Saturday • May 3 • 2025
Vol.XVII • No.XVIII
Manchester, N.H.
A bill pre-filed in the New Hampshire House would effectively ban government surveillance using facial recognition in the state. The passage of this bill would not only help protect privacy in New Hampshire, but it would also hinder one aspect of the federal surveillance state.
Rep. Thomas Cormen, along with a bipartisan coalition of 10 legislators, filed House Bill 1688 (HB1688) on Dec. 15. Provisions in the legislation would prohibit AI used for “real-time and remote biometric identification systems used for surveillance in public spaces, such as facial recognition, except when used to locate a missing or abducted person.”
AI is an important aspect of all current facial recognition systems. ReFaces is a biometrics company that sells facial recognition systems. According to its website, “the majority of modern facial recognition algorithms have some semblance of integrated deep learning and neural network.”
“Intelligent, AI-based software can instantaneously search databases of faces and compare them to one or multiple faces that are detected in a scene. In an instant, you can get highly accurate results.”
In effect, the passage of HB 1688 would ban government facial recognition surveillance in public spaces.
IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS
A 2019 report revealed that the federal government has turned state driver’s license photos into a giant facial recognition database, putting virtually every driver in America in a perpetual electronic police lineup. The revelations generated widespread outrage, but the story wasn’t new. The federal government has been developing a massive facial recognition system for years.
The FBI rolled out a nationwide facial recognition program in the fall of 2014, with the goal of building a giant biometric database with pictures provided by the states and corporate friends.
In 2016, the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law released “The Perpetual Lineup,” a massive report on law enforcement use of facial recognition technology in the U.S. You can read the complete report at perpetuallineup.org. The organization conducted a year-long investigation and collected more than 15,000 pages of documents through more than 100 public records requests. The report paints a disturbing picture of intense cooperation between the federal government, and state and local law enforcement to develop a massive facial recognition database.
“Face recognition is a powerful technology that requires strict oversight. But those controls, by and large, don’t exist today,” report co-author Clare Garvie said. “With only a few exceptions, there are no laws governing police use of the technology, no standards ensuring its accuracy, and no systems checking for bias. It’s a wild west.”
Despite the outrage generated by these reports, Congress has done nothing to roll back this facial recognition program.
There are many technical and legal problems with facial recognition, including significant concerns about the accuracy of the technology, particularly when reading the facial features of minority populations. During a test run by the ACLU of Northern California, facial recognition misidentified 26 members of the California legislature as people in a database of arrest photos.
With facial recognition technology, police and other government officials can track individuals in real time. These systems allow law enforcement agents to use video cameras and continually scan everybody who walks by. According to the report, several major police departments have expressed an interest in this type of real-time tracking. Documents revealed agencies in at least five major cities, including Los Angeles, either claimed to run real-time face recognition off of street cameras, bought technology with the capability, or expressed written interest in buying it.
In all likelihood, the federal government heavily involves itself in helping state and local agencies obtain this technology. The feds provide grant money to local law enforcement agencies for a vast array of surveillance gear, including ALPRs, stingray devices and drones. The federal government essentially encourages and funds a giant nationwide surveillance net and then taps into the information via fusion centers and the Information Sharing Environment (ISE).
Fusion centers were sold as a tool to combat terrorism, but that is not how they are being used. The ACLU pointed to a bipartisan congressional report to demonstrate the true nature of government fusion centers: “They haven’t contributed anything meaningful to counterterrorism efforts. Instead, they have largely served as police surveillance and information sharing nodes for law enforcement efforts targeting the frequent subjects of police attention: Black and brown people, immigrants, dissidents, and the poor.”
Fusion centers operate within the broader ISE. According to its website, the ISE “provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators…have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies.” In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant. Known ISE partners include the Office of Director of National Intelligence which oversees 17 federal agencies and organizations, including the NSA. ISE utilizes these partnerships to collect and share data on the millions of unwitting people they track.
Reports that the Berkeley Police Department in cooperation with a federal fusion center deployed cameras equipped to surveil a “free speech” rally and Antifa counterprotests provided the first solid link between the federal government and local authorities in facial recognition surveillance.
In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. The passage of state laws and local ordinances banning and limiting facial recognition eliminates one avenue for gathering facial recognition data. Simply put, data that doesn’t exist cannot be entered into federal databases.
WHAT’S NEXT
HB1688 will be officially introduced when the New Hampshire legislature convenes on Jan. 3. It will be referred to the House Executive Departments and Administration Committee, where it must receive a hearing and a vote before moving forward in the legislative process. An “ought to pass” recommendation would greatly increase the bill’s chance of passage in the full House.
Mike Maharrey | Tenth Amendment Center
We want to thank The Tenth Amendment Center for being a partner and supporter of Independent Media. You can support us here, or if you prefer to donate by check, email steve@granitegrok com for details.The post NH Bill Would Ban A.I. Facial Recognition Surveillance appeared first on Granite Grok.
Two-hundred-and-thirty-one US military members have submitted a letter to the American people, shared with United States military command. In it, they accuse ‘leadership’ of unconstitutional lawless behavior, experimentation on members of the military, and disregard for the harm caused by forced COVID vaccination.
While implementing the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, military leaders broke the law, trampled constitutional rights, denied informed consent, permitted unwilling medical experimentation, and suppressed the free exercise of religion.
The letter is to us, explaining their commitment to seek accountability. “To rebuild trust and the rule of law, particularly in the armed forces.” And the culpability is not limited to those in uniform. They pledge to do everything legally possible to demonstrate how other agencies in the government “can put their own house in order.”
At 4am EST today (a few min ago), senior military leaders received an email with a letter attached called the Declaration of Military Accountability. I know because I sent the email. I sent it on behalf of myself & 230 other signatories of the letter. The letter is not addressed to the military leaders but rather to the American people. The email was merely to inform these military leaders that there is group of troops & vets pledging to the American public that we will do everything lawfully within our power to stop the willful destruction of our military by its own leadership. Let’s take our country back in 2024 & let’s begin by defending our military from its own leadership. You can find the body of the letter below. Soon we’ll have it on a website where you can find it as well, along with the names of the 231 signatories.
Here’s the tweet and the letter below.
At 4am EST today (a few min ago), senior military leaders received an email with a letter attached called the Declaration of Military Accountability. I know because I sent the email. I sent it on behalf of myself & 230 other signatories of the letter. The letter is not addressed… pic.twitter.com/jFkF3FmcA8
— Brad Miller (@BradMiller1010) January 1, 2024
Nice words, as they say. Inspiring, much like the Declaration of Independence, which ended with, “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
What do we expect the DoD and the US Military to do to the 231 cosigners of this Declaration of Military Accountability?
He says, Troops and vets. I can’t imagine it will be pleasant for those who are active military.
Thoughts?
The post A Declaration of Military Accountability … appeared first on Granite Grok.
A perfect record, the governor predicted, would guarantee a chance to compete for greatness, inspiring his 5-year-old son to take a Sharpie in hand earlier this year, stand on his tiptoes, and lovingly graffiti the front of the DeSantis campaign bus. Barely above the headlights, in big block letters, the young fan wrote, “Florida State.”
If the university’s football team stayed perfect, the governor told his kids, FSU would make the four-team NCAA postseason. Triumph followed as the Florida State Seminoles team went through their 13-game schedule undefeated and untied. Perfect, in other words. Then a cruel snub that challenged the DeSantis family worldview: The College Football Playoff committee voted to elevate more popular schools over the team that did everything right. Excellence may be its own reward, but it doesn’t always swing enough votes. At least, that is, for the favorite football team of the Florida first family. And perhaps for presidential campaigns.
It is four days before Christmas. DeSantis is again in Iowa, and though his season is still far from over, the situation is far from rosy.
A former high school football coach, the governor draws from the hard-nosed pep talks he once delivered at halftime: “Stay dedicated to the mission, you’re not gonna be denied, and execute your plan.”
DeSantis has been blitzing Iowa non-stop, making stops in all 99 counties, many of them more than once. Ahead of the holidays, he mops up the western side of the state where he tells voters the country needs “a new birth of freedom” and promises to be their “change agent.” This isn’t just talk. Voters can see what he did in Florida. On policy, and more importantly, on getting that policy enacted into law, DeSantis has what many conservatives consider a perfect record.
But if it hasn’t already, the race for the Republican nomination may be shifting from a conversation about the fate of the country to a question about the fate of one man. “This whole legal stuff has had a big impact on the overall dynamics,” DeSantis says of how former President Trump’s myriad of felony counts and other legal challenges to his empire and his candidacy have changed the race. And this, among other factors, he says during an interview with RealClearPolitics, is “beyond my control.”
The pandemic made the “American Carnage” Trump invoked worse, the governor argues aboard the bus as it rumbles past cozy farmhouses decorated for Christmas. Worse even, he says, “than it was in 2016.”
“Are we going to have some type of accountability?” he asks. “Are we going to have a reckoning for this, or are we just going to act like everyone did such a great job?” DeSantis wants that conversation. But Trump won’t even show up to discuss it. What DeSantis considers his marquee accomplishment – how he handled a once-in-a-century crisis, refusing to lock down when Trump acquiesced – is becoming an afterthought.
“The 21st century: The three biggest events: 9/11 and the wars that followed, the Great Recession, and then COVID,” he says, moving his hand along an invisible timeline and pounding a tray table to punctuate each ugly epoch. The virus, and its still festering wounds, DeSantis continues, “had a broader impact than the other two events combined. And yet, here we are. We’re not even discussing that.”
The moderators asked exactly “one question even involving COVID” during all the primary debates, he complains, and then to make matters worse, “The former president, because he won’t debate on the stage, has not had to defend his record.”
Trump’s legal troubles now dominate the headlines once reserved for the virus. Two days prior, the Colorado Supreme Court had ruled that the former president was disqualified from holding office again because he engaged in an insurrection ahead of Jan. 6. DeSantis opposes the move “as a matter of principle” and warns that the decision “takes us down a road that’s not going to be good for this country when a court can disqualify you without a criminal conviction.”
“But let’s just be clear,” DeSantis continues, “Trump is fine with weaponization if it’s against people he doesn’t like.” For proof, he points to a complaint filed with the Florida Ethics Commission. It was “bogus” and quickly dismissed, but he notes that when the complaint was filed by Trump allies, they explicitly called “to have me ejected from the office of governor.”
He doesn’t make much of Vivek Ramaswamy’s demand, either, that the field boycott Colorado in solidarity. “If one of Trump’s competitors was removed by a state Supreme Court,” DeSantis says almost chuckling at the absurdity of the notion, “is there any chance in hell he would remove himself in solidarity? He’d spike the football!”
As Trump hustles to make the race about “retribution” and his martyrdom, DeSantis sees a trap. “This is all very strategic,” he warns while diagnosing a paradox: Democrats want to run against the former president. “They realize those indictments are beneficial to him in a primary” but also set up “a massive legal wringer” ahead of a general election. “I think they totally understand it.” And indeed, they do.
Trump’s own pollster, John McLaughlin, told RCP ahead of the first indictment that “this is really helping us.” A close friend of President Biden, Dick Harpootlian, even admitted to RCP that he was “praying” Republicans would set up Trump as the nominee for Democrats to knock down.
A popular former president adored by a sympathetic conservative media, DeSantis admits, “makes it harder for a guy like me to get oxygen.” But the candidate is stoic. “That’s just the landscape, and so a lot of that is beyond your control,” he says. “You’ve just got to do the best you can here on the ground to win the vote.”
DeSantis laughs when asked about speculation that Ramaswamy, who has repeatedly praised Trump as the greatest president in modern history, is running with a future cabinet seat in mind. If that’s the case, the millennial entrepreneur should have just issued an endorsement rather than enter the race: “He is obviously not running against Trump.” Focus on the wrong president though, he warns, and his party will lose: “Republicans should want the election framed as a referendum on the failure of Joe Biden, and how we get America out of this mess.” Unsurprisingly, he says the future ought to look like Florida.
Some Iowa Republicans have paused their holiday plans to hear about “the Florida model.” They learn, if they didn’t know already, about the Florida COVID experience, the reformed Florida public school system, the Florida war with the Disney Co., the Florida debt that is down by 25%, the year-after-year tax cuts in Florida, the Florida migration boom, and much, much more about Florida.
DeSantis sells himself as much as he pitches the Sunshine State for export. “You have the opportunity to change the trajectory of the country,” he promises. Make him the nominee, he later adds, and Republicans will win “just like we did in Florida.” On a night when the GOP was bitterly underwhelmed, DeSantis barely broke a sweat. He won reelection last year by a historic 20 percentage points.
Some voters come to hear him already convinced. During a stop in Coralville, Wyatt Landuyt-Krueger, a 21-year-old corrections officer wearing DeSantis campaign merch, asks the governor about mortgage rates. DeSantis gives a long answer that touches on the free market, the Federal Reserve, and energy independence driving down inflation. “I liked his answer,” the Zoomer replies, calling it “absolutely comprehensive.”
Others welcome the process of being persuaded. After another town hall, this one just outside Ainsworth, retired small business owner Patty Koller is also impressed by the DeSantis record. She came to the session leaning toward Trump, but leaves impressed with DeSantis. “He’s just solid,” she reports. “Very intelligent and sincere.”
Voters ask more than a dozen questions. No one says anything about the latest Washington Beltway fascination, namely the super PAC responsible for funding most of the DeSantis advertising, canvassing programs, and the candidate’s travel. It is reportedly imploding.
The DeSantis campaign ceded significant funds and traditional responsibilities to Never Back Down, an auspicious and historic bet that is now in danger of backfiring. The organization’s operation has been the polar opposite of what DeSantis promises to bring to the White House. Jeff Roe, the PAC’s chief architect, resigned last week from the group plagued by blunders and backbiting.
“I don’t have control over it, and that’s the problem with how this is set up. If I controlled it, I would own it, and I would obviously have run it in a good way,” DeSantis tells RCP. “It’s just an independent group, and so the dynamics there are things that I just have no visibility into whatsoever.”
Would he do anything differently if he could start over again, perhaps the now infamous decision to launch his campaign on Twitter? Despite glitches, DeSantis still considers the audio live stream a success. “There was so much interest that it crashed the site,” he says of the launch that attracted 300,000 listeners in the moment and 3.4 million listeners in the following 24 hours.
More generally though, he says of the campaign, “There’s always different things that you can do. Anytime I’ve done anything, I can look back and say that.” The last few months, DeSantis reports, have been a significant success. He won the endorsement of Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds and then Iowa kingmaker Bob Vander Plaats. He warmed up for the fourth GOP debate by taking California Gov. Gavin Newsom to task during an exhibition in primetime on Fox News.
“We are clicking,” DeSantis insists as he blankets Iowa. “We are doing good.” Does he enjoy the process of campaigning, though? DeSantis has heard the question before, phrased in various ways: It goes to the heart of whether he’s struggling in the polls because he’s charisma-challenged. DeSantis doesn’t object to the question. “It’s fun,” he replies with a shrug during another long day in Iowa.
Trump has not put in that kind of work. The former president prefers parachuting into early states for big rallies rather than meeting voters one-on-one at the diner or the firehouse. More recently, Trump can be found with a posse sitting ringside at UFC cage fights.
The governor has crashed big events like that before. He received a warm welcome last year during a surprise visit to Pepsi Gulf Coast Jam when he walked on stage and told a crowd gathered for country music that the festival had been made possible “because Florida chose freedom over ‘Faucism.’” And both men attended the Iowa vs. Iowa State football game earlier this year. Trump watched from a private suite. DeSantis sat in the stands.
“Ultimately, that’s not my bread and butter,” he says of the celebrity cameo. “I mean, I’m not an entertainer. I’m a leader. And a leader has got to be able to get the job done and deliver results.” Podcasts are a more natural fit, and his last stop before heading home for Christmas is a hayloft.
DeSantis sits opposite Sawyer and Tork Whisler, the father and son duo who host “Barn Talk.” They are the Joe Rogans of agriculture, and on their farm, the governor seems in his element. Behind the microphone for an hour, he discusses everything from the intersection of the U.S. Constitution’s Interstate Commerce Clause and the pork-packing industry to environmental regulations. He can’t help but brag about his son, the Seminoles fan.
A highlight from the campaign: a stop in Sioux City the morning of the Big Ten title game. DeSantis brought his 5-year-old on stage with him and put him on the spot. “I didn’t rehearse it with him,” he recalls on the podcast. “I was like, Mason who is going to win Iowa vs. Michigan?” A cute moment to be sure, it could have just as easily ended in disaster. As DeSantis brought the microphone within his son’s reach, he admits thinking, “If this kid chooses Michigan, he’s going to get booed.” He shouldn’t have worried. Mason hollered “Iowa!” The crowd went wild.
The Barn Talk guys love the story, and when the recording wraps, they invite the governor to come back anytime. He appreciates the hospitality. It’s a change of pace.
DeSantis has weathered more attacks than anyone else in the race, absorbing constant hits from Trump, the rest of the field, and Democrats. More campaign money had been spent to tear down the governor by the end of the summer than to attack either Trump or Biden. Even old friends started taking shots.
Right after news broke that Fox News had ousted Tucker Carlson, the candidate called the pundit. “He was really good TV,” DeSantis says of the former Fox News firebrand. The two were often of the same mind, and “Tucker Carlson Tonight” served as a sort of conservative safe space complete with an average of 3 million viewers on any given weeknight. DeSantis rebelled against pandemic protocols and went to war with Disney on the primetime programming until Fox gave Carlson the boot. DeSantis called to tell the pundit he was “saddened” by the news. They haven’t spoken since. That hasn’t stopped Carlson from attacking.
“His donor, Ken Griffin, told him to change his view on Ukraine from it’s a regional conflict we shouldn’t get involved to it’s a super important thing we should send more money,” Carlson claimed earlier this month at a Trump-friendly Turning Point USA conference. “One donor got him to change his view,” said the pundit, who is reportedly in the running to be Trump’s VP. “And these so-called conservatives are supporting that like it’s the most important thing ever.”
The governor had initially described the land war in Europe as “a territorial dispute,” only to clarify later in an interview with Piers Morgan that Russian President Vladimir Putin was “a war criminal.” Critics pounced on that clarification, but if DeSantis is tainted because he supports a Cold War era-type proxy war with Russia, no one told his two biggest congressional allies.
DeSantis brought both Reps. Chip Roy of Texas and Thomas Massie of Kentucky with him to Iowa this month, campaigning arm-in-arm with the two most prominent Ukraine skeptics in the House. He says he has “no beef” with Carlson. All the same, the governor seems annoyed at this kind of attack.
“I’ve never said it was the most important thing ever,” DeSantis replies. “I haven’t changed my position either.” He comes to his stances after deep study, he explains, not after calls with donors, even someone with oversized influence like the CEO of Citadel Capital. “Nobody got to me on anything. And in fact, Griffin has not supported my presidential campaign,” he says. “It’s a total false premise.”
DeSantis then offers his analysis of the conflict more than 5,000 miles away. After dinging Biden for failing to articulate “an end game” and reiterating that he opposes anything approaching “a blank check,” he gives two broad “guiding principles.” First, he says, “to ensure that wider conflicts are not breaking out in Europe.” Second, to see to it “that Russia is kept in a box.”
“In terms of all the nitty gritty,” the governor replies when asked what the DeSantis administration’s definition of victory would be, “we’re going to see what it looks like in January of 2025.”
Putin is the aggressor, but American interests are preeminent in the mind of DeSantis, who sees China, not Russia, as the bigger threat. Voters perk up when he lays out his “strategy of denial” for the Indo-Pacific, and they applaud when he not only promises to ban the Chinese purchase of American farmland but also notes that he did it already in Florida.
He doesn’t buy the argument from Nikki Haley, though, that Beijing will back off from wanting to swallow Taiwan if Moscow is denied in Ukraine. “She has even linked Hamas attacking Israel to Russia,” the governor says, noting the former ambassador’s recent remarks. “She said Hamas chose to attack on Oct. 7 because that was Putin’s birthday. That’s a conspiracy theory! Give me a break.”
DeSantis and Haley will meet the Wednesday before the Iowa caucuses. On stage, Florida’s governor and South Carolina’s former governor (and Trump administration U.N. ambassador) will clash over their visions, and he will again defend a record that is nearly faultless in the eyes of the right. He did the work in Florida, and he will promise again that he can do it for the country if given a chance. That starts with Iowa, where he trails by 32 points in the RealClearPolitics Average.
“The model that we’ve done in Florida,” DeSantis tells voters at his last stop of the day, “will lead us to not just victory in 2024 at the presidential level,” but also congressional majorities, “and then a reelected president in 2028. I don’t think anything less than that will get the job done.”
“Don’t listen to the media, don’t listen to them cite polls,” he warns. Look to his record instead, he urges the Iowa crowd. As for the polling and the ephemera, “Put it aside and do what you think is right.”
Back on the bus, as the day draws to a close, the candidate predicts that all the hard work will soon be worth it. “I think you’re going to see it really come to fruition when we get to the caucus,” DeSantis tells RCP. After all, the governor did all the leg work already.
He gave conservatives nearly everything they wanted in Florida. He now hopes Iowa will save him from the capricious fate of the Florida Seminoles who will watch the college football playoffs from the sidelines. Perhaps this time, in a conservative electorate swayed by policy, a perfect record will not go unrewarded.
Philip Wegmann | RealClear Wire
The post Ron Desantis Struggles With Unrewarded Excellence appeared first on Granite Grok.
We remember an Andy Sanborn, from nearly 15 years ago. A small business owner who stepped up with others to voice opposition to the then-all-Democrat New Hampshire State government and a budget bristling with new taxes. It vaulted him into politics and eventually a gig as a State Senator. That’s not this guy.
I’ve not spoken to Andy in many years, but a slew of circumstances hath laid him low, and the latest is a ruling by Independent Hearing Officer Michael King. In response to a long list of accusations from the State and the Gaming Commission, King has revoked Sanborn’s Casino license.
Thirteen state conclusions of law were granted, while 19 were denied. Many of the denied conclusions were denied due to not being relevant to the proceeding “and better left for determination by another agency.” Sanborn can operate the casino until Jan. 1, 2024, when the license is suspended and the casino must cease operations. He then has six months to sell the casino. If Sanborn fails to sell the business, the license will be fully revoked.
The accusations against Sanborn included increasing rent payments to himself from $500 a month to as much as $20,000 a month across several years, according to a state audit. The total amount appears to be more than a quarter of a century of advance rental payments. Sanborn was also accused of misusing more than $800,000 in coronavirus relief money for the business to buy himself and his wife sports cars.
We can’t speak to the numerous accusations of impropriety, including the misuse of COVID money not mentioned in the pull quote, but taken in the larger context of how governments and graft work, we’re partial to ‘Grok contributor Ian Underwood’s conclusion in this piece on the alleged scandal.
Taking money from your fellow citizens under false pretenses? That’s wrong and illegal.
Forcing your fellow citizens to buy something for you that you could afford to buy for yourself? That’s wrong, but legal.
Spending the money freed up by government largess on luxuries? That’s just normal behavior in modern America. One wonders why it’s taking up so much space in news reports on Sanborn’s activities.
Maybe he should have spent the money on real estate instead.
In other words, if there is any serious concern about waste, fraud, and abuse (of COVID money or any other laundering scheme, the watchdogs had best broaden the scope of their steely gaze lest this look like targeting.
If he done wrong then bring suitable justice, just don’t leave anyone else out of it.
The post Night Cap: Sanborn Loses Gaming License – Forced to Halt Operation on Jan 1 appeared first on Granite Grok.
(white) goldstandard-01-03-24-H.pdf
(gold) goldstandard-01-03-24-H-y.pdf
The post House Gold Standard – January 03, 2024 appeared first on NH Liberty Alliance.
(white) goldstandard-01-03-24-S.pdf
(gold) goldstandard-01-03-24-S-y.pdf
The post Senate Gold Standard – January 03, 2024 appeared first on NH Liberty Alliance.
The current in-vogue spin-room phrase is “context is everything.” That phrase is used to provide an excuse for every unethical action, from teachers who are caught reading pornography to grade-school children, to politicians who vote to support “gender-affirming” surgery without their parent’s permission or knowledge.
To university presidents who use that phrase to excuse support for genocide or plagiarism, and to how judges hand down different punishments based on the perpetrator’s political ideology or financial connections.
When “free speech” advocates are questioned about their obviously ridiculous statements, they retreat into well-practiced “weave and dodge” responses. They use technicalities cloaked in legal non-answers. They don’t want to be held responsible for what they said.
“You need to understand the context in which those words were spoken.”
Um, no. We don’t need to understand the “context”. We can plainly see what was said. We heard it. We understood it. And we know you meant every word you said.
The City of Nashua has recently used those same “weave and dodge” tactics to avoid answering difficult questions about a recent election. “We followed the law”, they claim. They point at various NH RSAs and use “context” to explain why they can’t retrieve public information they are required to provide, by those same RSAs, to citizens requesting that information. They want to know why the information is requested, as if the “context” of the request would provide an excuse for not providing the information. They say that the information is stored in a “secure location” and thus cannot be retrieved – even when ordered to retrieve it by a judge.
It’s not “context” that’s the problem.
It’s the fact that the statements were made at all, or that the information was purposefully hidden from view and/or retrieval. Those who made the statements or hid the information knew exactly what they were saying and/or doing. Now, like a toddler caught with a hand in the cookie jar, they are trying to fool us into believing that their truth is the only truth, that we are at fault for even asking the questions.
Nobody should be surprised at this. The United States has been sliding away from truth for decades. It is only now that the slide has finally become noticeable as more and more people begin to wonder exactly why they can’t get a straight answer from city leaders. Or politicians. Or university presidents.
The latest of these “we know better” efforts to provide “context” is the “diversity”, “equity”, and “inclusion” policies being implemented in both public and private organizations. The stated goal was to “level the playing field” by ripping up the playing field and redesigning it into multiple incompatible levels. The redesign violates the “all men are equal” principle (and MLK’s principles, by the way).
“But you need to understand the context behind DEI”, one person says.
Um, we need to know why two equally-qualified individuals must be treated separately? “Why, yes. It’s all about the context in which the decision is being made.”
That word again: context. The same “I don’t need to explain it to you because you obviously aren’t intelligent enough to see it for yourself” explanation.
So, given the correct context, it must be OK to tell city residents that they don’t need to have FOIA information that they demand, especially if that information will expose corruption and bias. With the correct context, it must be OK to tell university students that some of them don’t deserve protection from attack because “they’re not as worthy”. Context explains why it’s OK for politicians to use unethical and possibly illegal means to enrich themselves in office even though there are laws that are specifically designed to prevent it. And context explains how it’s OK for both the government and private organizations to treat selected groups of people differently.
Why is this so? Context, of course. Context explains everything.
So the question remains: are you going to believe those who are using “context” to explain the need for corruption, the violation of morality and truth, and the imposition of unequal treatment?
Or, are you willing to ignore context and recognize corruption and unequal treatment when you see it with your own eyes?
The post Context is… Nothing. appeared first on Granite Grok.
As we stumble into the year of our lord, Two Thousand Twenty-Four, I feel compelled to give thanks to commenters. Yes, the people who are not just fans of our authors but feel the uncontrollable urge to add their input and encourage debate.
You guys are great. Seriously.
To show my appreciation, I’d like to institute a new thing. You could call it a contest or perhaps an incentive. Maybe even a reward.
Inciteful input is valued, as is snark or compelling counterargument. We want more of it, so I am introducing a weekly commenter “award.” Here’s how it works. My moderator has been tasked with sending me comments they find interesting. Intuitive or relevant. Material that knocks an argument out of the park or adds to or extends the debate. He’s got a lot on his plate, so I’d also like readers and commenters to send me compelling comments (not your own, please).
Please submit each other’s best comments for consideration to support the community. Submit comments you read that make you go yeah, or hmmm, or hell no; that’s not right, but well said – you should also respond to those yourself.
There is no limit to the number of potential submissions from any commenter. The more you comment, the better your chances are that someone will pick your words for consideration. This is not an invitation to spam us or to be a troll. The same rules apply to those, and abusers will be removed at our discretion.
Add to the debate, please.
Whether you comment or not, if you read a comment you like, email it or a link to it (and the post from that week where you found it) to me with the name of the commenter. Please send it to steve@granitegrok.com. The email subject should be “comment of the week” or something similar.
We will run this weekly from Monday to Sunday for the next 24 weeks.
A winner will be announced at the beginning of the new week, and I will contact them for an address to send them their free Grok Swag. It could be a Grok Hat, a mug, or non-Grok NH-themed branding like Live Free or Die.
Contiguous 48 states only, sorry. International and overseas shipping are cost-prohibitive.
We will announce the winner each week following their selection. If it goes well from January to June, we’ll renew it for July to December.
We love our comments and commenters, and we’d like to love more of them. A lot more, so we hope this inspired you and others to join in the debate by exercising their right to Free speech.
Commenting house Rules apply – you can review those here.
Comments must be on the ‘Grok – meaning offsite remarks on social media that are not duplicated on our pages do not count. The comments should be your own, not someone else. Otherwise, we’re open to any remarks you’d like to contribute.
And remember, it is what you say, not how many words you use to say it. There is value in brevity.
The post New Year, New ‘Grok, Commenters Can Win Free Stuff – Every Week! appeared first on Granite Grok.
Advanced Placement for students in public schools who are more intellectually agile, capable, gifted, or just faster learners is proof of something. Racism? White Privilege (even if the bright kid is Asian or black). Whatever it is, it is unfair, and the government schools are on an equity mission to stop it.
Where once you had advanced placement or AP classes for kids who are or have the potential to excel above the standard level, you will now have everyone in one class.
Since Critical Race Theory (CRT), gender ideology, and DEI are not getting the reaction schools were hoping for, they’ve now repackaged their harmful agenda with a new title: unlevelling.
Unlevelling is when all students, regardless of academic abilities or special needs, are put in the same classes. No more standing out, Little Ricky.
Think about that for a second. In order to spare some feelings, students who show an aptitude for mathematics, science, English, and history will be punished.
According to Allison Dyer, the Nashua School Board has voted to end leveling, lumping all the kids into one room in pursuit of, my words, systemic mediocrity.
!function(r,u,m,b,l,e){r._Rumble=b,r[b]||(r[b]=function(){(r[b]._=r[b]._||[]).push(arguments);if(r[b]._.length==1){l=u.createElement(m),e=u.getElementsByTagName(m)[0],l.async=1,l.src="https://rumble.com/embedJS/u359331"+(arguments[1].video?'.'+arguments[1].video:'')+"/?url="+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+"&args="+encodeURIComponent(JSON.stringify([].slice.apply(arguments))),e.parentNode.insertBefore(l,e)}})}(window, document, "script", "Rumble");
Rumble("play", {"video":"v41at3u","div":"rumble_v41at3u"});
Allison brings up several of the Nashua School District’s many demons, including a ‘Grok fan favorite, Heather Raymond. Heather was the tip of the spear to smear Doris Hohensee back in 2019 for daring to run and get elected to her school Board. Doris was a bane of her existence, challenging the progressive public school orthodoxy. Doris later became a Nashua ‘Grok contributor. (Related: Paula Johnson vs. City of Nashua.)
We’re thankful to have her, but Nashua lost a defender of parent and student rights, and a board member more interested in academics than turning the district into a mental health waystation preparing underachieving students for the crumbs left them by political elites like Heather Raymond.
Unlevelling will further handicap Nashua students. Parents who are able should do what they can to find other options.
The post The Nashua School District Unlevels (De-Levels) Classroom Learning appeared first on Granite Grok.
Nikki Haley’s answer … more accurately non-answer … to a question about the cause of the Civil War speaks for itself. She OBVIOUSLY does NOT have the wherewithal to campaign for President successfully, never mind having a successful Presidency.
She is Biden-in-heels … a figurehead who will do whatever the GOP big donors tell her to do.
What needs emphasizing is her campaign’s pathetic and stupid “damage control” … it was a “Democrat plant.” Dear Birdbrain, Inc., the entire Regime-media are “Democrat plants.” Adam Sexton is a “Democrat plant.” So is every “reporter” at NHPR. So is every NBC “journalist” who moderated the so-called GOP debate where you, DeSantis, and Christie all went along with the charade that those Democrat plants were real journalists, and only Vivek called that farce a farce. Same for ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, etc., etc., etc..
What also needs emphasizing is that Nikki can’t think on her feet. Every moment of a campaign CANNOT be scripted. There will be times when the candidate, to use a football analogy, has to call an audible. Quarterbacks who don’t know when to call an audible or the right audible to call don’t win Super Bowls.
Nikki Haley will NEVER win a Super Bowl.
The post Dear Birdbrain, They Are ALL Democrat Plants appeared first on Granite Grok.
They’re flying so thick and fast it is amazing. And wishing everyone a Happy New Year!
Take heart – there will be both a Wednesday and Friday Edition. Last week’s Friday Edition.
Remember, ridicule and mockery are effective weapons:
Now, let the mockery and mayhem begin.
*** Warning, a few possibly off-color ones, in case tender eyes are about ***
>>>>>=====<<<<<
I know I’ve said this before, but… when I saw the first ultrasound of my oldest child, I broke down. Weeping and sobbing in joy. I was going to be a daddy.
I cannot advocate this tactic, but…
My wife – born and raised in the USSR – has described this to me.
Yes and no. My wife is – nominally – a Sunni Muslim and doesn’t think like this. But I do believe there is a vast reservoir of “moderates” that would, given a little push, make that change to radical.
Not just that, but I’m convinced the Dems were forewarned and deliberately sought to advance the virus’ spread as a way to attack Trump.
Yes and no. Do I think he’s central? Yes. Do I believe he’s at the true center of the web? No.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA
The invasion across what used to be our southern border proceeds apace – and is accelerating. As I posted on the GraniteGrok Telegram chat (not run by the Grok itself):
This is why you only see illegal migrants with small backpacks.
This driver carries all the people’s bags across the border, so when the migrants are illegally crossing into the USA, they don’t have to carry anything.
It’s a whole operation.
This footage is in Eagle Pass, Texas; it borders the city of Mexico.
https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/small-backpacks.mp4
A literal flood of people – just think, for a minute, about the logistics of a flow that large. Housing / shelter. Food & water. Sanitation – bodily and otherwise. This is not spontaneous – it has to be bankrolled, and yuuuugely.
https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/literal-river-of-international-workers.mp4
As many have noted, this has to have massive governmental support. From this Telegram channel:
Illegal Alien Invasion Maps Exposed – CRITICAL THREAD EXPOSING NUMEROUS MASS MIGRATION BLUEPRINTS
Muckraker has obtained multiple maps, handed out by non-government organizations across South and Central America, that detail the routes to take to the U.S. and where to cross the U.S. border.
The collapse of the U.S. southern border is the result of a carefully planned and deliberately executed industrial mass migration program.
MAP #1 – Distributed by Doctors Without Borders (Médicos Sin Fronteras in Spanish).
The front shows the routes from Panama to Mexico.
The back shows the routes across Mexico to the United States.
MAP #2 – Distributed by The United Nations International Organization of Migration (IOM). It shows various commissions and consulates across the country of Mexico.
MAP #3 – Distributed by the NGO Amigos Del Tren (Friends Of The Train in English).
This NGO aids illegal aliens in riding the “Train of Death”, (also known as “La Bestia”), a freight train that U.S.-bound illegal aliens ride on top of to reach the U.S. border.
The front shows the train routes across the country of Mexico.
The back lists numerous hostels that can be found along the train routes and also shows the distances between Mexican cities.
MAP #4 – Distributed by the Red Cross.
The front shows the freight train routes across Mexico (similar to the Amigos Del Tren map) and lists 80 different stops from Panama to the United States.
The back gives advice on navigating the mass migration trail. One piece of advice given is how to safely ride a freight train. It is advised to avoid riding a freight train if “. . . you are under the influence of alcohol, drugs or medication that can make you drowsy.”
MAP #5 – Distributed by R4V (Refugees and Migrants from Venezuela).
The front shows the “migration routes” across the country of Ecuador.
The back shows the distance and transit times between Ecuadorian cities.
https://www.muckraker.com/articles/illegal-alien-invasion-maps-exposed/
Think of the money to do this:
And while I don’t advocate violence, I admit this is intriguing.
And who is coming in (or already here)? From Tommy Robinson’s Telegram channel:
On Christmas day Al Qaeda released a new “Inspire” video calling for increased attacks on American, British, and French airlines.
Parts of the video also called for solidarity with Palestinians.
They are now focusing on “open-source Jihad” to decentralize instructions and materials on weapons manufacturing and lone-wolf techniques.
https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/AQ.mp4
Related memes and images:
As I said on Gab when I posted the above:
OK, a little investigation.
The average wage in Senegal is 351,000 XOF monthly.
https://www.salaryexplorer.com/average-salary-wage-comparison-senegal-c192
Translated to US dollars:
$592
https://www.currencyconvert.net/cfa-franc/dollar/351000
I don’t know costs of living, but… isn’t that a BIG TRIP for someone on such a low budget?
If you’re not familiar with The Cloward Piven Strategy, this is it writ large.
Cloward-Piven Strategy (CPS)
Democrats, Orchestrated Crisis, & an Open Southern Border
Pro-Palestinian Protesters Chant ‘Allahu Akbar’ At World Trade Center | ZeroHedge
What are the odds the “magic dirt” of America will make them into good citizens?
What ‘Great Replacement Theory’? Musk Exposes “Immense & Growing Size” Of Illegal Immigration Invasion | ZeroHedge
Open Borders – Why Not Just Invite the Entire World to the U.S.? – American Thinker
And lastly, consider the in-your-face all is well gaslighting by the The Potato’s administration:
https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/border-gaslighting.mp4
Utterly intentional. It’s for votes:
But apportionment in the House of Representatives if illegals are counted in the Census.
And one last thing – all the chaos this will bring. Then, in all the chaos and violence and uncertainty – the “benevolent hand” of one-world government socialism will be offered to make it stop and restore a sense of normalcy.
The question is not that the flood of illegals must be stopped and reversed. The question is if it can be stopped, and reversed, without enormous bloodshed.
Alas. I don’t think so.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
The problem is that it’s soooo much easier and cheaper to get it from overseas. E.g., at one place I worked the head of logistics said that to build the product in the US would be unsustainably expensive even with automation… and then they have a 1000% markup on the imported goods.
Marxism appeals to the worst in us. Thinking religiously, it appeals to SLOTH and WRATH and ENVY.
What’s that line from the original movie The Matrix:
How do these people sleep at night?
IIRC RFK Jr. said that the cancer / chemo medical market is 10+ times that of the Jab.
I repeat: How do these people sleep at night knowing they’ve created this crisis. Speaking of:
But those ideas sound so good.
Nor just flat-out killing your inconvenient and non-obedient *ss:
I wonder if this guy’s bought it yet:
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Pick of the post:
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Palate Cleansers:
—
—
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Come back Wednesday for another edition. Same Meme Time. Same Meme channel.
Please do consider buying me a coffee.
Buy Me a Coffee
>>>>>=====<<<<<
The post MONDAY MEMES appeared first on Granite Grok.
National Parents Organization and New Hampshire Families recently received the results of independent polling concerning the attitudes of those in New Hampshire about shared parenting. The results show overwhelming support for a legal presumption of equal shared parenting when parents are living apart.
Recent polling by Researchscape in New Hampshire adds to a body of similar research done in more than two dozen states now, including Alabama in 2023; Iowa, Wyoming, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Virginia in 2022; and New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut in 2021. In every state in which polling has been done, the support for a legal presumption of equal shared parenting when parents separate is stunningly strong. (See sharedparenting.org/shared-parenting-polling for details.)
So, what does the New Hampshire public think about shared parenting?
Decades of scientific research align with these public attitudes. More than forty years of empirical research provide near-uniform support for the conclusion that, when parents are living apart, the more time children spend with each of their parents, the better outcomes for children. Children fare better on all metrics of child well-being when parents share equally in raising them—even when the parents are not in agreement about engaging in shared parenting.
Under current New Hampshire law, in the absence of parental agreement, one parent is designated the custodial parent, and the other parent is relegated to an every-other-weekend visitor in the child’s life. This pits the parents against one another and contributes to the parental conflict that we know is harmful for children.
Assuring parents, and especially the children, that parental separation will not, in the typical case, degrade or destroy the relationship the children have with both parents will help to reduce the conflict that arises when parents separate. This is important because it is the ongoing conflict and extended litigation, together with the loss of a full relationship with one parent, that is far more harmful to children than the fact that the parents are living apart.
New Hampshire children and families pray their rights and best interests will prevail over the special interests that oppose shared parenting and that New Hampshire Legislators will VOTE GREEN ON HB185 on Wednesday, January 3, 2024.
The post New Hampshire Overwhelmingly Supports Shared Parenting appeared first on Granite Grok.
New Hampshire’s Largest paper, our paper of record, may not have had a lot of choices for a citizen of the year, or there may have been hundreds. But rather than pick a citizen, it picked a politician. Chris Sununu.
I am not implying that elected officials are not citizens, but shouldn’t an institution like the one left behind by the Loeb’s – the founders of that daily, make some effort to find someone outside the political sphere to recognize?
I’m not familiar with the criteria, but I’d be inclined to find a different sort of public servant. A police officer, EMT, firefighter, nurse, plumber, electrician, or other ordinary schmo who did something exceptional or persisted in a thankless task to benefit others.
Yes, you could call being elected thankless, but that’s in the job description. No matter what you do, at minimum, a third to perhaps two-thirds of citizens will not like it. That’s what his excellency gets paid to put up with. But this is a guy who let too many opportunities to choose liberty pass, and not just in 2023.
He has managed to sit atop an unusual time in 21st century New Hampshire. A Republican Governor with successive Republican majorities in the Executive Council and Legislature. With his signature, he has allowed tax cuts and the elimination of taxes to become law. But he has done too little to ensure election integrity. He endorsed Nikki Haley for President after Haley said she’d force private social media companies to make the names of every contributor public, which must include whistleblowers who could not otherwise speak.
Parents will be scratching their heads. Sununu was not their biggest ally and, in previous years, was quite the contrary. While Sununu supported school choice, he has compromised women’s safe spaces and left room for third-party associations to advance unconstitutional policies like JBABA, which encourages compelled speech. And done nothing in this year or any other of which I am aware to fight that injustice.
He has allowed his DoJ, without public comment, to chase cases that suggest a deeper commitment to interfering with free speech and support for more government control of speech.
Sununu chose the Biden administration’s election interference tactics over a former Republican president who was well within his legal right to possess classified documents and those he’d declassified. If it was a political hit on a guy he’d sworn to oppose, not much seems out of bounds.
Illegal border incursions from Canada went on for too long before Governor Sununu lifted a finger to do anything about it.
Sununu is always quick to take federal money, insisting there are no strings or federal demands attached when nothing comes out of DC without conditions. A commitment to growing fiscal dependency on the Feds, which is a crime against state sovereignty.
There are more, and by all means, please fill them in below as comments because I’m stopping here.
Mr. Sununu has done some good things in each of his terms, in every year in office as Governor, but he could have done better in 2023. More than a few opportunities to side with liberty passed him by either because he blocked them or failed to use his office to rally legislators in support.
Nobody is perfect, and we cannot let perfect be the enemy of the good, but naming a politician as Citizen of the Year is a cop-out and wholly inappropriate for a media organization whose role should be to find elected officials from any party, in any office, at the bottom of any or every such list. Your job is to hold them accountable, not put another accolade on their mantle.
As for The ‘Grok, we don’t name a citizen of the year, and by all means, offer suggestions in comments if you have them, but if I had to choose one off the top of my head for 2023, I’d go with Danial Richard.
But that’s just me.
The post Union Leader Names Chris Sununu NH Citizen of The Year – We Respectfully Disagree appeared first on Granite Grok.
There are three main takeaways from 2023. Higher education, especially among the Ivy Leagues and other “elite” colleges, continues to be revealed for what it has become: a bloated, tenured-protected, and indoctrinating mess.
Three Ivy League college presidents recently went before Congress and gave arrogant and evasive answers to simple questions. It reminded me of the Supreme Court confirmation hearing of Ketanji Brown Jackson when she could not define a woman or man.
Colleges have morphed from institutes for learning into indoctrination camps designed to propagate leftist race and gender ideology. The worst extremes of the left have now become the norm at colleges, which are out of touch, expensive and arrogant. They used to be places that searched for the truth; now they create false narratives.
Colleges are so paralyzed by race that they cannot fire the plagiarizing president of Harvard, Dr. Claudine Gay. So far, 40 cases of plagiarism have suddenly been discovered after she angered Jewish people, something any educated person with common sense knows not to do. President Gay, who is black, implies the assertions are racial. She says she plans to address all this in her upcoming “I Have a Dream” speech on the National Mall in D.C.
Having coddled students for so long, businesses are no longer buying the colleges’ product: students. I am glad I got my degree in gender studies in the 80s, back when there were only two of them. I cannot image how confusing that degree would be now.
Colleges have become so PC and humorless that their choosing to become antisemitic should worry us. I would not bring Mel Brooks’ comedy “The Producers” to any Ivy League campus for fear the audience would not laugh at the “Springtime for Hitler” song, but instead join in.
Secondly, it was good to see America and candidates (mostly Republicans like Vivek Ramaswamy and Ron DeSantis) push back on the idea of Washington getting us into another war of choice. Biden and the Beltway permanent political class love war now. And to keep us funding his honey hole ATM, Ukraine, Biden pandered to students by pretending he could wipe out their student loans.
The loans that college students signed up for to get degrees are worthless, like the course/major called “Taylor Swift Studies.” Getting out of college is much like breaking up with Taylor Swift; in a year or so you will be paying a severe price.
Biden did say that any young person killed in his pending World War III will have his or her government student loans forgiven.
Lastly, women and men taking advantage of the #MeToo movement have been dealt a blow. Kevin Spacey, Johnny Depp and others with the guts to challenge old claims have won their cases. Being hit on or flirted with have morphed into sexual harassment and assault allegations. Kevin Spacey’s first accuser, a massage therapist who said Spacey groped him, died suddenly after filing suit. This made me think the Clintons are now franchising.
In testimony, a witness said Kevin Spacey “would not hurt a fly.” (I guess as long as it is not open.) It’s clear: If Kevin Spacey, Chris Rock or Russell Brand were not rich celebs, these cases would not have been filed. Had the #MeToo movement gone unchecked and allowed to go any further, I was going to sue for harassment. If my lawyer asked who I wanted to sue, I would’ve said, “Anyone who will settle.”
When the #MeToo movement took the fun out of being a Democrat in elected office, the left backed off. They certainly have kept the Epstein Island guest list under wraps. It is still the only secret in D.C.
Opportunists used the #MeToo trend to shake down the rich and famous for purported sexual encounters from decades ago. When egregious crimes like rape, sexual assault and pedophilia go unpunished because people use the heightened #MeToo attention to threaten criminal charges in order to enhance their civil suit shakedowns, we are all worse off. It’s gotten where it is a career risk being social with co-workers.
In short, not a single Founding Father or president would have survived this #MeToo movement. Not a single male Republican Supreme Court nominee has since 2016 has not been attacked by an old allegation. Rest assured, if Lee Harvey Oswald’s bullet had not gotten JFK in 1963, the #MeToo movement in 2018 would have killed him at the ripe old age of 101.
A libertarian op-ed humorist and award-winning author, Ron does commentary on radio and TV. He can be contacted at Ron@RonaldHart.com or @RonaldHart on Twitter.
Ron Hart | Daily Caller
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.The post College Campuses, Warmongering, and #MeToo appeared first on Granite Grok.
Pro-Palestinians demonstrating in so many places, including barricading JFK and LAX today. Is their goal to change minds? Intimidate? Demoralize? Will their opponents ever use the Dublin model and fight back against them? Will Trump pick Haley as V.P.? Don Jr. said he’d do anything to stop it from happening. Was a tax on unrealized gains a Trump idea or a Biden idea? Which presidents/leaders were most responsible for the growth in power of China?
The post The Conservatarian Exchange Podcast #186 appeared first on The Liberty Block.
As GraniteGrok rolls into its 17th year at the helm of New Hampshire politics, we wish you and yours a Happy New Year. We hope you have some fond memories of the old year and great plans for the one ahead, regardless of how the political wind blows.
We will, of course, work to provide some direction and try to punch a few holes in our political opponent’s bilge barge. Changes are planned, but some things never change. We’re still your ‘Grok, so plenty of hyperbolic bomb-throwing will ensue.
Site updates are planned for Q1—a slightly different look. The ad-free VIP feature will build out from that—changing commenting systems. and new ways to sort content that addresses our expanded audience. The MicroGroks will be there, but you’ll be able to sift from any page by NH, New England, the Nation, and the World.
We’ll also be adding MaineGrok.
That Mobile App I’ve always wanted is lingering in the wings – and yes, I still want that, and I want it in 2024.
We are still hoping for a few generous sponsors willing to support independent media annually. ‘Grok can grow, but we need funding, and the consensus is no one wants more ads, including me. Ideally, we raise enough from subscribers, donors, and sponsors to make the Ad-Free VIP portion not just Ad-Free but premium content-only and the regular site Ad-Free. We need donors to do that, and it’s on the list.
Better search is still on the update bullet list, as is a dedicated Op-ed page that works a bit better than the way we do it now.
Given the new silo content sorting scheme, we’ll be moving toward – with a few exceptions – limiting MicroGrok content to articles about those towns or regions. No more general dumping of statewide, regional, national, or global content on those pages. They are useless as locals if the content isn’t local. And yes, I need to recruit more or newer creators willing to provide that focus for all of them.
Volunteers?
We need them for Nashua, Manchester, Hollis, Windham, Cheshire County (MonadnockGrok), Rockingham-Strafford County (SeacoastGrok), Belknap and Carrol (Cty Lakes Region), North Country (Coos – no site until we find writers), as well as Derry Londonderry (no site yet), Concord (No site yet) and perhaps the River Valley (Belknap and Sullivan Cty. no site yet).
It may make more sense to do Greater Nashua, Greater Manchester, and GreaterConcord -regional pages. This would roll Derry/Londonderry into Manchester and Hollis into Nashua – and no, I’m not married to that idea yet.
VermontGrok needs more contributors, as will the newly minted but not yet live MaineGrok – both states deserve our attention as they have significant policy impacts on New Hampshire. What happens there, they want here.
The budget to run all of this will be more than we failed to raise in 2023, so anyone who is good at fundraising and will work on commission should contact me. I know – in an election year, good luck, Steve – but that’s what we need, so we’ll try to get there from here.
We’ve made a few strategic content-sharing arrangements so ‘Grok can help local independent media grow its audience while we grow ours.
It seems like a lot, but it all comes down to this. There are outlets repeating the news and those who will do more than challenge that status quo. We are the latter and can do more, but we’ll need more help and, yes – more financial support. I’m not linking to it here. The donate link is at the top of every page (GiveSendGo has no fees if you care). But there are plenty of ways to contribute that don’t include money. Content, contacts, content, relationships, and did I mention content?
The world is out to shut independent media down. We see that as no less of a challenge and intend to rise to meet it. We hope you can do more than just come along for the ride, but if your contribution is reading and sharing, we’re more than just happy to have you. We love our readers, even the ones who don’t always love us.
Now put your phone away and enjoy whatever New Year’s Eve thing is your thing. And if you are reading this on New Year’s Day or later, welcome to 2024. Let’s kick some ass.
The post Happy New Year! – Now, Let’s Take 2024 by the (You Know What) And Kick It (You Know Where) appeared first on Granite Grok.
If you take out and read the United States Constitution.
Or the New Hampshire Constitution.
Or the Declaration of Independence.
Or the federalist papers.
or Tom Paine’s work “common sense.”
You would not find “equity” (as used in DEI).
George Washington never advocated it.
Abraham Lincoln never mentioned it.
Nobody died at Gettysburg to promote it.
Now, to be sure, the thought changes if you talk about “equality,” not equity.
Equality is a common theme in our laws, our social norms, and in our history. To confuse the two is to confuse two views of civilization.
Equality means that the INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS of each citizen are treated equally by the Government. Equality is an intimate part of a system of Government that elevates the individual to the highest status and sees Government as existing to promote, protect, and defend the rights of the individual citizen. As a part of a system of individual rights, “equality” operates to protect those rights by forbidding Government from promoting one man’s or woman’s rights preferentially over another’s. My first amendment right to free speech is no better nor worse than my neighbor. I am entitled to the same due process as a citizen born across town or across the country. The key is “my” rights: equality is a part of making “my” rights prosper along with everyone else’s rights.
Equity” means that citizens belong to one of two classes: the oppressed or the oppressor. “Equity” assumes that all of society- on all levels (whether spiritual, historical, legal, or educational) – is explained by these two classes. “Equity” declares that individual rights are really just an illusion imposed by the oppressor class to marginalize the oppressed. “Equity ” declares the role of Government (control belongs to a central Government, not local towns or cities) is to take control of society to un-oppress the oppressed and subdue the oppressors. CRT adds to this “equity,” the notion that the oppressors are white and the oppressed are not white.
For more than 250 years, we have been living in a world of individual rights and liberties, a world that treats citizens equally. Individuals may have seen themselves as oppressed, but the Government operated according to a constitution that valued and respected the individual. During all that time- 250 years- a lot of highly educated and freedom loving Judges, legislators, and citizens looked at and interpreted and enforced our Constitution through a filter of freedom, liberty, and individual rights. Not a one of them over 250 years-read “Equity” into the State of New Hampshire’s Constitution.
Kind of created a powerful log jam for the “equity” crowd: how do we replace the “liberty” and
“individual” freedoms Constitution with the value and norms of the “Equity” Constitution?
First step: Let Massachusetts tell us what is in our own Constitution!
Case 1: CLAREMONT SCHOOL DISTRICT V GOVERNOR OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 138 N H 183(1993)
Five “property poor” (as in the average home value for these folks is substantially less than in, say, Hollis) School districts plus one student and one taxpayer in each of these five districts sued the state, claiming that the State was not “spreading educational opportunities EQUITABLY among “its”( i e the entire student body of the state) students.
These plaintiffs argued that the State, as opposed to local school districts, had the duty to provide, on an equitable basis, the same education to each student in the State. A student in a property-poor district is denied “equitable” treatment if a student in a property rich district receives more money.
In other words, the plaintiffs argued basic principles of “Equity” and argued that the New Hampshire Constitution mandated such equity.
This infusion of “equity” was required, they claimed, due to the provision of part II, section 83(1774) of the Constitution, which reads:
“ART. 83: (ENCOURAGEMENT OF LITERATURE)Knowledge and learning, generally diffused through a community, being essential to the preservation of a free Government…it shall be the duty of legislators and magistrates…to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all the seminaries and public schools, to encourage private and public institutions, rewards and immunities for the promotion of agriculture,arts, sciences, commerce, trade, manufacturers…: to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and economy, honesty and punctuality, sincerity, sobriety, and all social affections, and generous sentiments among the people.”
When the Plaintiffs asserted that this provision of the Constitution MANDATED the State to take control of the education system and specifically the funding of each student on an equitable basis, the Honorable Judge Manias basically said, “HUH?”
“New Hampshire’s Encouragement of Literature Clause contains no language regarding equity, uniformity, or even adequacy of education. Thus, the New Hampshire Constitution imposed no qualitative standard of education which must be met. Likewise, the New Hampshire constitution imposes no quantifiable financial duty regarding education; there is no mention of funding or even providing or maintaining education. The only duty set forth is the amorphous duty to “…to cherish public schools and…to encourage private and public institutions.” The language is hortatory and not mandatory.”
It would seem that Judge Manias was spot on. How could anyone read the Encouragement of Literature clause any differently? The plain language is the plain language. Right? Right?
Nope.
In Claremont v Governor, the Supreme Court essentially said that to read the clear, unambiguous words in this clause so as to support our mandate that the State take over the school system, we must ignore the plain meaning and ask,” What did the people at the time mean by those words? “
Ok, fair enough -let’s do that. What did the folks in 1774 in New Hampshire mean when they wrote this article into the Constitution in 1774?
To find out, should we not look to the people in New Hampshire in 1774?
Nope.
We must look to the Massachusetts Supreme Court in 1993.
Why?
Because for a big part of New Hampshire’s history, up until 1680-nearly 100 years prior to the writing of the words we are trying to interpret – we were a part of Massachusetts. Therefore, a Massachusetts Supreme Court decision in 1993 provides mandatory guides for us to know what our citizens thought in 1774.
I hate to be repetitive, but HUH? WHAT? I am not making this up. It is what the New Hampshire Supreme Court said. Pull it up on Google and read it yourself.)
In Mcduffy v Secretary,415 Mass 545, the Mass Supreme Court (which, of course, is made up of justices who knew the citizens of New Hampshire back in 1774 because, after all, the idea is to interpret the subject clauses according to what the people at the time understood them to mean(sarcasm!)) ruled:
The phrase “duty…to cherish…the public schools encompass the duty (on the state) to provide an education to the people of the state.”
The New Hampshire Supreme Court held that because the 1993 Massachusetts court made this pronouncement, that the duty was now established in New Hampshire: Schools and school financing are the duty of the State.
OBJECTION, YOUR HONORS. For 250 years, the people’s legislators, judges, and citizens interpreted the subject phrase as Judge Manias did. Would that not be a better way to determine what the original authors meant?
What about 250 years when the good judges, legislators, and citizens of New Hampshire thought differently- thought like Judge Manias?
Nope.
The deal with this “problem,” the New Hampshire Supreme Court again turned for guidance to the Massachusetts case of Mcduffy:
Without any thoughtful basis, the Mcduffy court simply dismissed any idea that the founding fathers and mothers meant to place control of education into local hands by saying
“That local control and fiscal support has been placed in greater or lesser measure through our history on local governments does not dilute the validity of the conclusion that the duty to support public schools lies with the state.”
(Again HUH? What? Give me a reason. Saying what you feel or want is not a reason.)
In a nutshell, Judge Manias ruled that the plain meaning of the New Hampshire Constitution has no language of “equity” has no language saying that the State has the duty to run the schools. Moreover, 250 years of local school control, with local funding, say clearly that for 250 years, New Hampshire Judges, legislators and good citizens agreed with Judge Manias’ interpretation.
But… Massachusetts disagrees and because we were a part of Massachusetts until 1680, whatever they say goes. They say the state has the duty to provide for, control, and finance the school system by applying principles of EQUITY(DEI).
So, let’s ignore the language of the Constitution; let’s ignore 250 years of New Hampshire folks’ interpretation of the Constitution. And let’s apply Massachusetts law of 1993 to hold that the State of New Hampshire is under a constitutional level duty to take over the Education system, take control from the local school boards and citizens, and apply principles of equity to school financing.
This ruling was cataclysmic by every definition of the word. It represented a sea change of 250 years in how New Hampshire ran its schools. You may not realize how cataclysmic because, for the last thirty years, a lot of good folks in positions of power did not (my opinion) embrace the holding and fought it.
But the wealth, power, and persistence of the woke folks and the weakness of the non-woke means that what began thirty years ago is finally about to visit its full destructive force on the good parents, students, teachers, and taxpayers of this great State. Our system of local control will soon be replaced by a system of centralized control in Concord. An Equity-based tax system will take from the “oppressor” School districts and give to the “oppressed. ”
To understand more of what is happening, I invite your attention to part 2 of this article.
Simply put, there have been eight subsequent Supreme Court rulings – all chipping away at the traditional school system – replacing it with a system based upon EQUITY. Those 8 cases are now joined by two rather dramatic Superior court decisions coming out of Rockingham Superior Court. The full impact of this effort to fundamentally re structure the school system by filtering the New Hampshire Constitution through the eyes of DEI/Equity is now about to be felt. My opinion: we are about to see results -felt for the first time really in 2024-from these rulings that will fundamentally alter not only the school system (i.e., gut local control and local funding) but will fundamentally infuse the State with the EQUITY world view. Certainly, if the Courts are willing to do what they are doing to the school system, then what system is safe from the EQUITY rule?
Part 2 will explore Claremont II( Claremont v Governor 142 N H462(1997)), wherein the Court declared the system for funding education was unconstitutional because it was not based upon Equity.
The post Are the State Courts Trying To Transfer Control of School Districts to Central Command in Concord? appeared first on Granite Grok.
The year 2023 had so much potential. The usual suspects were screaming the hottest hotness ever. All that global boiling. The dry grass out west from a year with record snowfalls. Drought narratives meet climate narratives to spark a flame that rages (like wildfire) nationwide, but 2023 saw the lowest burn average in 25 years.
The news has been quite good this year with respect to the total number of acres burned on US soil due to wildfire activity. In fact, the total acreage burned this year is under 3 million (through 12/18) which is far below the 10-year average of nearly 7 million from 2013-2022 and the lowest since 1998.
One of the main contributing factors to the down year in overall US wildfire activity is the fact that it has been a mild year in California with the number of burned acres under 390,000 (as of 12/18). This value is down about 75% from the 5-year average of about 1.6 million acres burned in the Golden State (data source). The relatively mild year of 2023 follows another relatively mild year in 2022; however, the two years before that (2020, 2021) were some of the worst on record.
WUWT Also included a screen grab of the official government data, available here.
That’s not the only bad news for Captain Planet and the Climate Cult Profiteers. Overall, 2023, while sold with a hyperbolic fury as proof the world would end if we didn’t revert to stone tools and eating insects, was, in fact – boring. Nothing unexpected or exceptional if you are more interested in climate science than political science.
WUWT did a deep dive here, which was summed up like this.
We are all well aware of the narrative that the weather is quickly getting worse. Unfortunately, data does not agree.1
The weather — and certainly the impacts — of the past 12 months in the United States was actually pretty typical, even benign, in historical context.2
I’ll leave you with one more bit of data that is not at all interesting or exciting. NOAA’s USCRN Surface Temperature anomaly data for the US.
Boring. There is no evidence of a change in temperature trend, which means no boiling or roasting or hottest hotness. It’s just weather, and when you pile all that weather in a row, there’s nothing to see.
Sorry, one more “one more.” Tony Heller checked the Arctic Sea Ice Extent on Christmas Eve. It’s at its highest in Greta Thunberg’s lifetime.
Arctic sea ice has declined over the long term, but I read somewhere that the NAMO is expected to flip again soon, leading to expanding sea ice. None of which will stop the hyperbolic fury. The grift depends on it.
So, here’s to more news about wildfires, boiling, and sea ice news in 2024!
The post They Said “Global Warming” Will Affect Wildfires – 2023 Had Fewest Acres Burned This Century appeared first on Granite Grok.
We hear politicians spout it all the time when they are raising our taxes: “We’re just making them (of course not you) pay their fair share.” But what exactly is one’s “fair share,” and at what point can one be considered to be paying MORE than his or her “fair share”?
It seems like a good and important question to ask in this last post of 2023 and in anticipation of Vermont’s Democrat Supermajority returning to Montpelier next week for the start of the 2024 legislative session, looking, as they always do, to redefine this undefined term upward.
I have asked this question about what exactly a fair share is in the past. (Really fun to ask politicians on the campaign trail. Try it! The resulting squirming is impressive.) I get lots of answers, but rarely, if ever, a straight one, such as 20% of one’s income is enough. Or, as Bernie and his fellow travelers might say if they were being honest, “Everything you earn belongs to us, your government overlords. Just shut up and be happy we let you keep any of it.” What do you think?
Anyway, we can expect a lot of “fair share” rhetoric buzzing through the airwaves and social media in 2024 as our so-called representatives find new and creative ways to screw hard-working Vermonters out of their wages to pay for more pet projects that provide little real value or benefit to society. See, last sessions’ “Clean Heat” carbon tax forcing you to pay “your fair share” through higher heating bills to not have any impact on climate change, for example. Or the 20 percent DMV fee increases the department said it didn’t need or want, but lawmakers implemented anyway just, I guess, to be “fair.” And, of course, the anticipated 18.5 percent increase in property taxes, which is apparently the new “fair” price to pay for increasingly poor public school performance catering to fewer overall students
Another suggestion coming back next year is a 3 percent income tax surcharge on Vermonters earning over $500,000 a year. That would make the state marginal income tax rate on these folks 11.75 percent – the highest in the nation bar California (13.3 percent). And, just a reminder, our neighbor New Hampshire has no earned income tax at all and is phasing out its tax on dividend and interest income within the next year or so. (Please finish this article before you start scrolling through Zillow.)
This additional 3 percent surcharge would say its advocates, raise roughly $100 million per year from not very many people. According to an analysis done by former state economist Art Woolf back in 2018, only 1,658 Vermonters earned over $500,000, and just 488 earned more than $1 million. Still, this tiny group of about half a percent of Vermont taxpayers accounts for 20 percent of all income taxes paid. Is that fair?
Yes, many will shout! I don’t earn $500,000 a year, so who cares? “Don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax that rich guy behind the tree,” as the ditty goes. But here’s the thing…
As Woolf points out,
For most Vermonters who earn [$500,000 or more], having a high income is a one-time event. The Vermont Tax Department looked into this a few years ago and found that half of all the taxpayers who earned $500,000 or more experienced that level of income only once over a 10-year period…. Only 3 percent [of that half of one percent of all taxpayers] earned over $500,000 dollars in every one of the 10 years…. The basic conclusion: Very high-income Vermonters are rich because of a one-time event.”
Such as an otherwise non-wealthy Vermonter selling a house or a business. So, what this 3 percent income tax surcharge really is in practice, with very few exceptions, is not a screw the rich out of their ill-gotten gains play. It’s just the government greedily taking another chunk (on top of the property transfer tax) out of what is, for most of us, the largest investment we will make in our lifetimes, our house, or a bite out of Mom & Pop’s sale of their local business after a lifetime of work. These are often cases in which hardworking people have invested years of equity into these assets in order to fund their retirement. And our government wants a bigger piece of that. And no, it’s not “fair.”
The lesson here is to be careful when progressives try to win your support for some program by telling you they’re going to raise taxes on someone else to pay for it. In the end, it’s just propaganda, and it’s your wallet they end up looting because, as Willie Sutton might observe, “That’s where the money is.”
One of the questions Campaign for Vermont asked in their recent poll was Do you “Support/Oppose: Creating a Vermont Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, which would limit state spending growth to the rate of inflation and population growth; and would require any tax revenue collected in excess of that amount to be refunded to taxpayers. It would also require voter approval for any tax increases above and beyond this formula.” Gratifyingly, 67 percent of Vermonters supported the idea. Only 16 percent opposed it outright. This tells me that a solid majority of Vermonters think we’re already paying more than our fair share, and it’s time to cut off the spigot.
Rob Roper is a freelance writer with 20 years of experience in Vermont politics, including three years of service as chair of the Vermont Republican Party and nine years as President of the Ethan Allen Institute, Vermont’s free-market think tank. He is also a regular contributor to VermontGrok.
The post When Is Someone Paying More Than “Their Fair Share”? appeared first on Granite Grok.
First, let me tell you what Trump’s actual “crimes” were: Not starting any new wars. Actually getting economically tough, not just talking tough, on China. And, perhaps the biggest crime of all in the eyes of the UniParty, making the Southern border more secure.
Now let me tell you something else. Whenever the Regime-media tell you something is a “conspiracy theory,” that means that they have been caught with their hand in the cookie-jar and they intend to continue swiping the cookies. One such example is the Great Replacement, which according to NPR:
… is a conspiracy theory that states that nonwhite individuals are being brought into the United States and other Western countries to “replace” white voters to achieve a political agenda. It is often touted by anti-immigration groups, white supremacists and others, according to the National Immigration Forum.
Which is exactly what’s happening as illegal immigration is now exceeding domestic birth-rates:
Since August, there are officially more arriving each month than there are children being born to American mothers.
And these are just the official encounters — we don't know how many avoided detection. https://t.co/7Bt52x0385 pic.twitter.com/2APOiICGW0
— ~~datahazard~~ (@fentasyl) December 29, 2023
The Democrats support an open Southern border because they believe that non-white voters are Democrat voters and that, therefore illegal immigration produces a permanent Democrat majority once the American-born children of these illegal aliens reach voting age. The “traditional” Republicans support an open Southern border because their big donors want cheap labor.
The UniParty is winning. America will be unrecognizable in twenty years.
The post The UniParty Wins Again … The Great Replacement Is Succeeding appeared first on Granite Grok.