I have some excellent reading, if you have the time, that demonstrates something we’ve all suspected or known for a while. The Democrat party is a cult made up of cults.

We often refer to them as victim classes or part of the identity politics totem pole, but each one is a cult, herded like cats by the Democrat National Party hand-in-hand with the progressive globalists who fund them.

COVIDISM is a cult. Climate Change is a Cult. Abortion is a cult with a long history of blood sacrifice. Antifa and BLM are also both cults. Modern Feminism and now the gender cult both want their predecessors burned to the ground. Even public health has been absconded and reduced to a depopulation death cult.

Transitioning children is very cultish. And how do we know these are cults? Groupthink and mass formation psychosis.

The Wuhan Flu is the most recent example. Health Science as god-head, not to be debated, when anyone with a few minutes can go online and look at the data collected by their state and see it was all a fraud. But to suggest that, challenge, or even offer parallel alternatives (options) to the approved Cult dogma is heresy, and the Cult will do anything to censor that – which is what a cult does.

They silence dissent or label it intolerant, anti-science, or call you a denier. The Democrat cult is in denial, unable to allow any thought that is not approved.

Free speech cannot survive, nor can any idea outside the Cult’s dogma. The so-called truths that buttress their mythology are created and then sustained by  “free floating anxiety and frustration, a lack of social connection, an amorphous intangible enemy to be feared, then the reorganization into the new collective identify and adhering to strict ritualistic behaviors, and of course the creation of enemies.”

This,

 

create(s) an Orwellian connotation as Groupthink entails a deterioration of mental processes including a detachment from reality and morality that is driven by group pressures.

Excluding people from work or a normal life makes sense in their minds. Quarantine and confinement of the health that refuse to buy in – even allowing harm to come to them – overrides any remaining thread of common sense.

 

These related concepts of mass formation psychosis and groupthink describe an organic process that is evident in the climate change end times cult. To a great extent the irrationality we are seeing is in fact organic. There is indeed a rigid pattern of thought and a collective identification and all of the cult like behaviors are present such as censorship and coercion.

 

The climate cult was all-in on depopulation by any means long before the COVID cult arrived, the difference being that the COVID cult is embracing process and policy that kills its own members while it raves about science-deniers who

Dr. Joseph Sansone continues at length about these issues, and it’s worth the time – because I think it explains why the Demo party is a cult of cults.

Free thought is anathema in all of them, which is why NH progs have been going hard after the Free State Project. They are trying to create that “free floating anxiety and frustration, a lack of social connection, an amorphous intangible enemy.” Those people want freedom, taking extreme examples and applying them to any political opponent as if they were a cult.

But freedom can’t be a cult because, by its nature, it leaves room for you to decide what it means to you, as long as that does not infringe on a few fundamental shared interests as are required for common decency and order.

Free speech is shared even when it contradicts or challenges. Free thought and association is a birthright, as is the right to individual labor that permits you to acquire life, possessions, and your idea of happiness, which you must also have a right to defend.

Freedom can be messy, but it is free and does not work to silence your science or your faith, or even your election integrity concerns. It responds to them with more speech.

It is governments and Democrats that constrain us, and given the means and opportunity, they will do exactly that. Tossing aside all the rhetoric about unity or people before politics. Look no further than Biden. Sold as a leap toward sanity, order, and respect, his administration and party abandoned that as soon as they secured their majorities.

Under Biden and Democrats, the nation and the world are in chaos. Our economy is spiraling out of control, spending has escalated into debt as generational slavery, and the division has been cranked to level eleven. And because the political right reveres free speech (or should), the Cult gets to scream and rant loudly and often in its mission to silence all other voices.

An endless stream of one-sided mass formation psychosis and groupthink at whose end, if they are successful, will be the end of everyone who is not like them.

And on the other side, we want you to be free to be who you want to be as long as that does not infringe on the similar rights of others—the freedom side. We’re the good guys looking for ways to let you self-actualize or succeed, and every cut hates that; Democrats hate that.

The Democrat party is a cult.

 

 

HT | Joseph Sansone Substack – Psychology of Totalitarianism

Book Link

The post The Left is a Cult Made up of Cults appeared first on Granite Grok.

And they did it to themselves.  I DVR Fox News’s “The Five” because I like to watch/listen to smart people talking about the issues of the day. On Thursday’s show (which I am just watching as I type this), their first segment had this as their topic and had a clip of all Democrat candidates trying to run away from the Democrat Party’s battle cry of “DEFUND THE POLICE”!  It was rather amusing as it is clear that they are trying to convince the LIVs (low information voters that generally don’t pay attention to the politicians that are mucking up their (and their families) lives with such bad decisions as getting rid of those that stand between us and criminals (putting aside the relatively small percentage of bad cops for now).

I’ll have to go find the clip as it was funny to watch after knowing what the Democrats have been running so hard against that phrase.  Why?

The NBC News/Hart Research poll that came out said that the electorate, with the mid-terms all but here (early voting (a GHASTLY development, IMHO) has already started in many states), trusts Republicans over Democrats on the Crime issue 45% over 22%.

So, I had tabbed this from Citizens for Sanity clip earlier this month (9/3) and it fits so well:

Citizens For Sanity has released a new national ad “STOP THE SLAUGHTER!” It’s about woke leftist politicians transforming our cities into a hell of violence and death. pic.twitter.com/PQqt7KhFml

— Citizens for Sanity (@citizens_sanity) September 3, 2022

(H/T: Daily Caller)

UPDATE (before publishing) – found it!

Watch the latest video at foxnews.com

The post No, the Democrats (NH’s Hassan, Shaheen, Kuster, and Pappas) Can Never Out Run “Defund the Police” Albatross around Their Necks appeared first on Granite Grok.

Yes, I probably keep too much content around, a lot of it months old as I keep thinking, “I NEED to put this up…” and then get distracted – too many Shiny Objects. Sigh.

Anyways, this is back from July after the US Supreme Court twisted all of the Left’s panties (and a few on the Right as well – right, Steve Duprey, donor to NH Planned Parenthood even after being the NH GOP RNC Committeeman AND NH GOP Chair, contra the NH GOP Platform against abortion?).  It’s still relevant as the decision is still roiling the mid-term politics – it’s the number one issue for Democrats (Republicans, not so much at all) even if all it did was to return the decision-making about abortion back to the States.

The premise: find where abortion is mentioned in the US Constitution. Find it, and get $20.

 

 

Yep, a sucker’s bar bet.  After all, the Supreme Court walked away empty-handed as THEY couldn’t find it either.  Thus, they made the right decision in correcting an earlier wrong decision; you can’t just “make stuff up” in such a foundational document. Happy to see that at least one guy got it right (the blue T-Shirt guy) and showed he understands the underlying Principle.

Campus Reform does these “Man In The Street” interviews a lot with their own generation cohort.  It is illustrative to see what the younger set knows – and what it doesn’t.

And no, ideology isn’t part of the Constitution.

 

(H/T: Campus Reform)

The post Yep, another “Man In The Street” with a hook: $20 if you can find abortion mentioned in the US Constitution appeared first on Granite Grok.

I’m that older generation, and every older generation goes, “Those younger people, they know nothing.”

• The Silent Generation: Born 1928-1945
• Baby Boomers: Born 1946-1964
• Generation X: Born 1965-1980
• Millennials: Born 1981-1996
• Generation Z: Born 1997-2012
• Generation Alpha: Born 2010-2025

(H/T: Mental Floss)

 

Problem is, more and more, we’re finding (because of our lousy education system where standardized NEAP scores SHOW my premise as the majority of public school students aren’t even at the Proficient level) that they really are know-nothings. And this doesn’t help those that argue against that:

Watch: Gen Z Can’t Even Answer ‘What Country Is the Queen of England From’ – Fails Even Easier Questions

“We’ve all seen those videos showing how little Gen Z knows about literally everything, so today we’ve come to Los Angeles, California, and we’re gonna figure out if this is really the case,” Klug said at the beginning of the video. He then hit the streets to ask people his various questions.

…One of the questions Klug asked was, “How many stars are on the United States flag?

he probably cheery picked footage of the very ignoran people , and decided not to include people who actually knew the answers

— Armando (@w1ll1a23) August 23, 2022

One of the harder questions Klug asked was, “What ocean is on the east side of the United States?” The fact that this was a hard question shows just how easy most of the questions were.

Absolutely flummoxed. But I’m not flabbergasted at the results. Yes, these “Man In The Street” are anecdotal and unscientific snapshots.  That said, I’ve been putting them up for years and it isn’t a great look.

Sidenote: I abhor that the Education industry has decided to redefine our common language.  Students signify people that are in the process of studying their lessons. However, they just couldn’t just leave well enough alone and decided to call everyone “learners”.  While I AM a life-long learner (and am impressing that onto the Grandson), to be called a “learner”, one has to show that one is actually learning.  The above folks show that they didn’t and are not learners in any way of what the word connotes.

(H/T: IJR)

The post Gen Z -Seriously, They Can’t Even Parse This Question? They Know Little… appeared first on Granite Grok.

I mentioned Josh Rogers’ hit-piece on Don Bolduc in my post Massive Unforced Mistake By Don Bolduc. Rogers’ hit-piece … and another subsequent hit-piece by Rogers on Bolduc … merit a post of their own because Rogers is such a fount of misinformation that he represents a threat to the democratic process.

Let’s start with Rogers’ first hit-piece:

In this hit-piece Rogers writes:

Bolduc added he does still think the 2020 election was marred by fraud. Repeated investigations into the election have found no evidence of widespread fraud.

Rogers implies that “widespread fraud” was necessary to impact the 2020 election. That is patently FALSE. Presidents are not popularly elected. All that was needed to tip the election to Biden was to tip a few of the “swing states” … and that is exactly what the nearly half a BILLION of Zuckerbucks did. From Mollie Hemingway, who has exhaustively examined and documents how the 2020 election was rigged:

[Zuckerberg] directly funded liberal groups running partisan get-out-the-vote operations. In fact, he helped those groups infiltrate election offices in key swing states by doling out large grants to crucial districts. …

… [For example] Trump-voting counties [in Georgia] received an average of $1.91 per registered voter, compared to $7.13 per registered voter in Biden-voting counties.

… Trump won Georgia by more than five points in 2016. He lost it by three-tenths of a point in 2020. On average, as a share of the two-party vote, most counties moved Democratic by less than one percentage point in that time. Counties that didn’t receive Zuckerbucks showed hardly any movement, but counties that did moved an average of 2.3 percentage points Democratic. In counties that did not receive Zuckerbucks, “roughly half saw an increase in Democrat votes that offset the increase in Republican votes, while roughly half saw the opposite trend.” In counties that did receive Zuckerbucks, by contrast, three quarters “saw a significant uptick in Democrat votes that offset any upward change in Republican votes,” including highly populated Fulton, Gwinnett, Cobb, and DeKalb counties.

I am sure Rogers’ response would be that this was not fraud; that Zuckerbucks was legal at the time. So why not mention it in his hit-piece on Bolduc? Because most fair-minded people would not care whether Zuckerbucks was technically legal or not. They would see it as rigging the election. Which is why Rogers and the rest of the Fake News always talk about “widespread fraud.”

Additionally, there actually was a widespread rigging of the 2020 election. If the FBI-inspired Big Tech censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop is not widespread rigging then nothing is. NewsMax reports that eight out of ten Americans polled have said that they believe the censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop changed the outcome of the election. But, of course, no mention of the Hunter Biden laptop in Rogers’ hit-piece.

The foregoing is more than enough to say that Rogers’ misinformation represents a threat to our democracy. But there is more.

The very next day Rogers dropped another hit-piece on Bolduc. This one on abortion:

Not a single candid word in this hit-piece about Hassan’s position that there should be no restrictions whatsoever on abortion EVER; that is that Hassan supports abortion for ANY REASON up until the baby is born. And not a single word that Hassan’s position is EXTREME and not supported by a clear majority of Americans.

Rather, Rogers writes that Hassan merely opposes “any gestational limit on procedures.” What a lovely euphemism, “gestational limits.” To sugarcoat Hassan’s extremism on abortion with euphemisms such as “gestational limits” is misinformation. It’s no different than crediting Biden for bringing gas prices down without noting that it was his policies drove gas prices into the stratosphere and that gas prices under Biden remain much higher than under Trump.

Additionally, the so-called “national ban” … which Bolduc opposes on the grounds that abortion should be a matter for individual States to decide … would only ban abortion after 15 weeks, which is hardly a national ban. So that’s even more election misinformation.

Rogers is not in the least constrained by facts. He is single-mindedly focused … indeed one could say obsessed … with electing Democrats. He is NO journalist; he is a threat to our democracy.

 

The post NHPR’s Josh Rogers Is A Threat To Our Democracy appeared first on Granite Grok.

For all her ideological faults, Rosie Rung tends to get the most Democrat votes in town, which is why she is the only Democrat from our district in the State House. We have had more, and one of them is back, having hitched her equally flawed ideological wagon to Rung. Smart or dumb?

It’s dumb for Merrimack to send any of them to Concord, as they both have horrible voting records, especially for politicians arrogant enough to claim they put people over politics.

Related: Bad Votes by Politics Before People Rosemarie Rung (D, Merrimack)

Merrimack is a Republican town, and there are no examples of them voting the way that the majority of “their town” would prefer – quite the opposite. They vote against the town’s majority interest and the people. Rung’s HRA score for the last session was 4.5%. Nancy Murphy wasn’t any better when she served (2019,2020), with an average HRA of about 6.5%. You can revisit Rung’s lousy voting record here.

 

Here is Nancy Murphy’s

Parental Control
voted FOR subjecting students to intrusive surveys without the knowledge of parents ( 2019 SB196 )

Cost of Living
voted AGAINST prohibiting an income tax ( 2019 CACR12 )
voted AGAINST reducing electric rates ( 2019 HB477 )
voted AGAINST reducing electric rates by allowing more use of methane as a fuel ( 2019 HB157 )
voted AGAINST reducing the interest & dividends tax ( 2019 HB185 )
voted FOR creating a new tax on capital gains ( 2019 HB686 )
voted FOR creating an additional tax on room rentals ( 2019 HB641, 2019 HB641 )
voted FOR creating an income tax with rates set by an unelected bureaucrat ( 2019 HB712, 2019 SB1, 2020 HB712 )
voted FOR creating an income tax, and new taxes on capital gains, vaping, and sports betting; increasing business taxes ( 2019 HB2, 2019 HB2 )
voted FOR doubling and tripling various fees ( 2019 HB682 )
voted FOR higher electric rates ( 2020 SB124 )
voted FOR higher electric rates for most users ( 2019 SB165 )
voted FOR higher electricity costs ( 2019 SB72 )
voted FOR higher taxes on room rentals ( 2020 HB1160 )
voted FOR increasing electricity costs by at least $30 million per year ( 2019 SB168 )
voted FOR increasing residential electric bills ( 2020 SB122 )
voted FOR increasing the cost of electricity ( 2019 HB715 )
voted FOR raising taxes on small businesses ( 2019 HB623 )
voted FOR raising the cost of residential electricity by $5 million each year ( 2020 HB1496 )

Election Integrity
voted AGAINST ensuring that drivers’ licenses cannot be used by non-citizens to vote ( 2019 HB471 )
voted FOR making it easier for illegal aliens to get a driver’s license ( 2019 HB397 )
voted FOR making it easier for non-citizens to vote ( 2020 HB1700 )
voted FOR making it easier for non-residents to vote in NH ( 2019 SB67, 2020 HB1279, 2020 HB1653 )
voted FOR making it easier for out-of-staters to vote in NH ( 2019 HB105, 2019 HB106 )
voted FOR making voter fraud easier by allowing anyone to vote absentee ( 2019 HB611, 2020 HB1672 )

Constitutional Rights
voted AGAINST repealing a law that prohibits free speech on public property near abortion clinics ( 2019 HB124 )
voted AGAINST self-defense ( 2019 HB208 )
voted FOR confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens without any due process ( 2019 HB696, 2019 HB696, 2019 HB696, 2020 HB1660, 2020 HB687 )
voted FOR preventing law abiding citizens from protecting their children on school grounds ( 2020 HB1285 )
voted FOR preventing law abiding citizens, but not criminals, from buying standard firearms magazines ( 2020 HB1608 )
voted FOR protecting criminals by disarming law-abiding citizens on school property ( 2019 HB564, 2019 HB564, 2019 HB564 )
voted FOR requiring law-abiding citizens, but not criminals, to endure a waiting period between the purchase and delivery of a firearm ( 2019 HB514 )
voted FOR requiring law-abiding citizens, but not criminals, to undergo a background check for any transfer of firearms ( 2019 HB109, 2020 HB1379 )
voted FOR requiring law-abiding citizens, but not criminals, to wait 3 days before obtaining a firearm ( 2020 HB1101 )
voted FOR restricting the right to keep and bear arms ( 2020 HB1143, 2020 HB1350 )

Right to Life
voted AGAINST collecting abortion statistics ( 2019 HB158 )

Other
voted FOR allowing towns to ban plastic bags ( 2020 HB102 )
voted FOR banning plastic straws ( 2020 HB1472 )
voted FOR banning styrofoam cups ( 2020 HB1564 )

 

Please share these and explain to people why the People before politics line is not just a lie. It should be considered fraud.

 

The post Bad Votes by Nancy Murphy (D, Merrimack) appeared first on Granite Grok.

This Tuesday, I had the pleasure of meeting many of you at the polls in the primary election. Thanks to you, I will be on the ballot in November and hope to have the pleasure of representing you in Concord for the next two years.

My district has changed, due to redistricting, from Allenstown/Epsom/Pittsfield to Allenstown/Dunbarton/Epsom/Hooksett; it’s also a two-seat district now.

We want to thank NH State Rep Carol McGuire for this Op-Ed. If you have an Op-Ed or LTE
you would like us to consider, please submit it to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.

The outgoing House met for the last time this week to deal with the bills we passed that had been vetoed by the Governor. As expected, none of the vetoes were overridden; the closest was HB 1454, the criteria for new landfills.

After some debate, the House overrode the veto, 256-65. I was in the minority because I’ve opposed this bill all along: it seemed to be based on objections to landfills in general and one new in particular, cloaked in the guise of protecting the environment. There are already strict requirements for landfills in New Hampshire, and despite recycling, they will be needed for the foreseeable future. The Senate upheld the veto, 11-12, but I bet this bill will be back.

HB 52, new congressional districts, was not overridden, 103-220, after a brief debate. I voted to override only because I had supported the bill in the House; I expect that we would redistrict again this coming year since the courts, not the legislature, created the map we’re using for this election.

HB 275, restricting the governor’s powers to declare and extend a state of emergency, also failed after some debate, 157-167. My committee worked hard on this bill, and we thought it had been negotiated with the governor after only a piece of the House-passed reform ended up in the budget. I was very disappointed that this bill was vetoed and I’m cosponsoring its return.

HB 319, requiring state college students to pass the civics test for naturalization, was also debated and not overridden, 143-181. It’s true that we now require high school students to pass this test, but not all college students recently graduated from high school in New Hampshire.

HB 1022, allowing pharmacists to dispense Ivermectin, had a long, dull debate before failing, 144-170. I voted in favor since Ivermectin has an excellent safety record. HB 1131, forbidding school districts to require masks, failed after a short debate, 150-170. The question seemed to be whether “local control” meant school districts or parents; I prefer parents.

We also suspended the rules and passed a new energy assistance program, using some of the state surplus to expand the low-income heating assistance program by extending eligibility from 60% of the state median income to 75%. Since the price of oil, gas and electric heat has jumped this year, some people who normally don’t need help will struggle to heat their homes this winter. The bill also expands the electric assistance program in the same way. I voted against suspending the rules because this bill had been crafted without public input, and I wasn’t convinced we had fully considered it. Also, there’s nothing so permanent as a temporary government program… In any event, the rules suspension passed 259-66, and the bill (HB 2023) passed on a voice vote. The Senate also passed it, and the governor signed it, so this assistance is available this fall.

I’ve submitted three bills in the early filing period: an update of the scope of practice for occupational therapists (requested by the OT professional organization), a repeat of this year’s cannabis legalization (home grow but no sales), and a tweak to the state retirement system, allowing a person to get a service retirement if they request it shortly after leaving their position. A constituent was unable to get a service retirement after changing his retirement date, and there are some benefits that a deferred retirement doesn’t offer. When checking into his case, I heard of other people who were misinformed during Covid, and I don’t think it’s fair or appropriate to penalize them for not fully understanding the consequences of this rather unusual situation.

If anyone wants a yard sign, let me know. The election is November 8, and JR Hoell, from Dunbarton, and I are running against Mary Frambach from Epsom and Dennis Davis from Allenstown. My husband Dan is running in Epsom against Elizabeth Rousseau.

Representative Carol McGuire
carol@mcguire4house.com

The post NH State Rep Carol McGuire – Your State House 09/17/22: Legislative Work Begins Anew appeared first on Granite Grok.

After years of whining about how Republicans want to confuse voters, the NH Democrat Party has been slapped with a cease and desist order by the NH AG for…confusing and lying to voters.

 

The New Hampshire Department of Justice has slapped the state Democratic Party with a cease and desist order over mailers soliciting absentee ballot requests be sent to a non-existent government agency.

The mailers also contained false claims about voter histories, according to the order issued by Attorney General John Formella.

“In light of our conclusion that the NHDP has caused voter confusion given the incorrect return addresses to clerks on its mailers, the incorrect direction to non-existent ‘boards of election,’ and the incorrect voter domicile information, the NHDP is hereby ordered to cease and desist any and all activities which violate the law by causing voter confusion in the future,” Formella wrote.

 

NH Journal notes that the mailers had incorrect information for local town clerks, “incorrect return addresses and domicile information on mailers to 39 towns and cities” and referenced a Rockingham Board of Elections.” No such entity exists.

 

The Attorney General’s Office has ordered the Democratic state party to “notify each recipient of this mailer of the necessary remediation steps that they must take…and assist each recipient with explaining how they can obtain an absentee ballot prior to the General Election.” The NHDP has until the close of business Tuesday to present the Attorney General’s Office with a written plan to fix the mess.

 

The Dems are claiming it was a clerical mistake which is an excellent way to explain any voting irregularities they say we are not allowed to discuss. But challenging election results are at the center of every Democrat loss and a Constitutionally enumerated natural right. Free Speech. Okay, let’s say it wasn’t a repeat of the non-stop mailers fishing for mail-in ballots that besieged us in 2020.

A political party looking for votes in a primarily Republican County sends out thousands of these things hoping they can build a tiny wall to hold back the GOP wave everyone expects. But lust like how they run the government, they f**k it up.

When the government f’s something up, Democrats will try to make taxpayers eat the freight, but they can’t do that here. The NHDP will have to fix the problem with more expensive, massive mailers that will cost them a small fortune.

Money that they can’t spend on lying about Republicans or the Democrat agenda. But wait, there’s more!

 

Meanwhile, the AG’s office continues to “review the matter” of four illegal mailers sent by a Democratic mail shop into the Second Congressional District Republican primary. The mailers, which didn’t include any disclosure information about who paid for them or was responsible for their content, were sent to promote the candidacy of aggressively pro-Trump Republican Bob Burns. He narrowly defeated a more mainstream candidate, Keene Mayor George Hansel, by just 1,700 votes.

Maybe the NHDP should stay out of the mailer business, or was that just a clerical error too?

All this mail fraud is getting expensive and a drop in the bucket from 30,000 feet, but they did it to themselves. And best of all, it deliberately confuses voters, which, forever more, will serve as a riposte when they start yapping about Republicans and elections.

 

 

HT | NH Journal

The post NH Dems Busted For Lying and Confusing Voters with Mailer appeared first on Granite Grok.

The legislature never authorized Social Emotional Learning for NH public schools. Governor Sununu did it all on his own. Governor Sununu brought Social Emotional Learning (SEL) to New Hampshire and hired an SEL Program Director who reports to him, not the Department of Education:

“Governor Sununu has institutionalized the program with the hiring of a Choose Love Movement Program Director, who reports to the Governor’s Office and works closely with the Department of Education, Homeland Security and Emergency Management, Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of Safety. Town officials, local chambers of commerce, and other stakeholder organizations are also integrated. “Continuing support of these structures, the New Hampshire Department of Education’s Office of Social & Emotional Wellness will lead a three-pronged approach to improve children’s behavioral health system of care, in partnership with other state agencies. Funds from the School Climate Transformation Grant will be used to build, improve, or enhance the multi-tiered BEHAVIORAL FRAMEWORK; establish local student WELLNESS TEAMS; and collect and REPORT DATA to inform school climate efforts. This project will provide technical assistance to develop LEAs infrastructure, identify opportunities to strengthen professional development and training, and receive technical assistance to advance and sustain school climate transformation efforts through the adoption of policies, practices, and programs that address both in- and out-of-school time.”

There were no public hearings or legislative debates on SEL. The governor just inserted SEL programming into our public schools by offering free access and funding. In Nashua the school board had a brief one-sided presentation and a quick board vote. Parents had no voice in or knowledge of what was happening.

Most of us believe that state education laws are being followed in our schools. The legislature authorize the Department of Education to create state academic standards in accordance with RSA 193-C:3 with the state board of education and legislative oversight committee, not the Governor. Sununu completely overrode existing academic standards and corresponding state assessments.

There was no enabling legislation for Social Emotional Learning (SEL), behavior modification, mental health wellness programs and data reporting. Those just appeared with funding through Sununu. Seems like no one in government refuses “free money”, no matter how egregious the purpose.

Public school students have fallen behind academically after Sununu’s extended shutdown during the pandemic. They can’t afford to spend class time on non-academic endeavors. They haven’t even recovered from the shutdown.

State assessment results:

The legislature adopted “Work-study practices” in RSA 193-H:1 VIII, but those aren’t aligned with Social Emotional Learning. 

Work-study practices means those behaviors that enhance learning achievement and promote a positive work ethic such as, but not limited to, listening and following directions, accepting responsibility, staying on task, completing work accurately, managing time wisely, showing initiative, and being cooperative, and work-study skills that contribute to success in college, career, and life that include communication, creativity, collaboration, and self-direction.

SEL engages in discussions of racism, cultural equity, and political activism. SEL promotes social justice or “equity,” not equal opportunity. SEL does not deal in work-study practices and involves no objectively measurable skills.  Social Emotional Learning violates three New Hampshire state laws (1) Social Emotional Learning doesn’t align with state-approved academic standards or state assessments. RSA 193-C:3 (2) Social Emotional Learning is woven into the curriculum, making it difficult to impossibile to opt-out. Opting out their child is a parent’s right under state law. RSA 186:11, IX-c

(3) Social Emotional Learning contains non-academic surveys, which under state law require informed written consent from parents ,which are never obtained. RSA 186:11, IX-d

Who can overturn Social Emotional Learning? SEL is part of a nationwide agenda which tramples parental rights. Not surprisingly, Governor Sununu just vetoed our Parental Rights bill, HB 1431.

Despite violating these three state laws, Commissioner of Education Frank Edelblut has so far failed to provide a technical advisory on the subject. Below is my unanswered 2019 request concerning Social Emotional Learning to him while serving as a member of the Nashua Board of Education.

Subject: Request for Technical Advisory on Implementation of SEL Date: July 26, 2019 at 12:24:59 PM EDT

To: Louis Edelblut <Frank.Edelblut@doe.nh.gov>

Dear Commissioner Edelblut,   I need some legal clarification.  I am requesting a technical advisory on the implementation of a Social Emotional Learning (SEL) curricular program in our district. This is a voluntary behavior modification program that seeks to adjust how students think in an effort to decrease the incidence of violence in our schools. SEL is to be interwoven into our curriculum as opposed to a stand alone curricular instruction, making it difficult for parents to opt-out to protect their children from SEL if they find it objectionable.     In June our board approved (7-2) a pilot program for K-5 with the expectation that grants would be forthcoming for professional development training of our teachers and that the curriculum, Choosing Love, was available online for no cost.   My questions:   (1) What rights to parents have if they find the SEL curricular material or assessments objectionable under RSA 186:11 IX-c?  Should parents be allowed to opt-out their child given that SEL is only a voluntary non-academic program? 186:11 Duties of State Board of Education. – IX-c. Require school districts to adopt a policy allowing an exception to specific course material based on a parent’s or legal guardian’s determination that the material is objectionable. Such policy shall include a provision requiring the parent or legal guardian to notify the school principal or designee in writing of the specific material to which they object and a provision requiring an alternative agreed upon by the school district and the parent, at the parent’s expense, sufficient to enable the child to meet state requirements for education in the particular subject area. The policy shall also require the school district or classroom teacher to provide parents and legal guardians not less than 2 weeks advance notice of curriculum course material used for instruction of human sexuality or human sexual education. The policy shall address the method of delivering notification to a parent or legal guardian. To the extent practicable, a school district shall make curriculum course materials available to parents or legal guardians for review upon request. The name of the parent or legal guardian and any specific reasons disclosed to school officials for the objection to the material shall not be public information and shall be excluded from access under RSA 91-A. (2) What obligations does the district have to obtain informed written consent from parents for SEL programs given the nature of the instruction, which includes non-academic questions regarding the student’s social behavior and other issues? 186:11 Duties of State Board of Education. – IX-d. Require school districts to adopt a policy governing the administration of non-academic surveys or questionnaires to students. The policy shall require school districts to notify a parent or legal guardian of a non-academic survey or questionnaire and its purpose. The policy shall provide that no student shall be required to volunteer for or submit to a non-academic survey or questionnaire, as defined in this paragraph, without written consent of a parent or legal guardian unless the student is an adult or an emancipated minor. The policy shall include an exception from the consent requirement for the youth risk behavior survey developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The policy shall also allow a parent or legal guardian to opt-out of the youth risk behavior survey developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The school district shall make such surveys or questionnaires available, at the school and on the school or school district’s website, for review by a student’s parent or legal guardian at least 10 days prior to distribution to students. In this paragraph, “non-academic survey or questionnaire” means surveys, questionnaires, or other documents designed to elicit information about a student’s social behavior, family life, religion, politics, sexual orientation, sexual activity, drug use, or any other information not related to a student’s academics.  Please help me understand the legal ramifications of Social Emotional Learning programs in the context of these two state laws.  What can parents do if they object to the district re-programing how their child responds at a behavioral level?  If a clinical psychologist engaged in such activities, he would have to obtain informed written consent or he would lose his license to practice.  What protections do parents have in a public school? 

Even ESSA requires informed written consent from the parents of each child to participate in “any mental-health assessment or service.”  Isn’t that the purpose of SEL to prevent mental health problems and minimize violence in schools?

Our district will be discussing a proposed Five-year Strategic Plan which implements Social Emotional Learning this coming Monday night.  Included in this strategic plan are 56 new staff members at a cost of $4.5 million, including benefits. The proposal includes an Executive Director of Social Emotional Learning, a new Asst. Superintendent of Teaching and Learning, 10.5 Health teachers and 14 Social Workers.  Clearly, implementing SEL is not cost neutral as the board anticipated. As expensive as SEL is to implement,  my primary concern is to protect the rights of parents to direct the education of their children.  I’m not seeing how that is possible given that SEL is to be interwoven into the curriculum and would benefit greatly from some legal advice from your office. Thank you very much for your time and attention. Regards, Doris Hohensee member, Nashua Board of Education

 

The post Governor Sununu Institutionalized Social Emotional Learning in New Hampshire appeared first on Granite Grok.

Beautiful Fulchino Vineyard on a breezy Friday September 23rd, Ambassador and former Governor Nikki Haley reminded us what’s at stake and made a strong pitch for General Don Bolduc.

Video 1: Ambassador Nikki Haley makes the case for a strong leader like General Don Bolduc to serve NH in the US Senate.
Introductions and honoring Veterans and state representatives – Al Fulchino.
“Can’t is not an option” – National Committeeman Chris Ager introduces Ambassador Haley, who then gives a great wind up for General Bolduc and why we need him in the Senate.

 
 

Video 2: After that great intro, Don Bolduc delivers a short stump speech, working in the preamble to the constitution, and ending with the rallying cry of NH: “Live Free or Die!”

 
 

This is a TEA Party kind of year, and General Don Bolduc is the right man for these times, but remember, a conservative wave doesn’t happen without a big voter turnout. This man deserves your support and enthusiasm. As Ambassador Haley said, get out there and tell all your friends and neighbors that not just NH, but the USA needs this man in the US Senate.

The post Nikki Haley Stumps for Don Bolduc appeared first on Granite Grok.

I recently published a book entitled Unreality: “Sandy Hook Messes Minds.” The PDF is linked below. During the first half of the book, I thought the school shooting did occur; in the second half, I changed my tune. My conclusion?

It’s a near certainty that the entire event of December 2012 was a scripted “show.”

Since that is basically good news — no child died — I’d hate to invest any more of my time on Sandy Hook. But now we have the Alex Jones fandangle. I think it’s very telling that the mainstream media — which never covered the negative argument — is heavily covering Jones’ trial.

Possibly Jones is somehow “in on it.” After being sued by some people for hurting their feelings (by broadcasting, year after year, that no children died at Sandy Hook), he has said he was wrong, that the children did die, and that he is sorry he hurt anyone’s feelings.

Today he is up for millions of dollars in damages; the trial to determine the amount is now before a jury in Waterbury Connecticut. So, should I be worried about my pocketbook? I have similarly published that there were no deaths at school on that famous day. Can I be sued? Could I even be charged with crime?

At the moment, we Americans have a Constitution that contains a First Amendment which makes it OK for me to express my opinion. I can say anything I please. I can say “We never had a president named Abraham Lincoln.” I can say “Hunter Biden engaged in activities that were treasonous to the US.”

My cuckoo statement about Lincoln won’t hurt anyone. My allegation of crime by Hunter Biden will hurt him, but I am still allowed to say it. It’s not criminal. Hunter can sue me for damages, for defaming him, but the law states that “truth is a defense.” So he’ll lose the case if I can show the basis of my statement.

And where would I get, say, emails that he wrote? The court is obliged to assist my defense — as well as his plaint — by way of subpoenas. This is known as Discovery. All will be put on the table.

Incidentally, per the famous precedent of Sullivan v New York Times, if the plaintiff is a public figure — broadly defined — the defendant (the defamer) is allowed to throw dirt at him, unless it is done with knowledge of its falsity or outright malice (i.e., no meaningful purpose other than to harm the defamed).

So How’s the Parchment Doing These Days?

Doth not the current agony that Alex Jones is enduring prove that our Constitution has changed, such that it was illegal for him to call Sandy Hook a hoax?

I have three answers: No, no, and no.

First, if there had been a withdrawal of the First Amendment from the Constitution, you’d have heard about it. In fact, you’d have participated in it. The process of amending is difficult — as was intended by the Founding Fathers. Just trust me on that one — we have not lost our legal right to blather away on any subject we like. All is constitutionally intact regarding free speech.

Second, Alex Jones never had a judge or jury say that his claims about a hoax were untrue! That matter did come to court, but a judge made a DEFAULT ruling.
I don’t mean that the judge said “Let’s call a halt; Jones is wrong, case closed.” Rather, she asked Alex Jones to present some papers about his finances AND HE DECLINED to do so. You’re not allowed to disobey a judge, so that very disobedience brought the “case” to an end.

(Note: sometime prior to the default, Jones retracted his assertion that Sandy Hook never happened. That often happens when one is sued for defamation, in hopes that it will cause the plaintiff to drop the complaint.)

The media now want us to believe that there was a court case in which Jones’ claim of a hoax was adjudicated. Definitely not. He failed to comply with a discovery order. He did not even protest, to a higher court, that default judgment. (That’s why I suspect Alex is somehow in on it. Things are not going according to Hoyle.)

Jones — and his attorneys — don’t even react when CNN claims that Jones was found “liable”. No, he was not found liable. A default judgement is not a finding on the merits. The current proceedings before a jury have only to do with establishing the amount Jones must pay, based on that judge’s default ruling. And by the way, it’s a civil case, based on tort law; criminality is not being alleged against Jones.

Third (my third “no” to the question of whether Americans now have to shutta da mouf), there is the James Fetzer case. Prof Fetzer has petitioned the US Supreme Court to look at his Wisconsin case, and on October 3, 2022 — very soon — SCOTUS will decide whether or not to hear that case.

It is somewhat similar to the Jones matter — Fetzer is being asked to fork over megabucks to Leonard Posner, father of a child, Noah, that Fetzer says didn’t die at Sandy Hook. Fetzer edited a book entitled “Nobody Died at Sandy Hook; It Was a FEMA Drill To Support Gun Control.” In it, he said he doesn’t think Noah’s death certificate is valid. Posner sued for defamation, saying that Fetzer defames him by alleging that he submitted a phony death certificate.

It should be easy enough to prove or disprove “truth” to settle the case, one way or the other. Fetzer had two experts standing by, who claim they see evidence of inauthenticity in the death certificate. So, did a judge or jury rule on that?

No. It ended with a SUMMARY judgement, which is not the same as a default judgement. Judge Frank Remington summarily decided that the experts’ affidavits were just opinion that he could ignore. His Honor also chose to ignore the fact that Fetzer had made a demand (as is customary) to have a jury decide the case. Both of those decisions violate Fetzer’s due process rights — to discovery, and to a jury decision as to liability.

Note: I see that Prof Fetzer, age 81, has just issued a press release, offering to be interviewed by any interested person. He lists his phone number as 608 835 2707, and says that all pleadings are available at: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-7916.html

Here is a link to the PDF of my Book “Unreality: Sandy Hook Messes Minds.” As stated above, I’d like to put no more time into this subject. Time is precious when we have nuclear war hanging over us. Still, it’s necessary to combat the practice of deceit, as that could well be involved in all governmental decisions including nuclear war.

I urge you to stand up for truth. You won’t be sued for a million dollars and you won’t be arrested, either. But even if you were, please do it!

https://gumshoenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Unreality_230822w.pdf

The post Sandy Hook: Is the Alex Jones Trial a Gag Order for America? appeared first on Granite Grok.

After receiving loads of migrants and the criticism for having them deported with military force, the residents of Martha’s Vineyard are extending a cilantro branch to the Latino community by having a Home Depot franchise built at the entry point to the exclusive island. On behalf of the residents, the elite island spokesperson Bunny Tisbury offered: “This is our way of saying ‘lo centimos for the misunderstanding”.

The residents intend to break ground on the project this fall with the aim of having it open for business next spring.

“Martha’s Vineyard is an exclusive island that is all about inclusivity. We realized we needed to have a more welcoming place for the Latin community when they come here” said long-time island resident Edgar Chase-Manhattan.

A Home Depot spokesperson who prefers to remain anonymous told Bananas News:

“Home Depots are famous throughout the American south as a hot spot for central and South American migrants to find work as well as tools and building supplies. Undocumented workers can congregate in the parking lot and contractors can find day laborers at or below minimum wage which stimulates the economy.”

Attracted by this model the newly formed Martha’s Vineyard Equity council is acting fast on getting the plan in place.

“The island has been abuzz lately with requests for a decorative wall to protect from climate change. Climate change is going to destroy this island if we don’t do something fast. This has nothing to do with keeping the brownies out.”

The plan is to offer several low-paying seasonal jobs to the next surprise group of migrants bussed in from out-of-state to have them build the wall with materials easily obtained from Home Depot. Not only will this help against climate change but it will also cut down on the recent rise in illegal immigrants coming to the island that barely has enough resources for its tiny population of extremely wealthy residents.

Not satisfied that this will provide the necessary reparations given the national outcry over the recent mishandling of migrants, the Equity Board has included in the plans to have a micro Taco Bell drive-up window attached to the Home Depot.

“We understand the need for diversity at the Vineyard” bragged the 1/182nd Hispanic board director Chauncey Acosta.

None of the fifty migrants recently deported from the island were available for comment as they are currently being detained for processing in maximum security barracks at a nearby Air Force base at the behest of quasi-Republican Governor Charlie Baker.

The post Martha’s Vineyard Makes Amends for Migrant Debacle appeared first on Granite Grok.

The GOP is often called the STUPID PARTY … and rightly so. Well, if the GOP is the STUPID PARTY, then the NHGOP is the REALLY STUPID WING of the STUPID PARTY. A judge nominated to the State’s trial court by HASSAN has just INVENTED a RIGHT-TO-GROOMING and the NHGOP … and sadly its candidates … are afraid to tackle the issue head-on and instead respond with platitudes about “supporting parental involvement”:

Such impotent cowards. Here is some advice from Matt Walsh that the NHGOP should follow, but won’t, because they are much more comfortable bloviating about the nitty-gritty of the Fed Funds rate:

Hi Republican 2022 candidates. We have gone ahead and made gender ideology, child mutilation, and child sexual indoctrination major national issues. They're also winning political issues. All you have to do is take the reins we're trying to hand you.

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) September 23, 2022

 

The post A Message To The Really Stupid Wing Of The Stupid Party From Matt Walsh appeared first on Granite Grok.

What is going on in SAU21? From teacher training presented by a leftist political organization to canceling religious Christmas Carols and now political indoctrination in the classroom, parents wonder why academic excellence is no longer the focus.

I recently posted information about the politicized teacher training in SAU21 by Seacoast Outright. This kind of WOKE agenda in the schools means that they are abandoning their primary task –academics!  Make no mistake about it, when you see this kind of WOKE agenda in the schools, there is more that you haven’t seen. We recently discovered that religious Christmas carols would be canceled because the principal mistakenly said there is a “Separation of Church and State” law. This highlights the need for schools to focus on knowledge instead of woke ideology. If the administrators tasked with educating our children do not understand the basics, how will our children? Read more about that here. As if this wasn’t bad enough, now I’m learning how this political bias has been pushed on students in some of the high school classes. This isn’t really surprising given the uprising around the country by parents who are exposing political indoctrination in their child’s classrooms. These parents aren’t demanding teachers force conservative viewpoints on children. They simply say, don’t push a leftist’s agenda on their kids. This is a public school where they serve all families. Academic excellence should be the top priority, not anyone’s political agenda. You would think that AP U.S. History would be an area where the teacher would keep that kind of bias out of the classroom and just teach the facts and information. Of course there are historical events that are a stain on this country. Slavery, and denying women the right to vote needs to be taught so that we can learn from the mistakes of our past, and not repeat them. That’s not a political agenda, that’s teaching the next generation information facts and truth. But the United States of America is also exceptional because the founding was revolutionary, and rulers weren’t replaced with the next generation of rulers. We do not have to overthrow the institutions because the political power now lies in the hands of the people.

That’s not good enough for political activists working in our public schools. It’s not enough for them to come to school, and educate our children. They use our money to fund public schools with an agenda to change the values, attitudes and beliefs in our children. And make no mistake about this, this is a recipe for illiteracy.  Your child may learn and know every one of the 68 genders (and counting) but do they know basic math? Are they reading the great works of literature? Do they know how their government works? How does a Bill become a law? Are they required to read the founding documents? The United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence, The Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers? Can they even comprehend these documents, or are they graduating on a reading level that prevents them from understanding what they are reading? I know home-schooled high school graduates who have learned all of this.

What are your kids learning compared to what students learned in the 50’s? Take a look at what 8th grade students in the 50’s were learning in Civics here. We have high school graduates who’ve never read the United States Constitution. Are 8th graders in SAU21 able to answer the questions Kenny Hignite had to answer in 1954? I think we all know the answer to that question. We have a problem of illiteracy, and instead of focusing on teaching rich academic content, teachers are focusing on shaping a child’s political views.

Here is a summary from students on what is being taught in the AP History class at Winnacunnet High school. Several of the students in this class were bothered by the overt political bias: This is the survey and slide documents used in a class presentation.  The teacher was careful about the words he used in class but also asked the class, with a show of hands, if anyone had a political dislike for Hillary Clinton.  The teacher has a framed picture of Hillary Clinton on his wall, and has expressed his negative view on politics by using President Trump, having classified nuclear documents at Mar A Lago, as the example. The teacher said that Trump said,  “there were fine people on both sides” in South Carolina to prove that Trump was siding with white supremacists.     The teacher would bring up topics in class about whether the U.S. should rename certain buildings, remove statues, and determine what is racist, and what is not.  Some of the kids walked away thinking that this was based on Critical Race Theory to which the teacher denied and said CRT is what is taught in college.    The teacher brought up the 1619 project and denied knowing what that was even though he had brought it up in a class a short time ago. This discussion was recorded.    Some of the students talked about how this class felt like a hostile environment for students who didn’t share the views of the teacher, and then they questioned if they would receive a fair grade. Some students said they will just go along with the teacher to please him instead of expressing their honest views.  Here are copies of an assignment that includes a survey on the students’ political views. This survey was not approved by parents in spite of state and federal law that requires parental consent on non-academic surveys. You can find those laws here and here.
I filed a complaint with the New Hampshire Department of Education on behalf of several parents and students who attend Winnacunnet High School.  Teachers must follow a Code of Ethics and Conduct, they cannot ignore laws that govern our public schools.

Dear Ms. Fenton, After several parents contacted me about a recent survey their children completed in Andrew Gushee’s AP History Class at Winnacunnet High School, I filed a 91-a Right-to-Know request asking to see: 1) A copy of the Political Identity Survey distributed to students at Winnacunnet High School.  2) A copy of the parental consent form that was sent to parents prior to the distribution of the Political Identity Survey.    3) Confirmation that this survey was posted on the district website prior to the distribution of the Political Identity Survey.    4) A copy of the privacy policy from the Political Identity Survey vendor.    As you can see from the attached file, the survey was provided to me but no parental consent form was included. The survey was not posted on the website prior to the distribution as also required by law.    I am asking you to conduct an investigation because it appears as if RSA 186:11, IX-d was violated when the attached survey was given to students in this AP History class:    IX-d. Require School Districts to Adopt a Policy Governing the Administration of Non-academic Surveys or Questionnaires to Students. The policy shall require school districts to notify a parent or legal guardian of a non-academic survey or questionnaire and its purpose. The policy shall provide that no student shall be required to volunteer for or submit to a non-academic survey or questionnaire, as defined in this paragraph, without written consent of a parent or legal guardian unless the student is an adult or an emancipated minor. The policy shall include an exception from the consent requirement for the youth risk behavior survey developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The policy shall also allow a parent or legal guardian to opt-out of the youth risk behavior survey developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The school district shall make such surveys or questionnaires available, at the school and on the school or school district’s website, for review by a student’s parent or legal guardian at least 10 days prior to distribution to students. In this paragraph, “non-academic survey or questionnaire” means surveys, questionnaires, or other documents designed to elicit information about a student’s social behavior, family life, religion, politics, sexual orientation, sexual activity, drug use, or any other information not related to a student’s academics. 
  In addition, Federal law also requires informed parental consent when children complete a survey on the following:    §98.4   Protection of students’ privacy in examination, testing, or treatment.
(a) No student shall be required, as part of any program specified in §98.1 (a) or (b), to submit without prior consent to psychiatric examination, testing, or treatment, or psychological examination, testing, or treatment, in which the primary purpose is to reveal information concerning one or more of the following:(1) Political affiliations;(2) Mental and psychological problems potentially embarrassing to the student or his or her family;(3) Sex behavior and attitudes;(4) Illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating and demeaning behavior;(5) Critical appraisals of other individuals with whom the student has close family relationships;(6) Legally recognized privileged and analogous relationships, such as those of lawyers, physicians, and ministers; or

(7) Income, other than that required by law to determine eligibility for participation in a program or for receiving financial assistance under a program.

(b) As used in paragraph (a) of this section, prior consent means:

(1) Prior consent of the student, if the student is an adult or emancipated minor; or

(2) Prior written consent of the parent or guardian, if the student is an unemancipated minor.

(c) As used in paragraph (a) of this section:

(1) Psychiatric or psychological examination or test means a method of obtaining information, including a group activity, that is not directly related to academic instruction and that is designed to elicit information about attitudes, habits, traits, opinions, beliefs or feelings; and

(2) Psychiatric or psychological treatment means an activity involving the planned, systematic use of methods or techniques that are not directly related to academic instruction and that is designed to affect behavioral, emotional, or attitudinal characteristics of an individual or group.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1232h(b))

While I did not see a vendor listed on the survey, the document was uploaded through Google Docs. If this was administered by a vendor, then there should be some kind of privacy statement. However, it looks as if the teacher may have drafted the survey for his students, and then used Google docs as the online source.    Google has been sued by Attorneys General in New Mexico and Mississippi over children’s privacy violations. Several legislators in New Hampshire worked on this statute to prevent surveys like these from being administered without informed parental consent.  This survey transmitted through Google Docs included the student’s name and email address. These are the surveys that legislators in New Hampshire said they wanted parents to be aware of, and that needed consent. Please see testimony fromEmmet McGroarty who recently served as an attorney for the American Principles Project.  This testimony was presented to the Commission for Evidence Based Policy on October 21, 2016 regarding student data privacy. This survey was a way to gather personal information on students, versus an assignment that would have benefited children who could be learning historical academic content. This is happening more frequently, and it appears to be more about examining the values and attitudes of students. There is less of a focus on learning quality academic content in the core subjects, and more indoctrination as an attempt to change the political viewpoints of students.   Parents are fed up with this kind of approach used in the classroom. Parents are not looking for a teacher to push their political views but instead, one that will teach the academic content in an unbiased manner.    I am filing this complaint on behalf of several parents whose children took the survey but found out about it after it was completed. They do not want any backlash aimed at their children, so I am filing this request without publishing the names of those parents.    Thank you for your attention to this matter. 

Ann Marie Banfield 

TRUST REQUIRES TRANSPARENCY

As you can see, this is not an attempt to teach children U.S. History, this is a way to capture political data on their students. Teachers are now taking historical events and pushing a biased political narrative alongside it. Yes there is political content in this lesson, but you can also see the political bias too.

While the slide show doesn’t violate the anti-discrmination law, there is certainly a bias that could cause a teacher to violate a student’s free speech rights. I’d suggest you let your children know to watch closely because we have another example of that from the parent whose daughter in North Hampton, was told to remove “Merry Christmas” from the white board by a teacher who said it could offend someone. Students still have the right to free speech in this district and this parent could certainly challenge that action by the teacher in a court of law. This AP History teacher seems to be framing the survey in such a way to make people affirm certain controversial propositions, like that the gender pay gap exists. The teacher likely cannot explicitly require someone to affirm a certain political viewpoint unless it is for a pedagogical purpose. This is why so many parents are saying, teach children how to think, and stop teaching them what to think. Students shouldn’t even know a teachers’ political views, nor be asked about their’s.  A child could say in a social studies class that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a war crime. Their social studies teacher could then assign a presentation defending the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  This is an example of pedagogy and is permissible. Maybe the teacher wants the student to consider the other side in this historical event. Students would learn the historical facts but would also be challenged to look at different viewpoints. In this case, the teacher wouldn’t be pushing their biased political viewpoints on the students. Instead, the students would be learning more academic content on a historical event, and at the same time, possibly learn about a different viewpoint along the way.

We are not looking for WOKE graduates, we are looking for educated graduates. Ones who are literate, and adopt viewpoints based on knowledge and understanding.

This gets even more interesting when you peruse the “Equity Audit” that was conducted in SAU21. Under Classroom Environment question #6 asks: Is there an effort made to use non biased verbal and nonverbal language in the classroom? I think we can safely say in this example, the answer is NO.

With the examples from Project Veritas exposing teachers and administrators politicizing their schools, we see how prevalent this WOKE agenda in the schools has become. Illiteracy is never a good thing and yet this WOKE agenda is a recipe for illiteracy that we cannot afford in this district, state, or country.

Let Superintendent Nadeau and Asst. Superintendent David Hobbs know that this is unacceptable. Students should not know the political views of their teachers, and if the teacher discovers their students’ political viewpoints, that should never be held against them.

This has created a hostile environment in the classroom for children who share different views. Collecting data on their political views is not educating children, but it now has parents in Connecticut angry, and fighting for a quality education in their school district too.

SAU21 needs leadership that is free from political biases, and focuses on academic literacy versus woke agendas.

The post Complaint Against SAU21 Filed with the New Hampshire Dept. of Education: Breaking the Law and Political Bias appeared first on Granite Grok.

One of my favorite subjects that we haven’t heard enough of lately is reparations to be paid to the descendants of American slaves. Steve Mac Donald, here on the Grok, recently brought up the subject (haven’t read it yet). I got so excited that I just jumped at the chance to express my thoughts.

I’ll rush right back to read his post as soon as I send in mine.

First, I think the idea has some practical merit. There have to be eligibility rules in place, such as an ancestor had to have been a slave in America when slavery was actually legal. It would be a set amount per living individual with no retroactive eligibility.

Those applying must agree to legally renounce all future claims against the U.S.A., any State, or individuals in America.

And last but not least, they must legally renounce their and their children’s American Citizenship and immigrate to any other country of their choice and never attempt to return. Their SSA old age payments would remain unchanged, as would any disability, military retirement, or disability rights

I think that would be fair.

Not one living person now in America has had to endure being legally a slave here. So if one’s discontent with this nation is so manifest, I’d expect they would welcome the chance to immigrate to someplace away from here. It would be kind of like a divorce.

 

The post Slavery’s Reparations appeared first on Granite Grok.

Remember that time, at Obama Care camp, when Democrats insisted the Government would do away with greedy doctors performing surgeries for profit? Good times. How times have changed. Doctors admit that transitioning surgery for children is a big money maker for them.

 

Vanderbilt opened its trans clinic in 2018. During a lecture the same year, Dr. Shayne Taylor explained how she convinced Nashville to get into the gender transition game. She emphasized that it’s a “big money maker,” especially because the surgeries require a lot of “follow ups” pic.twitter.com/zedM7HBCBe

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) September 20, 2022

 

Occupational objection?

Vanderbilt was apparently concerned that not all of its staff would be on board. Dr. Ellen Clayton warned that “conscientious objections” are “problematic.” Anyone who decides not to be involved in transition surgeries due to “religious beliefs” will face “consequences”

Read the thread here.

Democrats have no objections to surgery for profit when it advances some left-Wing agenda. They don’t care if puberty-blocking drugs have killed thousands of kids. It is of no interest that a majority of them will attempt suicide. Spikes in substance abuse or the collateral damage caused are likely a feature, not a bug. These are, after all, just extra people the Left would prefer never breed and, if possible, die.

Related: Depopulation Progs Aren’t Transing Your Kids Out Of Empathy

Democrats are all-in because this advances at least two goals side-by-side. Legal castration and depopulation control and, if they survive – a victim group that is in now in worse shape, they can ply for votes with other people’s money.

De-transitioning survivors are shouted down or excommunicated like black Republican voters. You are dead to them, but that doesn’t mean they won’t try to kill you.

But there’s still the matter of performing these surgeries for profit, especially when manipulating someone’s emotions to drug and cut them up for profit. Not just children but parents and guardians, who are faced – especially in majority progressive outposts – with intimidation, guilt, and even shame if they protest even a little.

Related: Dr. Michael Laidlaw – Gender Transition Therapy is Giving Children a Disease

Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn isn’t keeping quiet.

 

“Using children for profit and political gain is deeply disturbing. Experts agree that there have not been enough clinical trials conducted to prove the safety and effectiveness of using these drugs on kids,” Blackburn said in a press release. “These drugs have not been approved for treating children experiencing gender dysphoria, but the left insists on experimenting on these children anyway.”

 

Blackburn wrote the FDA and asked them to investigate the adverse effects of puberty-blocking drugs on kids. But we have an opinion from the FDA already.

Related: A “Parents Transgendering Kids” Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy Double-Tap!

 

The FDA identified six cases where there was a “plausible” link between GnRH agonists and a condition called pseudotumor cerebri, which is caused by elevated fluid pressure in the brain. According to the FDA, all six cases were identified in biologically female children between the ages of 5 and 12; five of the six were being treated for early puberty, and the sixth was undergoing “transgender care.”

 

There are serious risks. As previously noted, thousands of kids have been killed by these drugs. But the Left encourages this and the surgery for-profit model that follows. But they aren’t hypocrites. It is the default setting for Democrats. You cannot allow the words they say to confuse you. No matter what comes out of their mouth, the goal is not to help anyone but the Democrat party.

Nothing they do works for anyone but them and their political ambitions. Once you accept this, you’ll find it is easier to filter the garbage they spew. Surgery for profit helps their buddies in the Hospital cartel, who donate to Democrat candidates and causes.

These kids are just another campaign finance laundromat, and they die or kill themselves; it hardly matters to them. They’ll still get the donations.

 

 

HT | Washington Examine

The post Greedy Doctors Performing Surgeries for Profit Update appeared first on Granite Grok.

Indeed, my meme cup runneth over.

This week saw MONDAY MEMES and a Meme Overflow too, so in case you missed them, please do go back for more meme carpet-bombing.

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

 

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

 

 

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

Reichstag fire moment coming in 3… 2… 1…

 

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

 

   

 

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

 

 

The best FDA (and CDC) that money can buy!  Never ignore the “royalties” on top of this… pharma money going to government people that are not required to be disclosed.

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

Echo that for here in NH.

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

Who are you to deny the new Golden Calf SCIENCE?  And if you do, you’re not mentally ill, you’re actually a heretic.  And we all know what happens to heretics.

 

 

(Buy the MUG)

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

True, but they do recruit.  And I was thinking about this.  What happens to a shy, loner, insecure kid when they come out as trans?  Attention!  Praise!  Affirmation!  No wonder it’s so attractive… and I truly believe that’s by design and intent.  And it all comes back to… VANITY (language alert):

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

One word: Yes.

 

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

 

Palette cleanser:

 

Whether you’re married or single, IMHO this is time well spent.  And funny too.

 

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

Biden’s Great Climate Leap Forward is well on its way to destroying everything, which, as we’ve pointed out often, is the point. Use government interference or meddling to wreck it, then insist only government can fix it. And there is no limit to what they’ll do or how they will spin it like raging wildfires in New Mexico.

In April – well into the annual permanent drought narrative – the US forest service started a planned fire of which they lost complete control.

 

“The Hermits Peak Fire began April 6 as a result of the Las Dispensas prescribed fire on the Pecos/Las Vegas (NM) Ranger District of the Santa Fe National Forest.   Although forecasted weather conditions were within parameters for the prescribed fire, unexpected erratic winds in the late afternoon caused multiple spot fires that spread outside the project boundary.”

 

Any reporting on the New Mexico fire or any fore related to the Las Dispensas prescribed fire cannot be called a wildfire. It did not start in the wild, on its own, due to natural events like lightning strikes or the ignorance of idiot campers.

The government lit it and lost control.

Debbie Cress, the ranger in charge when the prescribed fire was approved and set, has since moved up to a National Forest Service Job in DC.

The woman responsible for the worst “wildfire” in New Mexico’s history got a promotion, and all you got for news about any of it was the approved climate cult narrative until now.

 

 

HT | Tony Heller – RCSB

The post Largest Wildfire in New Mexico’s History … Was Started On Purpose, by the US Government appeared first on Granite Grok.

I am about as Catholic as you can get. The only thing Jewish about me is that I went to a Jewish kindergarten. Actually, it was a public school, but the local Gentiles went to a parish kindy which my parents deemed to be too long a walk from our house.

So I stayed closer by, at age 5, and found out what The High Holy Days are.

We want to thank Mary Maxwell for this Op-Ed Please direct yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.

Rosh Hashanah is coming this weekend, stating Sunday night September 25th, and ending Tuesday the 27th. The year that will be ushered in is 5783. Amazing. The Happy New Year greeting in Hebrew is “Shana Tova” (accent on second syllable for both words — try it).

Now I want to tell you what makes me happy at this present year-end. I have discovered a new way to talk about Jews, and to talk about pro-Semitism. I am a pro-Semite, but everyone is so afraid of being called an anti-Semite they don’t dare talk about our Jewish brethren one way or the other. Fact is, I had heard that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn had written a book in Russian, “Together for Two Hundred Years,” which no one had translated into English. Solzhenitsyn died in 2008 and here we are in 2022, so what’s going on?

Well, scouring the Internet usually hits paydirt. I found, at WikiSpooks, a commentary that includes many long excerpts from the hidden book. (In English, of course — the only things I can say in other languages are feliz navidad, pas de deux, and the aforementioned Shana Tova.)

In these excepts, Solzhenitsyn is reporting what many Russian Christians have to say. The material is not something we would understand in the melting-pot United States. It’s a discussion of — as the book’s title says — two centuries of Russians and Jews living together. “A” was aware of “B” and “B” was aware of “A.”

So sit back and hear. You will find much of it very touching. The Russian Christians understand that the Jews gave Russia many of its best enlightenments. They also feel terrible that this was not met by official kindness! (Let’s take a lesson here — we are all God’s chillun, even the ones on Martha’s Vineyard, if you know what I mean!)

Solzhenitsyn’s book is in two volumes; one deals with the period from 1795 to 1918, and the other covers the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution to the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. The selections below are all from Chapter 11, pre-revolution. David and Davina Davison translated them from the French in 2016. None of it is mine. Mostly it is Aleksandr talking; parenthetical remarks are his, square bracketed editing is mine. Double quotes means he is quoting.

Chapter 11. Jews and Russians before the First World War – The Growing Awareness [greatly abridged here]

In Russia … the best minds among the Russians and the Jews had had time to look back and evaluate from different points of view the essence of our common life, to seriously consider the question of culture and national destiny.

The Jewish people made its way through an ever-changing present by dragging behind it the tail of a comet of three thousand years of diaspora, without ever losing consciousness of being “a nation without language nor territory, but with its own laws” (Salomon Lourie), preserving its difference and its specificity by the force of its religious and national tension—in the name of a superior, meta-historical Providence.

[From the late 1800s], it was precisely this Jewish community in Russia that began to grow stronger, to flourish, and now “the whole history of the Jewish community in the modern age was placed under the sign of Russian Jewry”.

For their part, the Russian thinkers were perplexed by the particularism of the Jews. And for them, in the nineteenth century, the question was how to overcome it. Vladimir Solovyov, who expressed deep sympathy for the Jews, proposed to do so by the love of the Russians towards the Jews….

Teitel reports the following observation: “The Jews are in their majority materialists. Strong in them is the aspiration to acquire material goods. But what contempt for these material goods whenever it comes to the inner ‘I’, to national dignity! Why, in fact, the mass of Jewish youth—who has completely turned away from religious practice, and which often does not even speak its mother tongue—why did this mass not convert to Orthodoxy, which would have opened to it wide the doors of all the universities …?

As for D. Pasmanik, he also mentioned that this category of Jews converted under duress. (From 1905, conversion was facilitated: it was no longer necessary to go to orthodoxy, it was enough to become a Christian.)

I. V. Hessen, in an intervention in the second Duma in March 1907, after having denied that the [1905] revolution was still in its phase of rising violence, thus denying right-wing parties the right to arise as defenders of the culture against anarchy, exclaimed: “We who are teachers, doctors, lawyers, statisticians, literary men, would we be the enemies of culture? Who will believe you, gentlemen?”—They shouted from the benches of the right: “You are the enemies of Russian culture, not of Jewish culture!”

Enemies, of course not, but—as the Russian party pointed out—Were they able to take to heart the interests of the Russian State in their full scope and depth?

The Jewish middle classes make a very clear choice to give secular education to their children in the Russian language, [but] there is the development of publications in Yiddish—and comes into use the term “Yiddishism”: that the Jews remain Jewish, that they do not assimilate.

And it was precisely during these decades, and especially in Russia, that Zionism developed. The Zionists were ironical about those who wanted to assimilate, who imagined that the fate of the Jews of Russia was indissolubly linked to the destiny of Russia itself.

We turn first to Vl. Jabotinsky, a brilliant and original essayist…. Jabotinsky considered that Russia was nothing more than a halt for the Jews on their historical journey and that it was necessary to hit the road—to Palestine.

Passion ignited his words: it is not with the Russian people that we are in contact, we learn to know it through its culture, “mainly through its writers…, through the highest, the purest manifestations of the Russian spirit,”—and this appreciation, we transpose it to the whole of the Russian world.

He is merciless towards those who seek to assimilate. The average Jewish intellectual forgets himself: it is better not to pronounce the word “Jew”, “the times are no longer about that”; we are afraid to write: “we the Jews”, but we write: “we the Russians” and even: “we the Russkoffs”. …. “The thirty pennies for equal rights…”

The situation of the Jews in Russia—and not at any time, but precisely after the years 1905?1906—seemed to [Jabotinsky] desperately gloomy: “The objective reality, that is, the fact of living abroad, has turned itself against our people today … newspapers financed by Jewish funds” do not defend the Jews “in these times of unprecedented persecution.”

At the end of 1911, he wrote: …“ The study of Jewishness must become for us the central discipline… Jewish culture is now the only plank of salvation for us.”

All of this, we can, yes, we can understand it, share it. (And we, Russians, can do it, especially today, at the end of the twentieth century.)

But under the condition of reciprocity. Especially since it is not up to any nation or religion to judge another. It is true that in the last volume of the Jewish Encyclopædia, its editors complain that “the elite of the Jewish intelligentsia has shown its indifference to the cultural issues raised by this Encyclopædia,” devoting itself exclusively to the struggle for the equality—all formal—of rights for the Jews.

Meanwhile, in other minds and other Jewish hearts there was a growing conviction that the future of the Jews of Russia was indissolubly linked to that of Russia. ….”There is no salvation for us without Russia, as there is no salvation for Russia without us.”

Our intelligentsia was so generous, so freedom-loving, that it ostracised anti-Semitism from society and humanity; moreover, the one who did not give his frank and massive support to the struggle for equal rights of the Jews was considered a “despicable anti-Semite”. With its ever-awakening moral consciousness and extreme sensitivity, the Russian intelligentsia sought to understand and assimilate the Jewish view of priorities affecting the whole of political life….

Not only did Russian society firmly defend the Jews against the government, but it forbade itself and forbade anyone to show any trace of a shadow of criticism of the conduct of each Jew in particular…. (The generation formed at that time retained these principles for decades.)

V. A. Maklakov evokes in his memoirs a significant episode that occurred during the congress of the Zemstvos in 1905, when the wave of pogroms against the Jews and intellectuals had just swept through and [there were] pogroms directed against landowners. Only Leo Tolstoy, who enjoyed a unique position in society, could afford to say that, for him, the Jewish question was in the 81st place.

A collection of articles entitled Shchit [The Shield] was published in 1915: it took on globally and exclusively the defence of the Jews, these [writers] were either Russian or Ukrainian…. A few samples:

—L. Andreev: “The prospect of an approaching solution to the Jewish problem brings about a feeling of ‘joy close to fervour’, the feeling of being freed from a pain that has accompanied me all my life,” which was like “a hump on the back”; “I breathed poisonous air…”

—M. Gorky: “The great European thinkers consider that the psychic structure of the Jew is culturally higher, more beautiful than that of the Russian.” (He then rejoiced at the development in Russia of the sect of the Sabbatists and that of the “New Israel”.)

—P. Maliantovitch: “The arbitrariness to which the Jews are subjected is a reproach which, like a stain, covers the name of the Russian people… The best among the Russians feel it as a shame that pursues you all your life. We are barbarians among the civilised peoples of humanity… we are deprived of the precious right to be proud of our people… The struggle for the equal rights of the Jews represents for the Russian man… a national cause of prime importance…

—L. Andreev: “It is we, the Russians, who are the Jews of Europe; our border, it is precisely the Pale of Settlement.”…

Everything had begun with the “Chirikov affair,” an episode whose importance was inflated to the extreme: an explosion of rage in a small literary circle accusing Chirikov—author of a play entitled The Jews, and well disposed towards them—to be anti-Semitic. (And this because at a dinner of writers he had let himself go on to say that most of the literary critics of Saint Petersburg were Jews, but were they able to understand the reality of Russian life?)

Jabotinsky published a text … in the Slovo newspaper on 9 March 1909. He stated his fears that the majority of the progressive press wanted to silence this matter. That even a great liberal newspaper (he was referring to the Russian News) had not published a word for twenty-five years on “the atrocious persecutions suffered by the Jewish people…

Because of this tradition of silence, “one can be accused of anti-Semitism for having only pronounced the word ‘Jew’ or made the most innocent remark about some particularity of the Jews… The problem is that the Jews have become a veritable taboo that forbids the most trivial criticism, and that it’s them that are the big losers in the affair.” (Here again, we can only agree!)

Yes, insists Struve, it is essential to draw a border between the legal, the political domains and the realm where these sentiments live. “The Jewish question is both very easy and very difficult…. It is formally a question of law [and so] it is easy and natural to help solve it: to grant the Jews equal rights, and it requires great moral force and a very rational mind to, despite this repulsion, resolve definitively this question of right.”

And he concludes: “We must not deceive [our national feeling] or hide our faces… I have a right, like any Russian, to these feelings… The better it is understood… the less there will be misunderstandings in the future.” Yes… Oh, if we had woken up, as much as we are, a few decades earlier! (The Jews, them, had awakened long before the Russians.)

—And again these lines of Slovo‘s editorial team: “Harmony… implies recognition and respect for all the specificities of each [nationality].”…

Understanding this is much more important than calculating the percentage of Jews who tried to destabilise Russia (all of whom we did), who made the revolution or participated in Bolshevik power.

[May we all enjoy 5783! In fact may we live to see it! — MM]

The post Happiness for Rosh Hashana appeared first on Granite Grok.

Merrimack Democrat Rosemarie Rung styles herself as a people before politics person, which is so absurd it is beyond laughable. If you don’t believe me, look at her voting record. It is a long trail of breadcrumbs that, when followed, leads to the truth.

And it’s not something from which Rung can hide. To her, politics is more important than parents, students, taxpayers, and just about everyone. Your rights begin and end where she says, and her government allows.

She is a government-first Democrat, and by definition, that puts politics before people.

 

Rung’s Voting Record

Parental Control
voted AGAINST establishing the parental bill of rights ( 2022 HB1431, 2022 HB1431 )
voted AGAINST giving parents more information about students‘ assessments ( 2021 HB194 )
voted AGAINST parental choice regarding face masks ( 2022 HB1131 )
voted AGAINST parental choice regarding intrusive surveys ( 2022 HB1639 )
voted FOR bypassing parental choice regarding vaccinations ( 2022 HB1126 )
voted FOR restricting parental choice in determining the best educational opportunity for their children ( 2021 HB251 )

Education
voted AGAINST education choice ( 2021 CACR3, 2021 HB278, 2021 HB282, 2021 HB388, 2021 HB609, 2022 HB1132, 2022 HB1298 )
voted AGAINST letting parents sue if their child’s school neglects to protect students from bullying ( 2021 HB140 )
voted AGAINST requiring students to pass a civics test ( 2021 HB319, 2021 HB320 )
voted FOR repealing the education freedom account program. ( 2022 HB1683 )
voted FOR restricting education choice ( 2022 HB1120, 2022 HB1516, 2022 HB1684 )

Cost of Living
voted AGAINST prohibiting a sales tax ( 2021 CACR2 )
voted AGAINST prohibiting an income tax ( 2019 CACR12, 2021 CACR1 )
voted AGAINST reducing costs of energy ( 2021 HB373, 2022 HR17 )
voted AGAINST reducing electric rates ( 2019 HB477 )
voted AGAINST reducing electric rates by allowing more use of methane as a fuel ( 2019 HB157 )
voted AGAINST reducing the cost of electricity ( 2021 HB614 )
voted AGAINST reducing the interest & dividends tax ( 2019 HB185 )
voted AGAINST requiring a super-majority vote to override a property tax cap ( 2021 SB52 )
voted FOR creating a new tax on capital gains ( 2019 HB686 )
voted FOR creating an additional tax on room rentals ( 2019 HB641, 2019 HB641 )
voted FOR creating an income tax with rates set by an unelected bureaucrat ( 2019 HB712, 2019 SB1, 2020 HB712 )
voted FOR creating an income tax, and new taxes on capital gains, vaping, and sports betting; increasing business taxes ( 2019 HB2, 2019 HB2 )
voted FOR doubling and tripling various fees ( 2019 HB682 )
voted FOR higher electric rates ( 2020 SB124 )
voted FOR higher electric rates for most users ( 2019 SB165 )
voted FOR higher electricity costs ( 2019 SB72 )
voted FOR higher property taxes for most owners ( 2021 SB102 )
voted FOR increasing electricity costs by at least $30 million per year ( 2019 SB168 )
voted FOR increasing residential electric bills ( 2020 SB122 )
voted FOR increasing the cost of electricity ( 2019 HB715 )
voted FOR making it easier for municipalities to raise taxes ( 2022 HB1342 )
voted FOR raising taxes on small businesses ( 2019 HB623 )
voted FOR requiring state taxpayers to make up for poor investments by the Retirement Board ( 2022 HB1417, 2022 HB1417, 2022 HB1417, 2022 HB1417 )

Election Integrity
voted AGAINST ensuring that absentee ballots are not sent to unregistered persons ( 2022 HB1153 )
voted AGAINST ensuring that drivers’ licenses cannot be used by non-citizens to vote ( 2019 HB471 )
voted AGAINST improving the procedures for ongoing verification of the voter checklists ( 2021 HB285 )
voted AGAINST requesting absentee voters to verify their identity ( 2021 HB292 )
voted AGAINST requiring that voters without valid photo id must provide documentation within 7 days ( 2022 SB418, 2022 SB418 )
voted FOR making it easier for illegal aliens to get a driver’s license ( 2019 HB397 )
voted FOR making it easier for non-citizens to vote ( 2020 HB1700 )
voted FOR making it easier for non-residents to vote in NH ( 2019 SB67 )
voted FOR making it easier for nonresident aliens to vote illegally ( 2022 HB1093 )
voted FOR making it easier for out-of-staters to vote in NH ( 2019 HB105, 2019 HB106 )
voted FOR making voter fraud easier by allowing anyone to vote absentee ( 2019 HB611 )

Constitutional Rights
voted AGAINST giving the legislature a role in declaring emergencies ( 2022 HB275 )
voted AGAINST prohibiting the state from mandating businesses to require vaccinations ( 2022 HB1495 )
voted AGAINST property rights ( 2021 HB402, 2022 HB414 )
voted AGAINST protecting constitutional rights during a state of emergency ( 2021 HB440 )
voted AGAINST protecting religious liberty during a state of emergen y ( 2021 HB542, 2021 HB542 )
voted AGAINST repealing a law that prohibits free speech on public property near abortion clinics ( 2019 HB124, 2022 HB1625, 2022 HB1625 )
voted AGAINST rights of conscience ( 2021 HB63 )
voted AGAINST rights of conscience for medical professionals ( 2022 HB1080 )
voted AGAINST rights of conscience regarding vaccination mandates ( 2022 HB1210, 2022 HB1379, 2022 HB1455, 2022 HB1490, 2022 HB1604 )
voted AGAINST self-defense ( 2019 HB208 )
voted AGAINST the right of self defense ( 2021 HB197 )
voted AGAINST the right to keep and bear arms ( 2021 CACR8, 2021 HB195, 2021 HB196, 2021 HB307, 2021 SB141, 2021 SB141, 2021 SB154, 2022 HB1178 )
voted FOR confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens without any due process ( 2019 HB696, 2019 HB696, 2019 HB696, 2020 HB1660, 2020 HB687 )
voted FOR protecting criminals by disarming law-abiding citizens on school property ( 2019 HB564, 2019 HB564, 2019 HB564 )
voted FOR requiring law-abiding citizens, but not criminals, to undergo a background check for any transfer of firearms ( 2019 HB109, 2020 HB1379, 2022 HB1668 )
voted FOR requiring law-abiding citizens, but not criminals, to wait 3 days before obtaining a firearm ( 2020 HB1101 )
voted FOR restricting property rights ( 2021 HB177, 2021 HB177 )
voted FOR restricting the right to keep and bear arms ( 2022 HB1096, 2022 HB1151 )

Right to Life
voted AGAINST collecting abortion statistics ( 2019 HB158 )
voted AGAINST prohibiting abortions after 24 weeks ( 2021 HB625, 2021 HB625 )
voted FOR weakening the right to life ( 2022 HB1609 )

Other
voted AGAINST allowing schools to display “In God We Trust”and “Live Free or Die” ( 2021 HB69 )
voted AGAINST exempting kids’ lemonade stands from licensing requirements ( 2021 HB183 )
voted AGAINST repealing the mandate that schools provide menstrual products ( 2021 HB458 )
voted AGAINST right to join or not join a union ( 2021 SB61 )
voted FOR allowing towns to ban plastic bags ( 2020 HB102 )

The post Bad Votes by Politics Before People Rosemarie Rung (D, Merrimack) appeared first on Granite Grok.