender science is little more than opinion with very littleevidence to back it up.

 

The post Night Cap: A Majority of Gender Research Lacks Rigour, Quality, or Evidence appeared first on Granite Grok.

If you missed the recent ‘Grok coverage on offshore wind, you can catch up here. Wind Power is not any of the things they say and mostly things they will not, and a plan to put turbines off the coast of Maine and New Hampshire is moving ahead despite the long list of negatives.

An informative session on the topic is coming up, and we wanted to let readers know so they could share that or plan to attend.

We have some great speakers who will provide research and information about offshore wind and its effects on marine life, fishing, the environment, and its questionable effectiveness and sustainability as a green, renewable energy source. This event has been put together in response to a pro-wind informational session previously planned to take place in Rye last month, which was canceled when the organization learned some people opposing the project would be in attendance.

Would love to see you there!

Fishing Off Our Coast 2: Offshore Wind Power & The Fishing Community
Mark Your Calendars! Date: April 23rd Time: 6:00 PM Location: Rye Congregational Church
580 Washington Road, Rye, NH 03870

Representatives from the New England Fishermen’s Stewardship Association (NEFSA) will discuss their concerns regarding offshore wind power in the Gulf of Maine, such as potential impacts on fishing grounds and the environment.

This is an important opportunity to learn more about the future of our coast and fishing industry.

If you go (I am not available that day), feel free to provide some details or a report for us to share.

The post Offshore Wind and New Hampshire – An Opportunity to Listen and be Heard appeared first on Granite Grok.

The ground shook in Tehran as Ali Khamenei, the 84 year old supreme leader of Iran, shook in his boots as he listened to President Joe Biden give his terse warning to Iran about attacking Israel. Biden looked into the camera, mustered all of his intestinal fortitude, and barked a single word that he thought would instill fear in the rogue country, “Don’t.”

Without another sound, he turned and shuffled away from the podium. He had spoken. It was feckless, but why should we expect more from this man who has disappointed us daily during his presidency?

I can imagine Biden had a similar effect on Benjamin Netanyahu as he listened to the American President, and it just adds to the confusing message of support that Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken have been delivering since the October 7 attack last year. One day, Biden is pledging unwavering military support for our greatest ally in the Middle East, and the next day, he is condemning Israel’s strategy and tactics. Since World War II, American support for the sovereignty and safety of Israel has been unconditional except for two Presidencies, Obama and Biden.

Nobody, except for China and Russia, has done more to bolster and finance Iran’s effort to become a nuclear threat, continue to be the biggest supporter of worldwide terrorism, and pledge to destroy Israel and America. President Trump had put a stranglehold on Iran with restrictions, sanctions, and freezing Iranian funds in America. These efforts had put Iran in a poor financial situation, which curbed their hostile actions.

Joe Biden reversed all of Trump’s decisions and set Iran free to pursue their devious plans once again. Billions of dollars were immediately available. For four years, we had this threat under control, but just like our border and the streets of America, Biden unleashed fury on America with no apparent purpose other than negating any Trump act. That is not a foreign policy position, but we were warned that Biden has never been on the correct side of any foreign decision.

As I am writing this article, Iran has launched an unknown number of drones aimed at Israel, so much for Don’t. These drones are slow-moving, and we do not know if cruise missiles will be launched as a second wave, but this is a critical moment in the Middle East conflict. This drone launch is the first direct attack from Iran and expands the breadth of the conflict. Israel will react as needed, but all eyes will be on Biden and the ample American assets in the area. Will we actively support Israel and go after Iran, or will we be empty threats, which is the track record of Biden’s administration?

This attack is risky for Iran, which is not popular with its people. They are performing to get attention from outside forces like China and Russia. They are trying to show strength. Tonight will tell how effective and strong Iran is, but the consensus is they will fall short. Israel is small in area but huge in heart. They will respond to defend themselves, but the bottom line is Iran would not have done this if America had a stronger leader. Again, Biden is the wrong man at the wrong time for world stability.

The post “Don’t” Is Not A Foreign Policy appeared first on Granite Grok.

Island nations like the Maldives quickly lined up for handouts when the Global Warming Cult got its sea legs. In the decades since that overlubricated wheel still grinds and screeches despite the very real fact that these places are not getting swallowed by Poseidon’s climate rage—quite the opposite.

The sea level rise narrative has had a bad few years all around.

East Coast beaches haven’t changed much at all in seventy years, and in some cases, like Jones Beach on Long Island, they’ve gotten bigger. This is good news for people in Manhattan who were supposed to be underwater by 2018, but years later, sea-level-wise, things look a lot like they did in 1918.

And the Maldives? They were supposed to be underwater by 2018 as well, which should have slowed the grand opening of a $500.00-a-night 120-villa resort project that opened on Raa Atoll in 2019. It’s still there, but there is one difference. It costs about $1000.00 a night to stay there now and not because the sea is coming to take it away. The same year that the pricey resort opened, researchers were conducting a global analysis of beaches and islands around the globe.

A 2019 global-scale analysis of 709 islands in the Pacific and Indian Oceans revealed 89% were either stable or growing in size, and that no island larger than 10 ha (and only 1.2% of islands larger than 5 ha) had decreased in size since the 1980s (Duvat, 2019).

Likewise, the globe’s beaches been growing by 0.33 m/year since 1984 (Luijendijk et al., 2018).

In a press release for a 2016 paper on coastal land area changes from 1985 to 2015, scientists acknowledged this:

“We expected that the coast would start to retreat due to sea level rise, but the most surprising thing is that the coasts are growing all over the world“ – BBC

I guess the resort investors knew more than the so-called experts (emphasis added).

The scientists observed that despite rising sea levels, many shorelines in Tuvalu and neighbouring Pacific atolls have maintained relative stability, “without significant alteration”. A comprehensive re-examination of data on 30 Pacific and Indian Ocean atolls with 709 islands found that none of them had lost any land. Furthermore, the scientists added, there are data that indicate 47 reef islands expanded in size or remained stable over the last 50 years, “despite experiencing a rate of sea-level rise that exceeds the global average”. ..

That has to be disappointing but look on the bright side. You said global warming was going to affect island nations, and it has. Many of them are getting bigger. So, do you know less about ocean and island mechanics than you do climate? Is that even possible?

 

The post ‘Experts’ Said ‘Global Warming’ Would ‘Affect’ Island Nations And They Were Right… appeared first on Granite Grok.

It is not easy, and it may be very uncomfortable, to change your political affiliation because you finally realize that it is not you who is leaving the Party, but the Party has left you. I grew up in Massachusetts, where everyone joined the Democrat Party at birth. Those many years ago, John Kennedy personified the Democrat Party.

They were the Party of the little guy, unions and workers, social safety nets, and legal immigration. It is easy to see that today’s Democrat Party is not JFK’s Party. When I graduated college, I recognized that the Democrats and Massachusetts were changing, and it was not for the betterment of the state or its people. That is why I packed up the family and escaped to New Hampshire. Unfortunately, many people made that same pilgrimage over the border. Still, many brought the Massachusetts political philosophy with them and contributed to changing the Granite State from Red to Blue.

The morphing of the Maine Democrat Party has been happening for years, and this new Progressive version has been gutting Maine like you would a boiled lobster. It is past time for Maine Democrats to stop pulling the D lever out of habit and recognize the Republicans align better with your old-fashioned views. Don’t be alarmed when you look into the mirror one morning and a Conservative is staring back.

To look at some of the recent bills passed by the Democrat-led Maine Government in Augusta, one would gaze into the Progressive Playbook. It is a path that does not reflect the hard-working, traditional Mainers who built a beautiful, diverse state that was a magnet for vacationers everywhere. The motto of Vacationland is being changed by Democrats who now want people to come to Maine for late-term abortions and transgender counseling and surgery. The Dems want to take children away from parents who are not supportive of their children’s wishes to re-gender.

The Dems are diverting housing and resources meant for Mainers who need help to illegal migrants who should be deported. Dems have put Maine at the top of the list of the highest real estate taxes in the country and fourth on the list of highest income taxed individuals. The Dems are restricting the Maine Lobster Industry to extinction while promoting marijuana usage and sales because they see the tax revenue that industry can generate. The state is doing little to stem the growth of illegal Chinese Cartel marijuana farms. It identifies laws that the justice department will no longer enforce because of a shortage of staff in the Justice and Law Enforcement agencies. These decisions are making Maine a less safe environment for Maine’s citizens but more attractive for illegals and criminals.

It may seem like a giant leap to leave the Democrats that have been your Party for a lifetime, but not so big when you look at the facts. Does the Democrat Party in Maine today reflect who you are, or is it time to let them go and look across the aisle. You will find those folks ready to welcome you to their Party, and I assure you that you will feel right at home. Like the feel of your favorite slippers, you will fit right in and wonder why you took so long to take the leap. Welcome home, my friends. Now, let’s make Maine back into the state we love.

The post Wake Up Maine Democrats, This Is Not Your Parent’s Party appeared first on Granite Grok.

Tell Your Representatives to Prioritize Students over Harmful DEI Initiatives. SB 219 – Act now to:

1. Sign in in support of the bill, next scheduled for a hearing in the House Education Committee Tuesday, 4/16/24.

2. Consider attending the committee hearing to testify in support of the bill, 4/16/24, at 9:30am in the Legislative Office Building room 205-207.

SB 219, The Students First Act, is an important bill that will crack down on sprawling and expensive school administration in New Hampshire to ensure that our education spending puts students and teachers first.

As amended by the Senate, SB 219 would require school districts to report six-figure salaries of diversity professionals and other high-paid administrators before school budget meetings.

These reports will prove to voters that they are being deceived. Despite decades of increasing school expenses around New Hampshire to reportedly benefit our students, no school tax increases are going to teacher pay. Instead, school districts are creating well-paid, left-wing administrative bureaucracies focused on expensive Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives and staffing, all at the expense of teachers and students.

WHAT YOU CAN DO: 

1. Register your support of SB 219 by signing in in support of the bill here.

You can find step-by-step instructions on how to sign in here.

2. Submit written testimony. You can do this when you sign in. Simply hit “choose file” under step number four to upload a document with your testimony, or type your testimony into the provided box.

3. Come testify in person. We have step-by-step instructions on how to testify here. You can also reach out to us at cornerstone@nhcornerstone.org if you have any questions about the testifying process.

Important Note: Some have issues with the House remote sign-in page. If you are encountering problems, you can also email the committee directly to register your support of this bill and/or submitting written testimony. You can find their contact info here.

Please Submit Group communications or Press Releases to steve@granitegrok.com.
Submission is not a guarantee of publication – Publication is not an endorsement.

The Importance of State Recognition of Biological Sex

Several pieces of legislation seeking to address the issue of protecting women’s sports are being considered by the New Hampshire General Court with one, HB 396, uniquely positioned for passage. HB 396, permitting classification of individuals based on biological sex under certain limited circumstances, narrowly survived the House and is now headed to the Senate for review.

While other pending legislation focuses on sporting events alone, HB 396 provides for broader application by allowing “any person or organization, public or private” the opportunity to make a classification based on biological sex. This level of classification flexibility and protection is not present in any of the other bills.

HB 396 provides the most expansive framework to address these issues and has the greatest success of becoming law in New Hampshire. It is of vital necessity that the Senate pass HB 396, unamended in any way, as an important first and needed step in clarifying the state’s ability to differentiate based on biological sex. This bill will pave the way for any person or organization, public or private, to protect women in the areas of sports, prisons and places of intimate privacy.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:
We encourage you to stay tuned for any updates on HB 396 as it advances to the Senate. Read more about this important issue and its priority in our blog post here.

Oppose State-Sanctioned Suicide in the Senate

On March 21st, the New Hampshire House of Representatives, including many Republicans, ignored the voices of the disabled community, veterans, and concerned New Hampshire citizens of all ages and cast their vote to legalize state-sanctioned suicide. HB 1283, relative to end of life options, passed by the closest of margins in the House, 179-177.

HB 1283 poses a risk to all Granite Staters, but especially to young citizens, already at risk for suicide. You can read more on this risk and how assisted suicide, in all forms, must be opposed in this op-ed from Mary Fahey: Young People Need Suicide Prevention, Not Promotion.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:
As the issue of state-sanctioned suicide advances to the Senate, we urge you to continue strong opposition to the bill, and stay tuned for more Cornerstone updates on key dates, including when the bill comes up for a hearing before the Senate HHS Committee.

We will keep you informed on any additional opportunities to help halt this dangerous legislation.

The post Tell Your Representatives to Prioritize Students over Harmful DEI Initiatives appeared first on Granite Grok.

Dear Mayor Ruais, this post will serve as my application for “Housing Stability Director.” And have I got a deal for you! I will work for FREE … provided I have plenary power to implement my plan. Here are the details!

PHASE 1 … the put up (and I mean this literally) or shut up phase. Every local politician running his mouth about how Manchester needs to “do more,” etc., etc., etc. for the homeless (lovely euphemisms all for increasing the size, scope and power of unelected bureaucrats like the Communist lunatic you just paid off to walk away) MUST house a minimum of two homeless in their residence. These local politicians are constantly extolling their virtue and compassion so I cannot imagine I will need to exercise the powers of my position as “Housing Stability Director” to open their doors … but needless to say I stand ready to do so whenever and wherever necessary.

PHASE 2 … the shared sacrifice phase. Every Democrat State Senator and State Rep will be asked to house a minimum of two homeless in their homes. I can’t imagine, given how relentlessly these Democrat politicians remind us that they are our moral compasses that even one would refuse. But in each and every case that a Democrat State Senator or State Rep refuses, a minimum of two homeless will be relocated to their homes along with tents to be pitched in the front or back yard.

PHASE 3 … this is part two of the shared sacrifice plan. All remaining homeless will be transported to BLUE towns and cities. We endlessly hear FROM THEM about how virtuous and compassionate they are so I have no doubt that these BLUE towns will welcome the homeless with open arms. But they’re coming whether or not our moral superiors in Hopkinton, Exeter, Concord, etc. like it or not.

What a great plan, eh! Let me know when I start!

The post Dear Mayor Ruais … My Application For “Housing Stability Director” appeared first on Granite Grok.

Political meddlers like to mess with everything, including ride-share companies. Early on, it was to protect cab companies that exercised political power to retain their cartel. Later, when and where that didn’t work, the busybodies put their dirty fingers in the wage pie. You don’t pay your drivers enough. We’re making you pay them more.

Did rideshare operations not have enough people choosing to work for them? That does not appear to have been an issue, but like any gathering of Democrats, the Minneapolis City Council knows better. They passed a city ordinance that would require ride-share companies to pay drivers $1.40 per mile and 51 cents per minute. The thinking, as if there was any involved, is that this would raise their “minimum wage” to over $15.00 an hour, as required by the city. Democrats are bad at math, but that doesn’t stop them from trying.

Uber and Lyft made it clear that if the new rules go into effect—slated for May 1st—they will stop doing business in Minneapolis. Thanks to busybody Democrats, the new minimum wage for their drivers would be the only true minimum wage—zero.

In early March both Uber and Lyft threatened to leave Minneapolis by May 1, after the council upped driver-pay requirements to $1.40 per mile and 51 cents per minute. Councilmembers said it was necessary to ensure drivers earned the equivalent of Minneapolis’s $15.57 minimum wage. But they determined the new pay rates without getting local data from Uber and Lyft and they didn’t invite company leaders to engage in their process.

Not everyone on the city council drinks from the same bucket of stupid.

[Councilwoman LaTrisha] Vetaw said her constituents have been living with “fear and anxiety” over whether they’ll be able to get to work or pick up their children from school, and called on her colleagues to find the “courage” to fix the policy.

“In this work, we all need to be willing to admit when we get things wrong,” she said. “I think this is just a bad policy and we need to go back and fix it.”

Ride-sharing has become a thread in the fabric of modern existence, something people rely on, like electricity and water. From the work itself, turning idle hours into income, to the ubiquity of knowing you can get a ride at a reasonable rate with a few taps on a smartphone. I suppose that explains it. Meddlers have done their best to make water and electricity unaffordable. Why not rideshare? And they tried, but you can’t make them stay (Uber or Lyft), and their promise has encouraged Minneapolis to slow its roll. The city council voted this week to delay implementation for two more months.

The decision to delay the implementation of the city’s rideshare pay rules from May 1 to July 1 was intended to buy time for the Minnesota legislature to implement a statewide policy that could override the city’s ordinance and for upstart rideshare companies looking to replace Uber and Lyft to enter the market.

I’m not familiar with the unnecessary rules the state has implemented to meddle, but I like the idea of opening up the marketplace to competition. More is better, but that doesn’t change the problem created by the mandated pay hike. Rideshare companies aren’t going to eat that; consumers will bear the mandated costs. But the real cost of meddling doesn’t stop there.

“This ordinance started with a good intent to ensure that every rideshare driver earned the city-mandated minimum wage. But it is now so tainted with negative public opinion and outcry that I find it unsalvageable,” Palmisano said, adding that her constituents are “upset, angry, frustrated, and downright despondent over this ordinance.”

She said there have already been negative effects: some drivers who had financed their vehicles have had them recalled, and one of her constituents who is nearing completion of a college degree is losing tuition assistance from one of the companies.

“These aren’t hypotheticals,” she said. “They’re already happening.”

Isn’t there a saying about government and good intentions?

The post Uber and Lyft Promise to Leave after Democrat City Council Meddles With Wages appeared first on Granite Grok.

I’ve written about sports mascots several times over the years, usually lamenting progressive bullies who’ve “canceled” so many symbols and nicknames. Some fair points were raised about some Native American Indian Indigenous symbology perhaps being culturally insensitive. So, despite respectful compromise proposals, politically correct bullies still defined nicknames on their negative terms, so it was goodbye Indians, Redskins, Chiefs, et al., and hello Big Green and Blue Pride et al.

Kudos to the Atlanta Braves, Laconia Sachems, Colebrook Mohawks, et al. for standing up to the bullies and retaining traditional nicknames—which most real Indigenous Native American Indians actually support.

Anyway, I noted with interest an MSN.com piece by commentator Noah Smith concerning a new nickname controversy involving a minor league baseball team in Minnesota—the St. Paul Saints.

No, the progressives haven’t yet canceled the “Saints” nickname to replace it with Blue Devils or Red Devils et al. At issue is the team mascot, who happens to be a pig.

According to Smith, the Saints hold a “Name the Pig Contest” each year, which draws thousands of submissions from fans eager to christen a porcine personality who’ll then be a regular at Saints games. This year’s selection, “OzemPig,” emerged victorious from nearly 2,300 entries, beating out contending proposals aimed at reflecting current events, pop culture, or humor.

Apparently, Ozempic is a medication prescribed for diabetics. Some folks take Ozempic (and its sister drug Wegovy) to address weight issues et al.

So, OzemPig generated an unexpected backlash. Despite the outcry, the team bravely stood by its choice, claiming no harm was intended with the playful twist on the medication name. OzemPig himself had no comment.

Sean Aronson, the Saints’ vice president and director of media relations, expressed surprise at the reaction to the name, which was immediately met with criticism upon its announcement. Social media platforms became battlegrounds as commenters voiced concerns that the name was hurtful and insensitive, seeing it as a form of fat-shaming. But Aronson cited the team’s history of offbeat humor and insisted that there was no ill intent.

“In today’s world, people don’t want to be diminished or be made to feel a certain way and I’m not going to tell them how they feel is wrong,” Aronson said. “But I can tell you there was no maliciousness involved here. No one thought this name might offend some people.”

Kudos to the Saints and OzemPig for not being “cowed” by the thin-skinned, easily-offended, virtue-signaling, intolerant, judgmental progressive bullies et al.—the folks who brought you the Dartmouth Big Green, the Cleveland Guardians, the Washington FT, and the Stanford Tree.

(Yes, Stanford University—née Indians —now has a tree as a mascot. But don’t try to hug it, lest humorless progressives charge you with assault. The Tree itself was recently suspended for waving an unauthorized sign. So much for free speech on campus. But I digress.)
Perhaps it “bears” mentioning that while pigs are generally good-natured, more people are killed annually by pigs than by sharks. (So don’t mess with OzemPig!)

In 2025, we’ll have to check in with the team to learn the name of next year’s pig, assuming OzemPig moves on to greener pastures—or outfields.

How about just naming the pig “Saint Paul?”

Except that would certainly offend progressives, non-Christians, and secular humanists, et al. Maybe just Paul? Paul the Pig? Or Paula. But female pigs are probably not de rigeur—for reasons I won’t try to explain here.

How about Boss Hog? Or Chief? Or better yet, Geronimo! (Pigs will fly before any porcine mascot is named Geronimo.)

Maybe Mike? But Mike the Pig would likely be too masculine—for reasons I won’t try to explain here.

Porky Pig might work, being alliterative and gender-neutral. But I think it’s trademarked.

An aha moment:

Name next year’s pig “Virtue-Signaler!” Dress him/her/in a tee shirt saying “Climate Action Now!” and announce that Virtue Signaler will only be fed organic greens, distilled water, and CBD gummies.

Pig problem solved.

“Go Saints!”

The post More #Woke Mascot Mania… And a Pig! appeared first on Granite Grok.

If you have followed along with what is happening in Brazil, you might start reflecting on what is going on in New Hampshire and see how fascism starts. It’s not a left versus right problem, even if it ends up resulting in far-right totalitarianism. It’s a problem that spawns from a need to control the narrative to cover up gross corruption—kleptocracies.

Kleptocracy — “a society or system ruled by people who use their power to steal their country’s resources.”

Alexandre de Moraes is the president of the Superior Electoral Court and a justice of the Supreme Federal Court in Brazil. He’s been labeled a “dictator” by some. Even though he is not the president of Brazil, he has been accused of having the president on a leash by Elon Musk.

De Moraes is criminally investigating Elon Musk and “X.” Employees of X have been told they will be arrested. Starlink has been disabled, cutting off internet access for remote communities.

It all sounds extreme and a far cry from the forests, mountains, lakes, and politics of New Hampshire. But it is not. When you look at “global” it would be foolish not to consider “local”.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/world-on-cusp-of-woke-totalitarianism-as-governments-act-to-end-free-speech

To understand what is going on today, we have to look at history.

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

Alexandre de Moraes is an extreme far-right judge, and Lula Da Silva, Brazil’s president, is left-wing. They are bound together by “Operation Car Wash” — a massive money laundering scandal at the center of the Panama Papers trial, which commenced yesterday.

“The case centers on allegations the firm set up shell companies to acquire properties in Panama with money from a sprawling corruption scheme in Brazil known as the Car Wash, or Lava Jato in Portuguese.”

Lula Da Silva went to prison for “Operation Car Wash,” but Supreme Federal Court Judge Edson Fachin overturned his convictions because, he argued, the case had been tried in the wrong state in Brazil.

Lula Da Silva was thus able to run for president and win the election in 2022. Alexandre de Moraes was a “vice” or deputy judge under Edson Fachin but he was also accused of being paid $4 million for work relating to Operation Car Wash.

Left wing Lula needs right wing De Moraes and De Moraes, who needs his own corruption covered up in the same graft scandal, is a disciple of Edson Fachin. A Faustian bargain.

When you read about this interdependence in order to cover up political corruption in Brazil, you would be forgiven if you were reminded of the club at the top of NH Politics and Courts: The one that a Washington Post article referred to in 1999 following the divorce of Chuck Douglas (a former member of Congress and former New Hampshire Supreme Court Chief Justice) from his 4th wife, also an attorney:

“The judges, who are all Chuck’s friends, rule against my clients just because I represent them.”

Other lawyers in Concord say Caroline Douglas’s argument is not without merit. But they say the situation is nowhere near as simple as she implies. There has been widespread dissatisfaction for some time in New Hampshire, they say, with the state’s clubby, closed-door method of handling complaints against judges and other lawyers. Her scattershot charges of a self-protective judicial old-boy network, they say, have clearly touched a nerve and accelerated moves toward reform.”

The timing of Alexandre de Moraes’ pursuit of Elon Musk is interesting, given that the trials for the Pandora Papers started this week. One wonders if the real reason he wants to go after X is to protect Brazil’s elections from foreign interference (as he professes) or is it that he and Lula don’t want critics of corruption to be speaking up on X or for details from the Pandora Papers trial to leak out — details that would most likely implicate him and Lula and their activities in “Car Wash”?

Meanwhile, on the home front, this week sees the start of the first civil case against the State of New Hampshire for abuse at the Youth Detention Center. More than 1000 cases are to follow. The State had originally dismissed claims of abuse as “victim negligence.” Now, the public is funding over $100 million (of which attorneys will get between 30–40%) for settlements to claimants against the State. The abuse didn’t start recently. It’s been going on and ignored for decades.

The criminal cases have been pushed back to later in the year. There have been multiple reports on the conflicts of interest for the State Attorney General’s Office, judges, and attorneys involved. Elected Republicans and Democrats all have their hand in the ugly mess from Governors (now Senators) to Attorneys General appointed by Governors, to members of the State’s Executive Committee, City Mayors, Police and DOC Officials, to the Department of Children Youth and Families and “non-profit” affiliates.

To actually come clean on what happened could (and should) send dozens of officials and others to prison, but there’s a kleptocracy to protect, federal grants to keep, and an enterprise to sustain. Control of the narrative, as it is with Alexandre De Moraes, is key. Brazil was on the brink of financial collapse when “Car Wash” was going on.

It could be argued that New Hampshire would be on the brink of financial collapse if the full and ugly truth were to come out regarding abuse of public funds to abuse, use, and harm children.

Nobody has asked for a Grand Jury Criminal Investigation into the New Hampshire Youth Detention Center. These trials will be a dance to appease the masses, split the baby, and protect the corruption. Judges aren’t going to rat on each other. Attorneys won’t rat on former judges or attorneys general because they all circulate in the same murky incestuous pool, feeding from the same teet now as they did in 1999 when the Washington Post touched on it. Public Officials won’t call each other out because none of them want to go to prison for cover-ups of abuse, which involved collusion across state agencies. I would not be remotely surprised if there was a secret code between each Governor and the next, each Attorney General and the next, to not expose the past.

Like Brazil, New Hampshire’s news media is censored. Elected officials in New Hampshire are intermediaries between the media, police, prosecutors, attorneys, and the courts. It’s all about control, just as it is in Brazil.

Manchester Police hired a reporter from WMUR to be their spokesperson. Concord Police and Merrimack County Superior Court work with elected officials and the NHCADSV to create and control their message. They have the ability to restrict media access to the courts so that only their trusted friends cover what’s going on. State laws don’t apply to public officials or when they do, the punishment is light.

The only DA who criticized the police’s use of media in investigations (Robin Davis) got smeared with a hostile environment suit and voted out in 2020. She had been a public defender and a Democrat, yet the Dem Caucus rep on the Concord City Council and NHCADSV preferred to have a Republican Juvenile Prosecutor in place. Chuck Douglas filed the hostile environment suit against the DA. The trick worked. She was gone from their business after just two years. Her complaints about the police were dismissed even though her concerns were probably well rooted in just cause.

We know what the police and prosecutors have said about the disappearance and death of Harmony Montgomery but since they couldn’t get their own timeline and story straight, that doesn’t mean we should trust Manchester Police’s media expert to tell the truth. Her body has not been found. Her father, Adam Montgomery, was convicted of her murder but refuses to show up to sentencing as he is denying that he is guilty. His girlfriend committed suicide, and the Manchester Police PR person said that it was not a suspicious death.

“Small’s death is not considered suspicious, according to police, although officials said the exact cause of death has not been determined.”

If you question the official narrative coming from police and courts, you are likely to be pursued, stalked, spied upon, or threatened. Is there any reason to trust the official narrative any more than the person in the court dock?

New Hampshire is really no different in many ways than Brazil:

Brazil’s leaders are implicated in the Panama Papers to the tune of $5.3 billion, while New Hampshire is the home to $932.5 billion in Pandora Papers secret accounts

The Pandora Papers followed the Panama Papers and the Paradise Papers. We wouldn’t have known about any of them if it wasn’t for the dogged pursuit of independent journalists who have managed to avoid censorship.

Autofair, which was based in Manchester, New Hampshire, and Bedford, is listed in the Paradise Papers.

Andrew H Crews was CEO of Autofair. He stepped down and the business was sold around the time that the US Senate Ways & Means Committee started asking Governors about the Pandora Papers.

Crews is on the board of Children’s Advocacy Centers, on the board of Primary Bank, on the board of Granite One Health, and President of the New Hampshire Lottery. Former US Attorney Bill Shaheen’s law firm handles lottery winners — Shaheen & Gordon argued to keep the identities of lottery winners private.

The law firm also represented Ghislaine Maxwell when she was arrested after being tracked down to a house she bought in cash through a shell company in New Hampshire. The house was registered by the Registrar of Deeds (an elected official) whose office appears to be adjacent to that of the Sheriff of Merrimack County whose son was arrested for domestic violence and tampering with evidence.

The previous sheriff was arrested for a DWI, and the Attorney General didn’t think he should be on a list of corrupt police officers.

The same AG (Gordon MacDonald) is now Supreme Court Chief Justice and argued to keep the list of corrupt police officers private.

Whenever judicial decisions take place behind closed doors in New Hampshire, you can guarantee that it is done in order to protect corruption from being exposed. Whether it is Rep. Troy Merner’s plea deal, Police Officer James F McLaughlin’s suit against the City of Keene Police, decisions by AG to delete police files or rulings by judges to keep publicly paid-for reports private.

Judges, police, and public officials are all getting secret deals that no ordinary citizen could ever hope for:

As with Alexandre de Moraes, Edson Fachin, Lula da Silva, and their cronies who range across the political spectrum, what’s really being protected when it comes to censorship in Brazil and New Hampshire is a wall against the public’s right to know and the public’s right to criticize its government.

According to Wikipedia:
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and/or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

The post Night Cap: Fascism Starts With Censorship appeared first on Granite Grok.

Is State Rep Alissandra Murray afraid of  GraniteGrok? I think Ali probably HATES GraniteGrok. You could see the hate all over Ali’s X before Ali made it “protected,” i.e., not public … which happened shortly after GraniteGrok began exposing Ali’s EXTREMISM and HATE using Ali’s own Xs (formerly tweets), e.g.: Support Anti-White Racism … Vote For Rep Alissandra Murray.

But now the HATE is hidden:

It’s such a shame. I was about to do a post called Manchester’s MYSOGYNIST State Rep regarding the hate Ali spewed on her X toward Riley Gaines. But apparently, Ali was afraid that the voters might see the real Ali—that is, see beyond the camouflage and mask that the Manchester Democrat Party outfits Ali with during election season.

So, is Alissandra Murray afraid of GraniteGrok? Well, I believe that Ali is afraid that GraniteGrok might expose enough of the EXTREMISM on Ali’s X that the voters will know that candidate Alissandra is a FAKE.

ESTAMOS AQUI! WE ARE HERE! Except you can’t see Ali because Ali is hiding.

 

The post Who’s Afraid Of GraniteGrok? … Manchester State Rep Alissandra Murray, That’s Who appeared first on Granite Grok.

Iran’s Mullah Military (IRGC) has acknowledged sending scores of military drones in targeted attacks on Israel in response to Israel’s attack on Iranians in Syria. The game is on people, and escalation is the word that matters.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has issued a statement confirming its launch of an attack on Israel, saying it is in response to the IDF’s earlier strike on a consular compound in the Syrian capital of Damascus. The April 1 airstrike killed several high-ranking Iranian commanders, including Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, among several other IRGC members.

The IRGC said it will hit specific targets in Israel with dozens of drones and missiles, reported Iranian state media.

Iran is also alleged to have seized a container ship in the straight of Hormuz linked to Israel, and of course, we have some thoughts.

After years of doing whatever it could to help fund and encourage Iran to militarize nuclear capability, the Obama/Biden administration did an about-face in recent months and turned antagonistic. The saber-rattling leads us to believe they wanted an all-out conflict, which the targeting in Syria has escalated.

I would be shocked if Biden’s CIA isn’t deliberately making hay on both sides of this conflict.

With a ship seizure at Hormuz, we get the double-edged sword of international involvement. At least a few Gulf States object to Iran’s long-time pursuit of regional hegemony. Saudi Arabia, for example, prefers the title, while the emirates want to be able to move oil. If Hormuz is a battleground, is it in the interest of the Gulf States to pick a side and go to war if it comes to that?

Biden is heading for a beating in November if he is indeed at the top of the ticket, so distractions are to his advantage. Hormuz gives the US an excuse to escalate and respond, as do recent pronouncements of support for Israel (if for no other reason than to use them to advance other aims), but there are a lot of Democrats who don’t like Israel and won’t like that.

Iran and Russia are allies (Russia and China have expressed shared interests against the US). Russia will use that to its advantage in any conversation about Ukraine.

The Mullahs are unpopular in Iran, and this could be used as an excuse to pursue regime change. Still, Democrats have never expressed much interest in benefiting anyone but the Mullahs.

Democrats ranted about Trump starting WWIII, but Trump didn’t start any wars, while Biden has supported several military conflicts and is on the verge of a third (fourth?) that could find the entire region in turmoil if not – at least technically – the world (and several of the nations involved have nukes). Nice job, Joe.

Watch the corporate media. Whatever they do or say odds are good, it’s the opposite of the truth.

And yes, this just scratches the surface (one comment elsewhere noted that Iran and other anti-IS factions) have terrorists in our country (thanks to Joe!).

Update from a reader.

I personally think that Hamas and now Iran are lighting things up because of the prophesy associated with the Red Heifer. Hamas admitted as much.

This attack by Iran is intended to stop the Red Heifer sacrifice this weekend or next. This is when the appropriate prayer will be said on the Sabbath.

The Iranian’s are desperate to stop it!

Reference: Red Heifer, Amalek, and Reactions of Nations

The post Iran’s Mullahs Are Retaliating Against Israel – How Does Biden Benefit? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Controversial new SEC Rules compel corporations to report the climate impact of each step of the supply chain. It’s complex, convoluted, and confusing at best – but is it constitutional? That was the question asked during a powerful hearing on March 18, 2024, before the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Regulations.

SEC Chair Gary Gensler is accused of overstepping constitutional bounds in his zeal to weaponize the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate greenhouse gases, a far stretch from the agency’s mission to protect investors and ensure financial integrity in markets. Burdensome new rules do the opposite, threatening to inflict net-zero business profits in a kamikaze effort to achieve impossible net-zero emissions of carbon dioxide.

In a divided 3-2 decision on March 2, 2024, the SEC issued the controversial new “climate disclosure” rule as an 886-page amendment to S-K, which governs required disclosures in Form 10-Ks and other public filings. The rules purport to improve investor awareness, instead feeding the fantasies of climate ideology over investor concerns and imposing billions of dollars of compliance costs on businesses for a hazy effort to track every aspect of climate impact in each step of businesses’ complex supply chains. An even more ambitious plan under proposed “Scope 3” disclosures was curtailed.

An Unconstitutional Climate Regime

The US Constitution (Art. 1, § 1 and § 7, cls. 2) provides that “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” The SEC was given the power to oversee financial markets, including “material” investor disclosures. The question in dispute is whether this extends to high-cost compliance efforts that will increase consumer costs for products and even close many businesses – including down-chain farming operations – that are already struggling with weak margins. This rule change is just one of many so-called climate initiatives under the Biden administration that exceed traditional administrative authority as defined by the courts.

Tennessee Republican Andy Ogles expressed this at the hearing:

“[W]e’ve seen these regulatory regimes come in and essentially function as members of Congress, as the body of Congress, by creating legislation and burdens by rulemaking …[through] SEC’s climate rules, which play to the tune of the administration’s obsession with the climate change religion, and that’s what it’s become, is a religion. Simply put, this rule will bully publicly traded companies into reporting environmental information that has no relevance to the financial concerns that matter to investors.”

The POTUS defied SCOTUS when he bypassed Congress to erase student debt, signaling that he seeks to escape the surly bounds of the Constitution and representative democracy in favor of tyrannical edicts and executive orders. The list of such episodes grows daily, including stricter EPA rules for gas emissions and expanded rules for wildlife protection that undermine farmers. Another sneaky initiative would create an international building code applicable to the entire nation, drafted by an unelected organization governed by “industry stakeholders” rather than We the People.

An Attack on Farming and Food Supplies?

The Scope 3 disclosures originally proposed by Chairman Gary Gensler would have dramatically impacted farmers economically downstream from publicly listed companies subject to its provisions. California now seeks to impose Scope 3 rules in the SEC’s stead, a back-door assault on states’ rights akin to its Proposal 12 governing pig farming.

The legal term for a government or corporation exceeding its authority is “ultra vires” – Latin for “beyond the powers.” It describes an act requiring legal authority but done without it. The Scope 3 disclosures – abandoned for the moment by the SEC but eagerly embraced by California – are precisely that. Their impact on farming operations was summarized at the hearing by third-generation Tennessee tomato farmer Renea Jones, of Jones and Church Farms:

“Scope 3 emissions – as proposed in the original rule – are emissions which are the result of activities not owned by the company but are in its supply chain. Naturally, this includes family farms as most farm products, including the tomatoes grown on my farm, end up in the value chains of these companies….

“To comply with Scope 3 reporting requirements, we would need to hire a legal consultant and a chemist to keep up with all that would be required of us. Looking across the entire tomato supply chain, there are approximately 6,000 inputs involved in the growing of one tomato. On average, my farm produces 38.5 million tomatoes every growing season. From a record-keeping standpoint, my small family farm operation would have to hire extra staff just to keep up with the data the SEC is asking for. A rule with requirements this extensive would cause us to consider closing our doors. Profit margins for farm operations are already tight due to inflated input costs, and hiring extra help to navigate these requirements would make those tight margins even tighter, if not nonexistent.”

Scope 3 requirements would ensure net-zero carbon emissions for Jones when tomato production hit net-zero. This is not just throwing the baby out with the bathwater; this is shoving its head underwater in the name of a rescue effort.

On the other side of the climate-nut food-attack spectrum, New York’s now-infamous Letitia James has sued JBS Foods (the world’s largest producer of beef) for fraud for claiming it is implementing GHG-reducing regenerative agriculture policies. This “damned if they do, damned if they don’t” insanity is insouciantly ignored by fearmongering alarmists who have their regulatory cake and eat it too. The complexity of the case against JBS displays the near-impossible reporting burden being foisted on companies by the SEC’s new 886-page rule.

Hiding Elephants in Mouseholes

Subcommittee testimony from Whitney Hermandorfer, an attorney and Director of Strategic Litigation with the Tennessee Office of the Attorney General & Reporter, laid the SEC out in legal lavender, invoking constitutional protections and extensive case law to aver that the new rule lacks statutory authority, distorts existing “materiality” principles, and imposes undue compliance and speech burdens, all accomplished through a flawed process of enactment. Hermandorfer claimed Congress never granted broad power to the SEC or unelected Gensler, especially in such clear derogation of reserved states’ rights, and that the rule’s “ambiguous statutory language” will harm consumers and the economy:

“Under the Supreme Court’s major-questions doctrine, an agency must come forward with ‘clear congressional authorization’ before using a rule to settle an issue of great ‘economic and political significance.’ This principle reflects the commonsense presumption that Congress ‘does not…hide elephants in mouseholes’ when delegating agency authority.

“The lack of clarity around what it means for climate risks to be material will no doubt subject companies to costly litigation that would detract from innovation and investor value—thus harming rather than helping consumers on balance.”

Dogmatic Policies Eclipse Common Sense

Climate policies have interfered with power grid maintenance, creating grid fragility even as the electric vehicles that will spike demand are touted as salvific. Corporations have been granted massive tax subsidies to “store” liquid carbon dioxide underground with little hope it will stay put, while billions of dollars are “invested” into other corporate winners who manufacture renewable energy darlings that are presented as inflation-reducing but are regressively pumping up the national debt. This corporate favoritism is unavailable to small and mid-sized farms compelled without subsidy to comply with a Kafka-esque panoply of vague or burdensome regulations. Americans cannot eat solar panels, heat pumps, or EVs, no matter how much they are subsidized.

 

John Klar is an Attorney, farmer, and author. Mostly farmer… And Regular Contributor to GraniteGrok and VermontGrok.

The post New SEC Climate Rules Are Burdensome – But Are They Constitutional? appeared first on Granite Grok.

People who think that cannabis should not be legal in New Hampshire are fond of quoting the governor of Virginia’s statement justifying his veto of a legalization bill in his state.

But here’s the thing about that statement: Nowhere in it does he address the question of where the government supposedly gets the power to tell people what substances they can’t ingest. The whole American system, from top to bottom, is based on the idea that governments can only exercise powers that are delegated to them.

Do you know of any individual who could go to his neighbor as an individual and insist that he stop ingesting any plant, whether that’s marijuana, chamomile, or lettuce? I don’t.

If individuals don’t have a power, how can they delegate that power?

Suppose we change the topic of the governor’s statement from pot to guns:

The proposed legalization of retail firearms in the Commonwealth endangers Virginians’ health and safety. States following this path have seen adverse effects on children’s and adolescent’s health and safety, increased gang activity and violent crime, significant deterioration in mental health, … and significant costs associated with retail firearms that far exceed tax revenue. It also does not eliminate the illegal black-market sale of firearms, nor guarantee product safety. Addressing the inconsistencies in enforcement and regulation in Virginia’s current laws does not justify expanding access to firearms, following the failed paths of other states, and endangering Virginians’ health and safety.

If you oppose legal cannabis, are you still on board with that reasoning? Or do you just pretend it’s valid when you agree with his conclusions? Because if the reasoning is valid for restricting access to pot, then it’s also valid for restricting RKBA, speech, religion, privacy, property, and every other ‘right’ that you might think you have.

The argument he’s making boils down to this: If some people exercise a right in ways that cause harm, then we are justified in taking that right away from everyone.

Do you support that premise? Because if you think about it carefully, it’s equivalent to this: There are no rights, only permissions.

The post Rights, or Permissions? appeared first on Granite Grok.

I will start by sharing a video link for the readers to bookmark, though I don’t recommend wasting 98 minutes of your life listening to the insufferable drivel of the Nashua local swamp.

If you mute the sound and just look at each graphic presentation, it clearly reeks of Agenda 21/2030, NRPC, and much of the usual fare that’s being pushed. Look for words like climate, emissions, equity, and sustainable, and you’ll get the picture.

During our mayor’s campaign, he regularly boasted Nashua’s AAA bond rating. I offer to the readers, especially ones from Nashua, a mental image.  Think of the parents of some 30-year-old who’s living in their basement.  Don’t sweat the intricate details of that arrangement, but the wheels start turning when you’re told that said person brags about having a credit rating of greater than 800.  You know darn well, without getting into the weeds of the “what if” questions, that this person didn’t earn it the old-fashioned way.

Remember HB 1080, which died 19-5 on 5/5/22 in the Senate? I mentioned Jeb’s beloved CMS money. NH, at the state level, and many of its political subdivisions have similar examples of being yoked to the strings attached to money coming from higher political entities, usually the federal government and usually in the form of “grant money.”

This is another good site to visit to follow financial connections. The graft on display comes from private sources with their own nefarious agendas.

Back to Nashua

I’d like to compare the local government to workers in the Oldest Profession, but I have to keep the content clean to keep it suitable for all readers, so I will mention Homer Simpson becoming the “prank monkey” for Mr Burns (the nuclear plant owner, not the new executive council candidate who failed to unseat Annie Kuster 2 years ago).

Nashua is a 15 Minute City wannabe, change my mind!

Millions of dollars of grant money fund its social programs and the bus system is almost entirely federally funded.  If you want to check for yourself, it’s on the City’s website, but if you choose to dig deeper, let the rest of us know how you rate the user-friendliness of the local RTK process. Our mayor keeps pushing for commuter rail despite repeated studies indicating it’s a boondoggle, but he wants it anyway because federal grant money is available and with Mayor Pete’s blessing to boot.  In fact, the two mayors have been photographed together and together with my own House swamp rats, Mr&Mrs Newman.

If you’re reading this and you have the good fortune of NOT living in Nashua, consider the alarm sounded, perhaps not for the first time.  If you have decent people in office in your community, support them.  If not, just be a good watchdog whether or not you’re available to attend town meetings and/or committee meetings. At least look at the agenda and give instructions to your elected officials.  They work for you.  Do NOT let your community lose its dignity by becoming another Nashua.

The post Do Not Let Your Community Lose Its Dignity by Becoming Another Nashua. appeared first on Granite Grok.

Despite what the union leader says (and later had to correct), Lily Tang Willaims was the first Republican in the race for New Hampshire Congressional District Two. She’s been campaigning for a long time in the run-up to the 2024 contest without much support from the GOP or attention from the local media.

It is not a secret that the establishment does not think she can win, even after incumbent Democrat Ann Kuster announced her retirement. Lily’s presence, much like the original Landrigan article announcing Vikram Mansharamani’s entry, has been invisibilia. CD2? What CD2? There’s nothing there to see; move along.

Why are you not reporting accurate information @KlandriganUL ? You obviously know that @Lily4Liberty has been running for this seat since last year? You want to provide accurate coverage, right? Probably a simple oversight, right? @UnionLeader @AdamSextonWMUR pic.twitter.com/qy9nEBT42L

— Nikki For NH (@NikkiforNH) April 11, 2024

The RNC had ceded the seat to the Democrat, but Ann Kuster’s retirement announcement kicked the RINO bee’s nest, coughing up a list of names rumored to have taken an interest. Suddenly, NH CD2 was something they thought they could win. Vikram is but one of a handful of primary contenders looking to be the non-Lily candidate to appeal to what appears to be a very moderate district that no real Republican could win.

Lily has rightly been a bit miffed about the sudden attention to a race she’s been running for over a year, but that hasn’t stopped her from campaigning or taking advantage of opportunities that present themselves to be the real Republicans.

Dartmouth College, a premier #woke Ivy League wasteland, held a gun control debate featuring David Hogg and Libertarian vice presidential candidate Jeremy “Spike” Cohen.

At some point, Lily Williams stepped up to the microphone to ask D. Hogg a question. The question.

“Hi, my name is Lily Tang Williams. Welcome to my ‘live free or die’ state,” she began.

“Actually, I am a Chinese immigrant who survived communism, and under Mao, you know, 40 million people were starving to death after he sold communism to them. And 20 million people died … murdered during his Cultural Revolution,” she continued.

She then specifically addressed Hogg: “So, my question to you, David, is that can you guarantee me, a gun owner, tonight, our government in the U.S., in D.C., will never, never become a tyrannical government? Can you guarantee that to me?”

“There’s no way I can ever guarantee that any government will not be tyrannical,” Hogg replied.

“Well, then the debate on gun control is over, because I will never give up my guns. Never, never. And you should go to China to see how gun control works for the dictatorship of the CCP.”

The exchange quickly went national, appearing on The Blaze, ZeroHedge, and elsewhere as the center-right rushed to share what to 2A advocates and defenders is the crux of the matter. It is the matter—the question.

The Second Amendment exists to protect us from a tyranny that David Hogg admits the gun grabbers cannot promise will not come to be if they get their way.

As Lily implies, tyranny is likely inevitable absent those rights so why risk it? In fact, why not try it out first and see how much you like it?

We do not expect Hogg to take her up on the suggestion.

David Hogg torched by a Chinese immigrant warning against gun control.

This is what happens when liberals do an open mic. They get wrecked. They can’t defend their positions. pic.twitter.com/aeUGq0ff0c

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) April 11, 2024

The post In Lily Tang Williams vs. David Hogg – Williams Wins with 2A TKO! appeared first on Granite Grok.

Diversity is our strength! Diversity is our strength! Diversity is our strength! BULLSH*T. Not according to me, but according to the people who supposedly represent diversity. More specifically, Annie Kuster has endorsed WHITE MALE Colin Van Ostern to replace her in Congress.

If “diversity is our strength,” as Annie and all the Woke-Commie bots keep telling us … then why is Annie making Congress and America weaker by making Congress less diverse?

And note how our wonderful “press,” … who are always more than happy to amplify the Democrats’ attacks on the GOP for not being “diverse” enough … don’t hold the Democrats to the same standard. Because, needless to say, the “press” in New Hampshire is an arm of the Democrat Party. Please, Kevin, explain it to us slowly and using small words … why is “diversity” our strength only when and where the Democrats tell us “diversity is our strength.”

What a wonderful opportunity for the NHGOP to meddle in the Democrat primary. But don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen … “we’re better than that,” “focus the fiscal issues,” blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

 

The post Annie Kuster’s Endorsement Exposes The Diversity-HOAX appeared first on Granite Grok.

You’d have to have been trapped under a very large rock to have missed the months of debate over a handful of states trying to keep Donald Trump off their primary ballot. He led an insurrection, they said, so that Constitution-thing they typically loath demanded they act … like ignorant partisan children.

Left-wing agitators petitioned states across America’s inflated plain to block The Donald. Their hope was that by limiting the states in which he could compete in what is effectively a private corporation’s nomination process, he might never achieve the delegates necessary to challenge their Democrat contender. The argument centered on the 14th Amendment and the supposition that Donald Trump led an insurrection and was, therefore, ineligible.

Whether you believe that or not is irrelevant. “States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency.” Neither Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Michigan, nor any other state has executive authority on these grounds. So sayeht many a non-partisan confirmed by a 9-0 ruling of the US Supreme Court.

Yes, all the so-called Liberal justices agreed—a truly bipartisan ruling, which pissed off the progressives to no end and set up the current outrage. States are charged with overseeing the execution of elections. They are to set up polling times and places, ensure access, the collection and counting of ballots, and they get to decide the dance steps to get on that ballot not otherwise established in the US Constitition.

It is a difference with a distinction.

The two cases … are completely different. The democrats tried to block Trump by accusing him of being an insurrectionist under a Civil War-era Constitutional provision that only applies to state officials. Ohio and Alabama’s issues relate to simple qualifying deadlines that apply to all candidates.

Trump’s call for peaceful protest and the lack of any weapons at what in progressive parlance is called the Capitol riot aside, the Constitution (apparently) does not give States the power to enforce Sec. 3 of the 14th Amendment, but it does empower them to manage the logistics of ensuring that elections – no matter who is on the ballot – happen. Both Ohio and Alabama have long-standing deadlines, which the DNC ignored when scheduling its nominating convention, and this is not their fault?

Like most of what goes wrong in America, this is a Demcorat-created problem.

And so far, the DNC has not sued either state, presumably because they would surely lose on the merits, not least because they control when their convention is held.

Hate Trump all you like, but neither Ohio nor Alabama established their rules based on his choosing to run for elected office. Everyone else who intends to appear on the ballot, regardless of party, needs to meet the same deadline.

[Alabama Secretary of State Wes] Allen sent a letter to Alabama Democratic Party Chairman Randy Kelley saying that the state’s Aug. 15 certification deadline is four days before the Democratic National Convention is set to begin. Allen indicated that Biden’s name will not appear on the ballot unless the deadline is met.

“If this Office has not received a valid certificate of nomination from the Democratic Party following its convention by the statutory deadline, I will be unable to certify the names of the Democratic Party’s candidates for President and Vice President for ballot preparation for the 2024 general election,” Allen wrote.

And it is not the crisis advertised, but there is a problem within the problem.

The State Party can request “provisional certification for Democratic and Republican nominees,” and the state can allow it. The issue for Democrats—who insist that despite this matter, Joe Biden will be on all 50 state ballots—is what if it’s not Joe come November. Disregarding his declining mental state, the man is increasingly unpopular even among Democrats. Rumors abound across the political spectrum about the plan to replace him before November. Biden sweeps the nomination, then voluntarily bows out for health reasons, and the DNC picks his replacement—someone younger and less disliked who can presumably distance themselves from the past four years’ worth of policies they all supported.

If state parties have already sent provisional certifications with Joe Biden’s name on them, any replacement on the Biden-Harris ticket won’t appear on those ballots.

The New Republic to the Rescue

The New Republic article notes the 82-day requirement, the scheduling snafu, and exceptions and past accommodations that might resolve the 2024 problem, but it can’t help but be what it is: a progressive press mouthpiece.

While both Allen and LaRose could well be trying to simply uphold state laws, the moves seem remarkably suspicious given recent lawsuits regarding Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. The Colorado state supreme court attempted to kick Trump off of the 2024 ballot due to his role in the January 6 insurrection, which the justices determined violated Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

While The New Republic notes the Supreme Court striking down Colorado’s unconstitutional effort to keep Trump off its primary ballot, it never notes the complicity of liberal justices in the 9-0 decision, including a Biden appointee. To them, it is the Roberts Court, which “will have to swiftly reinstate [Biden and Harris], since states don’t have the authority to remove federal officeholders, right? But that would require consistency from John Roberts’s Supreme Court, whose values are in question.”

Hardly. Were the matter not to reach a means for reconciliation (which we doubt) and head to the Highest Court, its ruling would likely acknowledge that States do indeed have that authority (as the Constitution is silent on the matter – not that this has stopped the court as often as it should) and that it is the DNC’s responsibility to work out their differences with the states.

Which it will, unless the Dems are truly throwing the dice on another Biden-Harris ticket and Joe’s ability to keep what is left of his wits about him until at least November. That’s how it sounds, and I’m curious to see if that’s true.

 

The post New Republic Gets Pissy After Alabama Says Biden Might Not Be On Its November Ballot appeared first on Granite Grok.

Democrats reportedly are celebrating after passing their $20. hr min wage for many businesses. Yup, a victory for labor rights, they say, only there is a cost. As predicted, fast food chains are scrambling to adjust. Layoffs of full-time employment, cutting hours, some even closing up. Topping this off, prices are rising as we knew they would.

Welcome to California.

Burger King in Los Angeles reports a price increase. The Texas double whopper, which was $15.09, is now $16.98. The big fish meal, which was $7.49, is now $11.49. How will customers respond? I don’t think they will be thrilled.

Fosters Freeze was paying its crew $16.00 hr now – – nothing. The doors are closed. Pizza Hut laid off over 1200 delivery drivers, and many small businesses expect to see reduced profits. Wonder how much tax money the state will lose and how they intend to make up the differance? Of course, the democratic way is to raise taxes. With the increase in unemployment, those benefits will be more in demand, along with gratuities’ being given to illegals. Sunny Cal looks forward to a darter future.

Can things get worse, well yes of course, while politicians celebrate, whispers of $50.hr. have been heard in quiet corners of leftist strongholds.. If twenty has crippled the beast, then fifty is sure to kill it. While democrats ponder the side effects of their victory, there is then the question of population loss again affecting the state economy. Will citizens, even devout democrats of the working class, tolerate this absurd mismanagement for much longer?

Stay tuned for the next episode of We Told Them So, coming soon.

The post Leading the Nation in Making People Jobless and Homeless appeared first on Granite Grok.