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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) April 11, 2024

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

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

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

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

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

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