You live in a strange world when existing laws regarding obscenity and age-appropriate material are ineffectual at preventing adults from exposing children to explicit sexual content. But that’s where we are. If you want to show porn to kids, work in a public school.

That’s a great loophole, given that the majority of pedophiles try to find work in public schools. That’s where the children are, by law, they have to be there, and in some states, they make it as difficult as possible to let them out of that paddock. Homeschools, private schools, and charter schools are constantly under attack from a government more interested in how it has deformed education than anything that amounts to learning.

And ironically, not all porn is allowed in schools, but that is not book banning.

Into this circus atmosphere comes HB 1419, an act “relative to prohibiting obscene or harmful sexual materials in schools.” [Public Hearing: 01/18/2024 09:30 am LOB 205-207] It defines and outlines things that are otherwise common sense definitions reiterated to make the educator-class understand that showing kids cartoons of sex (or descriptions of same) is inappropriate, mentally disturbing, and should be illegal (generalized for brevity).

Call to Action! – Keep reading past the video to see how you can help right now!

Again, why we have to do this is a question that can only be answered by groomers and pedos in the public schools and their political progressive defenders. The latter will be nearly universal in their opposition, which will make for good copy.

Democrats insist on exposing kids to sexually explicit content. Something that, outside the school room, gets you arrested. If you are unclear about the distinction, Allison Dyer of Nashua made time to frame that distinction in a recent video.

!function(r,u,m,b,l,e){r._Rumble=b,r[b]||(r[b]=function(){(r[b]._=r[b]._||[]).push(arguments);if(r[b]._.length==1){l=u.createElement(m),e=u.getElementsByTagName(m)[0],l.async=1,l.src="https://rumble.com/embedJS/u359331"+(arguments[1].video?'.'+arguments[1].video:'')+"/?url="+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+"&args="+encodeURIComponent(JSON.stringify([].slice.apply(arguments))),e.parentNode.insertBefore(l,e)}})}(window, document, "script", "Rumble");

Rumble("play", {"video":"v44kizz","div":"rumble_v44kizz"});

 

And fear not, groomers and pedos, and those with Munchhaeus by proxy, you can still order these ‘books,’ just like 50 Shades of Gray, online, allowing you unfettered access in seconds (digitally) or a day or two (for hard copy fans). Just don’t go thinking you can walk up to some kid at random and share it with them. As Allison points out, that might get you arrested.

Now!

Would you like to help advance this bill? You can without leaving the comfort of wherever you feel comfortable using your phone, laptop, or desktop PC. Heck, you can do it if you’re uncomfortable or pleasantly indifferent to your current state.

• Click this link to go to the NH House calendar.
• Scroll down and select “Remote Sign In”
• Fill in the requested information, Name, Address, etc.
• On the Calendar below those fields select January 18th
• Scroll down and using the drop-down, choose the education committee.
• Choose Bill number HB1419.
• Identify yourself (as a member of the public unless you are one of the other selections).
• Select ‘I support the Bill” – then scroll to the bottom and click submit.

You don’t have to write or say anything, but we’d appreciate it if you would share this post or the link everywhere. A strong showing of support from NH Residents is essential to help move this legislation forward.

The Dems do this with a passion, so we must too. The Children need us to defend them. I hope you’ll help.

 

 

The post Call to Action: Relative To Prohibiting Obscene or Harmful Sexual Materials in Schools appeared first on Granite Grok.

A proposed constitutional amendment (CACR 12) has been put forward, which would amend Article 83 of the state constitution by replacing the word ‘cherish’ with the word ‘cherish.’

Say what?

The idea is that currently, the word means whatever it meant in 1784. And we need to replace it with whatever it means in 2024. That is, we would leave the word the same but change the meaning.

Which is what courts do all the time. (It says ‘fee’?  Well, it means ‘tax’. It says ‘shall not’? Well, it means ‘may sometimes, with our approval.’  And so on.)  So it’s clever. But too clever by half.

The amendment doesn’t specify a particular reference work for either definition. But if we look at the etymology of the word, we find that in the 14th century, it meant

hold as dear; treat with tenderness and affection

And in 2024, it means

to treat with affection and tenderness; hold dear

So unless the definition changed before 1784 and then changed back, the meaning has been constant, and there would be absolutely no significance to the proposed ‘change.’

Which means it fails even as an attempt at humor.

But it also completely misses the larger point, which is that we could change the word ‘cherish’ to a word that isn’t even a word, like ‘sorbelate’ or ‘presmonify’, and it wouldn’t really matter.  In the clause in question,

it shall be the duty of the legislators and magistrates, in all future periods of this government, to cherish the interest of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries and public schools,

the crucial word is the word and, highlighted above.

That is, whatever ‘cherish’ — or ‘sorbelate’, or ‘presmonify’ — means, it must mean the same thing for both seminaries and public schools.

And it’s less important what you can do to cherish these institutions, than what you can’t do.

In particular, the state can’t fund, operate, or regulate a seminary. So it can’t do any of those things for public schools, either.

However, all three branches of government have been acting as if

A and B

means

B but not A

If we’re going to ‘fix’ Article 83 by either changing or affirming the definition of a word, then the word to focus on is and, rather than cherish.

And once we’ve straightened that out, we can look, in the same article,

Free and fair competition in the trades and industries is an inherent and essential right of the people and should be protected against all monopolies and conspiracies which tend to hinder or destroy it.

…at the word all — which, in any dictionary, would include the current government monopoly on schools.

 

The post Article 83 – It’s Not about ‘cherish’, It’s about ‘and’ appeared first on Granite Grok.

For an oldster like me, the current inner-city violence and destruction is only the next stage of an agenda that was underway even before my male-gender birth. Certain past highlights now stand out as former unnoticed signals yet have planted the formational seeds for today’s hateful attitudes and cultural cleansing.

One such event needs to be used as a comparative then versus now lesson. This was JFK’s memorable 1961 Inaugural Address in which he stated: “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” This preceded his equally famous, “And so my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”

WOW, sacrifice, God Bless America, and Mom’s apple pie flow throughout. However, this national pledge has grown some “maybes” and “what ifs,” which, in hindsight, were preparatory signs of today’s dysfunctional state.

Some who were elected have been impatient and have juiced up this agenda, yet it’s still the same dysfunctional cloud, regardless of its rate of speed. Past moments captured various officials, including Presidents, stating that the most solemn duty of the Oval Office is “having to send men off to war.” Given this acknowledgment, coupled with our Constitutional mandate for declaring war prior to that “most solemn duty,” past actions were either a general dysfunctional act(s) or were inherently criminal!

I fully accept that with today’s super sensitive atmosphere, neither term is welcomed, but being offended is not illegal and sometimes necessary. Since this topic involves many tens of thousands of lives, being offended is the least of our concerns, as it should be when the law is hanging in the balance.

This slice of American waywardness is but one example. It seems that policies are instituted until other priorities arise. This was perfectly clear when our support for a “friend” and our “oppose any foe” devotion faded from the pledge.

JFK’s “liberty” has now been recalculated to beachfront resorts on the China Sea, along with doing commerce with communist regimes. It just might be that the word “dysfunctional” is, in fact, too soft!

Concern should be directed to the government’s continuing dereliction of duty since it remains appropriate with today’s quagmires, all of which were fomented gradually as test cases at their intervening level of importance. Also, this issue of war, centering around the needless loss of American lives, ceased to be important when today’s volunteer military lessened both public interest and debate.

However, closer to home, this is not the case with today’s latest and highly publicized dysfunction. Supposedly, the dearest and most precious possession that brings us meaning with its joy and nurturing is the birth of our children. This is natural, desired, and, above all, a societal requirement. But not so today! Without getting into the dysfunctional corridors of selecting one’s gender, let’s just say again the word dysfunctional doesn’t do it justice.

I’ll wrap up this un-Godly nonsense by pointing to the current crop of dysfunctional parents who themselves have, in many cases, been similarly influenced in their youth through their own wayward rearing. As previously stated, for too long, all of this comes and goes quietly as “Joe Q Public” goes about his or her daily functions. This “let it be” attitude has become fundamental, one which, in all likelihood, was that communist singer’s intent. Nevertheless, it serves to weaken America’s resolve for all that is worth tackling.

Today, the tougher the chore, the less likely it’ll be addressed. Modern man and woman now choose to “let it be!” Our country wasn’t founded, nor did she gain freedom with easy tasks. Those Americans were proud, determined, and hardy. They made friends with the difficult since chopping wood determined warmth and dinner.

In contrast, our modern conveniences have brought an unhealthy degree of ease into our living. Such luxury often produces boredom, which in turn usually breeds either discontent, jealousy, immorality, hatred, or violence. What is missing is the inner peace and contentment derived from one’s pursuits of a purposeful, challenging, and fulfilling life, all while being guided by his or her faith.

 

The post Offensive but Accurate appeared first on Granite Grok.

Saturday afternoon at “the Aud” in Barre I attended the Republican Party of Vermont’s committee meeting. My reasons for attending were twofold, namely to get a sense of the party (I am a lifelong Independent) and listen for their pitch to me as a potential candidate for the Senate or House from my progressive stronghold in Windsor County.

I rode to the event with my long-time friend Joe Trottier, who is also looking to run as a Republican for the state house now that perpetual incumbent Kevin “Coach” Christie appears to be stepping down due to health concerns. Christie, a Democrat, is one of the most likable human beings you will ever meet, whether you agree with his politics or not. Joe can be described similarly, although his personality is a bit more quixotic compared to Christie’s blue-collar statesmanship.

Entering the conference room, the bustling sound of old friends and lively hopefuls filled the air. Big names of the Vermont GOP, aside from Phil Scott, all seemed to be in attendance. Paul Dame, Gerald Malloy, Scott Milne, and others who have spent their years grinding away at the political wheel worked the room deftly as any Vermont Republican might, politely and with a smile and savvy unique to Green Mountaineers. As a flatlander from the West Coast, I stood out like a sore thumb for my lack of a plaid shirt, Carhart pants, and sensible winter boots. 

A brief conversation with Mr. Dame reassured me he at least understands his role as a political leader. Strong eye contact and sharp listening skills are accompanied by political insight into strategy and need. After an inviting invocation to the Lord asking for His blessing on the day’s event, followed by a hearty pledge of allegiance, Dame gave the VT GOP equivalent of a State of the Union address couched as a motivational speech. His overriding message? If we don’t establish some party unity, the progressives are going to continue to eat our lunch and tell us we have to pay for it. Neither the prayer nor his plea would win the day.

After a run through the respective county roll call, where individual names were confirmed for member representatives to vote on the meeting’s issues, the procedure made it alphabetically all the way to the last county, mine, Windsor – when the fireworks began. Upon calling the name John McGovern as chair of Windsor County, an “objection” was raised, followed by a series of back-and-forth “points of order” and “appeals” until a man from Windsor County stood up and read a letter describing the nature of the objection.

Trying hard to follow the technical language that invoked “Robert’s rules” and other party statutes, it was clear the Windsor Committee was in disarray. It seemed the committee had swollen thanks to new membership, and many of them had grown disenchanted with Mr. McGovern for what they described as “dereliction of duty.” It was implied the committee’s attempt to force McGovern to resign was wrongfully nullified thanks in part to both McGovern’s unwillingness to recognize their authority and the state GOP inconveniently scheduling a meeting for the same day as theirs. The next twenty or so minutes saw “point of order” after “point of order” and “appeal” after “appeal” until McGovern was asked to explain his side in the matter. An older man with a gaunt and wizened Ivy League presentation began his defense by reminiscing his grandfather’s wisdom “never to get into a pissing contest with a skunk.”  Amidst groans and protests, he attempted to backtrack the comment, but the insult had been made. 

A lengthy explanation of the vote to recognize McGovern as the chair and rightful voter passed when a man at the back of the room launched into an expletive-laced complaint where he slammed a chair into the wooden floor calling “b***s**t,” Dame “a Democrat,” and referred to “the uniparty” as the Windsor clan stood up and began to walk out. To Dame’s credit, I thought he handled the entire ordeal with dignity and fairness.

Outside, I overheard McGovern explain to another attendee that he didn’t want Trump on the ballot and to oppose Trump is “pro-Republican.”  This struck me as odd given Trump’s overwhelming popularity with the national party, and when I asked him about it, McGovern became defensive and shortly used terms like “crazy” to dismiss the case for Trump or his supporters. My next question to him was, “Do you think Joe Biden won the 2020 election?” to which he asserted he absolutely did. I asked if he’d seen D’nesh D’souza’s “2,000 Mules”, and he told me he went to Dartmouth with D’nesh, hadn’t seen the film, and dismissed both as “crazy.”

Moments later, another man from the meeting came out to McGovern’s case, which shortly turned into his describing a friend who he trusts with his life but is “nuts” for believing 9/11 was an inside job before demonizing Alex Jones’ involvement with Sandy Hook. Neither point had anything to do with Trump or the coming election. It was an emotional appeal, given he’d cried the day of the shooting and took the time to carve out the names of the children in a memorial he would personally take to Newtown, CT. 

Surely, the man’s gesture was sincere, but it doesn’t warrant labeling those who question either story as “crazy.”  There is enough public evidence of our government being weaponized against its citizens and media systematically lying about it to at least give credence to those who question the popular stories.  In fact, that’s what the constitution these conservatives claim to want to conserve is built upon – the necessity of protecting dissenting voices.  I can only imagine how many Brits and crown sympathizers referred to the revolutionaries as “crazy” to go up against the established colonial power. 

Dismissing others as “crazy” and “nuts” has become the easiest way to avoid in-depth political conversations. No appeal to reason or additional facts and evidence can be mounted to take the dialogue further with people who use diagnostic terms to degrade or belittle people with differing opinions. What results is the Hatfield’s vs. McCoy’s effect which exists already between Republicans and Democrats, though now appears to be bifurcating the Republican party – never Trumpers vs. MAGA.

I went outside to ask the Windsor delegate for more clarification, and they refused on the grounds they speak as a group, so I shared my contact info in hopes I would have the chance to understand the deeper nature of the rift.

As an outsider looking into potentially supporting the Vermont GOP as a viable candidate, I was left disappointed at their seeming inability to set aside what are ultimately petty differences when faced with the real political threat – the supermajority in Montpelier and the establishment in D.C.  These are the questions I hope they’ll consider:

How can you expect to win if you can’t even finish a simple meeting without devolving into chaos?

If Trump won in 2016 and received a record 12 million more votes in 2020, why would you not back such a strong candidate?

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have the lowest approval ratings in history. Biden is demonstrably mentally unfit, and Harris isn’t taken seriously as a candidate by her own party. Can you not see the Democrats have the weakest candidates in their history, yet you’re letting them dictate to you about likely the strongest you’ve had in Trump?

Is it possible you have adopted the very talking points given by a media that ranks as the second least trusted institution in the country, behind only Congress (who championed the “insurrection” narrative)?

If more than one million Democrats left the party to become Republicans following the 2020 election, what does that tell you?

If over half the country thinks the election was stolen, including some 30 percent of Democrats, why would you oppose the most popular Republican candidate?

From my vantage point, the Republican Party has never been in a better position to take back ground in the state of Vermont. From the unpopularity of DEI and the climate agenda, the failing education system, the attack on families, parents, and gender, the rising cost of gas and housing, and the soaring crime rate, winning back seats in Congress should be easier than getting an extra mail-in ballot.

The problem doesn’t appear to be a lack of unity but a lack of courage to call out the actually crazy party – the one that calls mothers “birthing persons,” says women can have penises while not being able to define a woman, drag-queens should read to children, children should have sex organs removed, we should ban gas-stoves yet tolerate genocidal language regarding Jews, the people who ended slavery are inherently racist, ad nauseum – are the same ones saying Trump is the biggest threat to America – and you agree with them?

What say you grand ol’ party?

The Lord from whom you sought guidance says this:

 If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other. (Galatians 5:15)

The post VT GOP – Call Me Crazy but…. appeared first on Granite Grok.

With nearly 36,000 square miles, you can put the other five New England states inside Maine’s borders. Madawaska is a little town located at the top of Aroostook County and is the northernmost town in New England. It is home to around 3,800 residents.

If those residents wanted to take the 400-mile ride to Kittery, the southernmost town in Maine, in their snappy Tesla sedan, they would have to add about 6 hours of charge time to the 6 hours of drive time. An EV would double the time of the trip, and that is IF they could find a charging station. Maine has only 216 high-speed charging stations but over 1,200 gas stations. Using a 6-pump average per station makes 7,200 gas pumps versus 216 charging stations.

Does that sound like the Maine infrastructure is ready for an EV Mandate? I think not. But that is precisely what the Democrat leadership is trying to ram down Mainer’s throat. By the way, Maine is also a frigid state in Winter, and EV batteries lose a tremendous amount of energy running the heaters to keep the batteries warm and viable. A long stretch of RTE 95 is the last place you want to spend a cold winter night in a dead EV, but it will happen.

The Maine Board of Environmental Protection had been scheduled to vote on December 21 on the Advanced Clean Cars II Program, which initially proposed to require 43% of new vehicles sold in Maine to be zero emission by the 2027 model year, increasing to 82% by 2032. The December 18 storm closed the capitol and delayed the vote. A slight change has been made, and the 2028 Model year has replaced the 2027.

They can play with dates and percentages. But I still question the constitutionality of the government mandating the type of car we can own or which appliances we can choose. There seems to be a disregard for the Constitution at the Federal and State levels. Where did the government get this power or liberty, whether it is the type of car or leaf blower, replacing our gas with an electric stove, or controlling our preference for air conditioners? What about our liberty?

According to independent surveys, only 6% of Americans prefer EVs, a far cry from a majority. Hertz announced this week they are selling off 20,000 EVs and restocking with gas-powered vehicles. Hertz customers do not want EVs because of the limitations on where to travel and the extra travel time with frequent charging. The company is losing millions because it jumped on the government EV train.

America was built on the free market and free means of choice, not mandates. There are over 280 million cars in America that the Biden Administration is rendering worthless. Not only will our cars be of no value when forced to replace them with an EV, but where will we scrap nearly 300 million personal vehicles, and when will the government turn its attention to commercial and agricultural? It is unsurprising, but Biden did not think this whole scenario through. He also didn’t get the advice of the car industry or, more importantly, the drivers. Biden, Buttigieg, Kerry, and Granholm know better than we do. The problem is they consistently prove themselves wrong. This case is just another, and Maine is on the wrong side of right or wrong, too.

The post Bear Pond Conservative Chronicles: Why Do Democrats Think Maine Is Ready For EVs appeared first on Granite Grok.

Effective presentation skills are essential for anyone who wants to convey ideas, influence decisions, and make an impact. Whether you’re speaking in front of a large audience or presenting to a small group, mastering the art of public speaking can elevate your professional and personal endeavors.

In this blog, we’ll explore What is Presentation Skills and some fundamental principles of Presentation Skills that can help you become a more confident and persuasive speaker.

Table of Contents

• Know Your Audience
• Structure Your Content
• Engage Your Audience
• Practice, Practice, Practice
• Use Visual Aids Wisely
• Manage Nervousness
• Seek Feedback and Learn from Experience
• Embrace Authenticity
• Continuous Improvement
• Conclusion

Know Your Audience

Delivering an effective presentation starts with knowing your audience. Take into account their experience, passions, and expertise in the area. Make your message more relevant and interesting by adjusting the content and delivery method to appeal to your target demographic. Be it stakeholders, customers, or coworkers, understanding your audience will enable you to engage with them more deeply. 

Structure Your Content

It is simpler for your audience to follow and comprehend a well-structured presentation. Start your presentation with a concise opening that summarises the key ideas you will cover and explains its purpose. Use titles and transitions to help your audience navigate your presentation as you arrange your material into logical parts. Finish on a high note that captures the essence of your argument and makes an impact. 

Engage Your Audience

Keeping your audience interested and paying attention requires engagement. Include interactive features, humour, or narrative to add interest to your presentation. Bring up questions, promote involvement, and include your audience in the conversation. This keeps people interested and makes the encounter more significant and unforgettable. 

Practice, Practice, Practice

You’ll become more polished and self-assured the more you practise your presentation. Practise your delivery many times, focusing on your body language, tempo, and vocal tone. To pinpoint your areas for growth, practise in front of a mirror or videotape yourself. Seeking input from mentors or coworkers might help you get insightful opinions. 

Use Visual Aids Wisely

Slides, movies, or props are visual aids that may improve your presentation and support your main points. But it’s crucial to utilise them sensibly and avoid becoming too dependent on them. Use your visual aids to support, not detract from, your spoken remarks. Keep them straightforward and uncomplicated. Make sure they are clear to see and comprehend from any angle in the space. 

Manage Nervousness

Although being anxious before a presentation is normal, controlling your anxiety is crucial to giving a polished presentation. Before you talk, try relaxation exercises to help you de-stress, including deep breathing or visualisation. Instead of concentrating on your nervousness, think about your audience and the message you want to deliver. Recall that anxiety is often seen as excitement, so accept it as an indication that you are invested in your presentation. 

Seek Feedback and Learn from Experience

Ask your audience or other coworkers for comments after your presentation. Request detailed input on things like delivery, engagement, and clarity. Use this input to pinpoint your presentation’s strong points and areas for development, then apply it to subsequent ones. Over time, you’ll improve your presenting abilities and become a more polished speaker by drawing lessons from each event. 

Embrace Authenticity

Being real is essential to building a relationship of trust with your audience. In your presentation, be yourself and allow your personality to come through. Sharing personal tales or experiences relevant to your subject may establish a more intimate connection with your audience. Authenticity increases credibility and trust, amplifying your message’s impact and recall. Adopting authenticity also makes you feel more at ease and self-assured, which calms anxieties and improves your performance in general.

Continuous Improvement

Just like any other talent, presentation abilities may be developed with time. Adopt a mentality that emphasises ongoing development and look for chances to improve your presentation skills. Enrol in training sessions for presenting skills, seminars, or workshops to learn fresh perspectives and methods. Remain receptive to criticism and be prepared to modify and advance your strategy in light of new information. You can remain on top of trends and provide more memorable presentations that connect with your audience by always working to improve your presenting abilities.

Conclusion

Gaining presentation proficiency is an invaluable skill that will help you in both your personal and professional life. You may develop into a more certain and convincing speaker by knowing your audience, organising your material, including them, rehearsing often, using visual aids, controlling your anxiety, getting feedback, and learning from mistakes. Using these core ideas will enable you to provide presentations that educate, motivate, and persuade audiences, whether you’re giving them in a conference room, boardroom, or classroom.

The post Presentation Skills 101: Fundamental Principles for Success appeared first on Granite Grok.

Attorney Brian D. Kenyon of the Marshall Law Office in East Kingston, NH, has been suspended by the NH Supreme Court pending final resolution by the NH Professional Conduct Committee (PCC).

The suspension stems from allegations by the NH Attorney Discipline Office (ADO) that Kenyon, who was admitted to the NH Bar in 1978, violated a number of professional conduct rules in 2022 and 2023. The most significant allegation accuses Kenyon of failure to supervise a Paralegal at the law firm. Kenyon, who is no stranger to ethics violations, was reprimanded in 2016 for violating “duties owed to a client,” in which the ADO concluded that “Mr. Kenyon’s mental state was negligent with respect to his client.”

According to recent case documents obtained at the NH Law Library and the NH Supreme Court, the ADO alleges a number of ethics violations against Kenyon. The most significant of which is that Kenyon allegedly failed to supervise paralegal Keri J. Marshall who was a former attorney and is the current and longtime owner of the Marshall Law office. Marshall, who was admitted to the NH bar in 1987, once specialized in family law. She resigned from the NH bar while under investigation by the ADO in 2022. The specific reasoning for the ADO’s investigation of Marshall has not been disclosed.

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

Marshall is no stranger to ethics violations herself. According to ADO records, she was censured in 2012 for a number of ethics violations, including directing an office employee to file an affidavit testifying that she had notified Daniel Shepard (an adverse party) of an “Assented to Motion to Continue” (agreement on rescheduling). Shepard, who was representing himself Pro Se against his ex-wife and her then-council Marshall, successfully proved that he was never notified of the Assented to Motion to Continue. Marshall was subsequently censured by the ADO with aggravating factors, including failure to fully cooperate with the ADO and failure to take responsibility for her misconduct. For her actions, Marshall received a public censure with sanctions. Marshall was permitted to continue practicing law without any suspension.

The recent allegations against Kenyon stem from two separate independent complaints by Timothy Bickford and Michael Kimball. Bickford’s complaint alleges that Kenyon, who represented his ex-wife in a recent family court matter, failed to supervise Marshall and that she, as a paralegal, was falsely representing herself as an active attorney at the Marshall Law firm. Kimball’s complaint alleges that he met alone with Marshall (a paralegal – nonattorney) at her law office in 2023, and he received legal advice from her and was subsequently billed for the meeting. He later learned that Marshall was not a licensed attorney. Kenyon, the only attorney at the firm, is responsible for the behavior of all staff members, including paralegals. These complaints to the ADO, by both Bickford and Kimball, have resulted in new accusations against Kenyon by the ADO where both Kenyon and Marshall appear to have dug themselves into a deep hole.

The ADO allegations against Kenyon and Marshall should not come as a surprise to many residing in the seacoast area. The Marshall Law office has a notorious reputation for ruthless and ignoble tactics in the realm of the family court. Online reviews on lawyers.com speak for themselves. Some of the reviews state: “She is the most dishonest person on the planet,” “She lies and encourages her clients to lie,” and “Honestly the most dishonest attorney in the state. Quick to lie and without a stitch of morals. A trust piece of subhuman garbage”, “She drags out a divorce as long as possible to make it as expensive as possible for her clients. She is always late for hearings, which costs everyone more money. She will keep the fight going as long as she possibly can, and if children are involved, she will lie”.

Presently, there are no licensed attorneys working at the Marshall Law Firm. However, the public is generally unaware of this. The Marshall Law sign still hangs in front of the law office at 47 Depot Road in East Kingston.

Stay tuned for Part 2 of this series when I discuss the details of the ADO allegations against Kenyon and Marshall and report on developments in ADO’s case.

 

The views and opinions expressed by contributors are those of the author and may not reflect the opinion or position of Grok Media, GraniteGrok.com, its authors, advertisers, donors, or sponsors.

The post Trouble Brewing again at the Marshall Law Firm in East Kingston appeared first on Granite Grok.

A January 14th poll on the Iowa caucus had Trump in the lead with 55% of the vote. Haley was 21, DeSantis at 15, Ramaswamy at 5, Christie (dropped out), and Hutchinson at 2%. Iowans caucused last night and declared their choice for the Republican Nominee.

Trump won with 51% of the vote, DeSantis managed to secure second with 21%, Haley coming in third at 19%. Vivek, failing to do better than 4th place, announced his withdrawal from the race after only attracting 8% of the vote.

Ramaswamy endorsed Trump on his way out of the race Monday night, and the two were already closely ideologically aligned. According to an average of recent polls that asked Republican primary voters their second choice for president, a plurality — 42 percent — of Ramaswamy supporters nationwide said Trump.

It was a similar story in New Hampshire, where an average of 39 percent of Ramaswamy voters said Trump was their second choice.

Ramaswamy has also endorsed Trump.

That might make a difference in New Hampshire, where St Anselm’s latest poll (1/12/24) has Trump at 45, Haley at 31, Christie at 9, DeSantis at 6, and Ramaswamy at 6. There is always some debate about these polls, but if this one is accurate, Haley could scoop up Christie’s voters and come up with five theoretical points, but Trump could likewise get Vivek’s.

Given the influence of independents in the New Hampshire primary – who can choose to vote on either party ballot – the thinking is that this is why Haley is doing so well or will. The Independents helped to keep Sununu in office for four terms, and he is a ruling-class RINO machine politician like Haley. It is not a stretch to suggest she might win New Hampshire, given the collapse of DeSantis and the departure of every other anyone-but-Trump candidate.

It is a three-person race on paper, but after Iowa, it might only be two. Desantis did not meet expectations, not even close, and  Haley appears likely to crush DeSantis in New Hampshire, not that this drama matters much to Trump. The most recent national polls have Trump/Haley at 69/12, a fifty-seven-point lead for the former president. While a close shave in the Granite State might help Haley attract more anyone but Trump fence-sitters (and that is a thing), she has a very big hill to climb but plenty of establishment money to attempt it.

Still, Mr. Trump’s lock on the nomination continues to be his to lose.

Tune In

We haven’t advertised this much yet, but the ‘Grok and The 603 Alliance will be on Radio Row in Manchester in the lead-up to New Hampshire’s First in the Nation Primary. We’ve got local and national guests lined up (in-person and phone interviews), and despite some last-minute wrangling, we appear to be ready to roll, assuming the equipment or the folks running it (me, for example) don’t run into trouble.

At present, we intend to stream to the ‘Grok Twitter feed as Musk’s X has made it about as easy as you can get. Facebook, too, I suspect – also relatively easy to set up. I’ll announce the final digital destinations as soon as I know they are working, which might be Sunday morning before we start. The interviews and commentary will commence on January 21st from 9 am to 5 pm and continue again on Monday and Tuesday, same bat time, same bat channel.

If you happen to be in the DoubleTree in Manchester, come find us!

The post Trump Wins Iowa Caucus, DeSantis Second, Haley Third – Ramaswamy Drops Out appeared first on Granite Grok.

A few nights ago, a violent pro-Hamas mob attempted to storm the Whitehouse. But they are not insurrectionists, and let me explain why. The United States of America is now the Apartheid State of America. There are different rules.

If you belong to the Left … pro-Hamas, BLM, Antifa … you get to storm the Whitehouse, and it is a mostly peaceful protest, and you aren’t charged with any crimes. Can’t upset the voting blocs the Left counts on.

But if you do not belong to the Left, you are presumptively an insurrectionist. And you face years of jail time for peacefully walking through the Capitol after the Capitol Police opened the doors to you and let you in.

To cut to the chase, America is an apartheid state based on where you rate on the woke scale. The more woke you are, the more rights and privileges you get. And vice versa.

JUST IN: Pro-Palestine protesters try to breach the security fence outside of the White House, forcing DC police to hold the fence.

If they were wearing red MAGA hats this would be all over the news.

According to @Julio_Rosas11, the fence was attacked so badly that Secret… pic.twitter.com/1vwVxE7WEe

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 14, 2024

Remember the media playing this clip of the “insurrection”?

No?

That’s b/c it was Antifa and BLM storming the White House and injuring 50+ Secret Service agents

When will the FBI arrest these “domestic terrorists”?pic.twitter.com/E6spEmzkjs

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) January 31, 2023

 

The post Don’t You Dare Call Them Isurrectionists appeared first on Granite Grok.

Digital marketing and digital agency are often used interchangeably in the digital landscape, but they differ significantly when seeking professional services in the digital space.

A digital marketing company or agency gives smart and effective marketing help. This includes boosting online search results, social media campaigns, content making for websites, email advertising, designing web pages look good and branding. It also helps with computer support. They aid companies in the online world to reach their targets, but knowing their special skills and range is very important.

In this blog, we will explore the difference between a digital marketing company and a digital agency. This way you can know which one is better for your needs.

What is Digital Marketing?

Digital marketing means the ways and methods used to show off goods or services on the internet. It includes many things such as SEO or search engine optimization, social media marketing, content marketing and email marketing. The purpose of digital marketing is to make your brand known, get people to visit your website, create chances for sales and finally turn those chances into paying customers.

What is a Digital Agency?

A digital agency is a type of business that gives different online marketing services to other companies. These services can involve making and developing websites, marketing on search engines (SEM), controlling social media. It also includes creating content and sending emails. And more too. Basically, a digital agency is like an outside marketing team for businesses. They take care of everything related to a company’s online image.

The Real Difference

In the always changing world of technology and business, it’s really important to know the difference between digital marketing and a digital agency. Although they might look alike, they have different jobs and purposes in the world of online business plans.

Definition and Scope

Digital marketing is about advertising products or services using online tools like websites, social media sites and search engines. It also includes email marketing and mobile apps. It’s about making and using ads, improving your internet presence, and looking at what customers do.

A digital firm is a business that provides various digital services to customers. This can cover things like online ads, making websites, designing pictures, creating content for people to read or see. It also includes how well a website comes up in search results and managing social media pages too. A digital agency offers full support for companies to set up and improve their online presence.

Focus and Expertise

Digital marketing mainly aims to get people aware of a brand, create leads and boost sales using different ways on the internet. Digital marketers are experts in using digital ways and tools to connect with their target people. They make interesting content and measure how good their campaigns are.

A digital agency, by comparison, gives services that go beyond digital marketing. They know a lot about different things like making websites, designing pictures and SEO. Digital companies have different teams with experts in various areas who work together to give full digital answers.

Client Engagement

Digital marketing and a digital agency might seem the same, but there’s an important difference when it comes to interacting with clients. Digital marketing is about the methods and actions used to advertise a brand or product on the internet. It typically includes tasks like using social media, improving search engine results, and sending emails.

But, a digital agency is a kind of business that gives many types of digital services to customers like marketing on the internet. But, the real change comes with how much clients get involved. A digital agency not only does digital marketing campaigns, but also gives a total approach by helping clients all the time. It gives advice and planning services too. This higher level of client involvement makes a digital agency different from just a single digital marketing service.

Collaboration vs. Outsourcing

Digital marketing and digital agencies may seem similar, but there is a real difference between the two. One key distinction is the approach to collaboration versus outsourcing. In digital marketing, businesses typically collaborate with a team or agency to develop and execute their marketing strategies. This involves close communication and involvement in the decision-making process.

On the other hand, digital agencies often provide a more outsourced service, where businesses hand over their marketing efforts entirely to the agency, allowing them to handle everything from strategy to implementation.

Cost and Scalability

When looking at digital marketing and a digital agency, one big difference is cost and how easily they can grow. Digital marketing means the ways and methods used to sell products or services on the internet, which can be done by yourself or given to a digital team. When it comes to price, online marketing lets firms have more power over their money. This is because they can pick and decide how much funds they want to give just for particular ways of advertising.

Digital companies offer access to a diverse group of experts, allowing businesses to adapt their marketing plans to their goals and budget. Digital marketing offers more flexibility, while digital agencies can handle complex campaigns due to their knowledge and tools. The choice between digital marketing or a digital agency ultimately depends on the business’s specific needs and resources.

In the end, even though digital marketing and digital agencies might look alike, there are some important differences between them. Digital marketing is about the ways we use online to tell people about products or services. A digital agency is a business that helps others with their internet advertising efforts.

Digital marketing is a part of the work done by a digital firm. This also includes making websites, managing social media, helping with search engine rankings and more. So, it’s important to know these differences when thinking about how best to use digital tools for business growth.

The post Digital Marketing Vs. Digital Agency : The Real Difference appeared first on Granite Grok.

This week, the House started public hearings on the new bills. My committee first met to review the performance audit of mental health professional licensing.

There were no surprises; the auditors found conflicting requirements, various laws not enforced, and leisurely activity by the licensing boards. Most of the statutory changes suggested have been submitted already, so this audit was mostly a map of things to be aware of as we proceeded this year.

Then we heard seven pension bills, all of which were sent to subcommittee. HB 1647 was a recommendation from the retirement commission I chaired this fall, restoring the pension multiplier to 2.5 (from a staggered 2.0 to 2.4 currently) for Group II (police, fire, corrections) employees not vested in 2011. It improves the pensions for all GII employees, including new hires. HB 1653, adding overtime back into earnable compensation for only the employed but not vested group, and HB 1673, changing the calculation of final compensation for that group, both had moderate costs that compounded the effects of other changes, so we need to be careful about increasing costs.

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

HB 1299 added the fire instructors at the community college to GII if they had at least ten years of service before becoming educators in an attempt to recruit New Hampshire professionals. Teaching is a Group I activity, and going to GI after a career in GII is generally disadvantageous for the person, both because there are some special benefits that are only available if one retires directly from a GII position and because the federal government penalizes Social Security if there is a GII pension (GII does not pay into, nor earn, Social Security benefits.) The committee was skeptical mostly because there are only two instructors in this program, and we hate making exceptions for only a few people.

HB 1211 would increase the maximum hours worked by a retiree for ten years to allow localities to hire them to cover openings. Since very few retirees work anything close to the maximum number of hours, I’m not optimistic we’ll recommend this bill.

HB 1421 requires the retirement system to hire two investment consultants rather than one and only renew the contract of the one with the better results. It’s an interesting idea and might improve the investment results, but the bill puts this competition in the wrong statute.

Finally, HB 1307 grants a $500 stipend to disability retirees who didn’t get last year’s bonus because it was restricted to those who retired after at least 20 years of service. Disability retirees don’t choose to retire early.

The committee will be holding hearings at least two days a week for a while since we have 66 new bills assigned.

The post Public Hearing’s Are Upon Us appeared first on Granite Grok.

Last week, yet another election-process challenge was argued in court: this time, federal U.S. District for New Hampshire. At issue was the sleight-of-hand unauthorized extension of primary voter dates to change party – part of a schema of Trump-haters to empower non-GOP outsiders to vote in the state GOP primary election, then to switch back to their own ‘other party’ affiliation to vote in the general election.

Crafty? Slick? This Machiavellian maneuver by high-level authorities (both government and political party leaders) was yet another scheme to keep the leading contender for U.S. President off the state general election ballot. It has a name – this disruptive practice is called a ‘tactical voting’ practice.

There have been 64 election challenges across the nation since the 2020 election results were announced, each filed by a diverse set of interested parties challenging every kind of conceivable plot and project to illegally gather, create, invent, destroy, and manipulate computer data, voter rolls, and paper ballots in ways that alter true vote outcomes. It occurs at polling offices, virtual data repositories, print shops, using ballot machines, and now by an SOS email to every precinct officer. Whether these ideas of stolen and altered election results are illusory and ill-thought or whether there is merit and true evidentiary substance to these claims is yet to be seen because of manipulation of the third branch to avoid looking and hearing these 64 case challenges.

Standing to Sue is a legal concept that bars the doors to the courthouse to those who have nothing at risk, no losses (actual or potential), and therefore, people who file a claim are deemed to be bringing spurious cases – alleged to be unfit litigants and attorneys without character, fact, or valid right to sue for relief under the law.

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

Last week saw a multitude of New Hampshire supporters show up for a court hearing where state GOP Party Committee member (and past gubernatorial challenger) Karen Testerman appeared–to explain to the judge why she should be allowed to advance her lawsuit to discovery and trial stages – a lawsuit alleging state officials quietly and irreparably altered the GOP primary voting process –causing irreparable harm if not corrected using legal process.

Testerman’s case is #65, although it is hard to keep track.

The NH SOS and GOP chairman challenged Testerman’s right to sue them (she sued along with two other GOP citizen co-parties) over their manipulations of law using the authority of office that quietly (some would say secretly) was planned to alter and corrupt the State GOP primary election outcome.

The primary election is less than two weeks away. If the government officials’ challenge to Testerman’s fundamental right to bring a law case against them is not decided, then de facto, the altered primary process will proceed with thousands of registered Democrats and Independents (now temporarily casting GOP primary votes) deciding if Donald Trump will be listed on the general election ballot this fall.

Americans have been increasingly disappointed for several decades over the collapse of the American Dream in areas of work, economic freedom, and individual reward for their hard work, discipline, risk, and product quality. The crashing American dream also includes widespread loss of faith in the political systems and in many government actors—elected and appointed bureaucrats with power acting against duty and morality–while unfettered courts that can – do or will not allow legal actions by citizens to be heard to correct administrative injuries, errors, and outright abuses of government authority and power.

Here, those who have access to top-level authority over the primary election processes are again being challenged for their failure to follow the rule of law by altering the process and/or by acting unethically to corrupt the election outcome. The question is, are they above review? Above the law? Or is there oversight of the highest offices of state political election power?

The U.S. Supreme Court this summer ruled on two cases that States may not duck or avoid court cases challenging state rights, including voting law. These are Marbury v. Madison caliber cases – finding a basic duty in court judges to allow 2nd Amendment cases (landmark decisions in Heller v. District of Columbia (2008) & NY State Pistol Club v. Bruen (2002), which firmly set the standard of review for judicial review of American fundamental rights (overruling the disingenuous universal pre-2023 court trick of manipulating to shift the state’s burden of proof over to complaining citizens.) This burden-shifting manipulation (of the state burden onto the backs of citizens). This means a citizen’s right to access to court to right a fundamental wrong. The Right-to-Sue-in-court had been shifted into oblivion by standardized modern court practice. Moore v. Harper (2023) also established rules on judicial review (in a redistricting challenge involving independent redistricting theory). Courts are not free to legislate from the bench or act in an inappropriate manner, wrote the U.S. Supremes, so does the present NH process of barring access to justice –by denying a party voter the right to sue for relief meet this new U.S. standard? Does it mean courts can avoid hearing these cases at all, much less to rule in a timely manner? And with the election less than two weeks away?

[See another recent NH Supreme Court case argument on YouTube at Daniel_Richard.com.] 

A voting system is spelled out in the State Constitution with the required process; so the state administrator’s exploitation of his SOS power of office to quietly manipulate to alter what is a detailed Constitutional mandate into something else in practice– is a boldfaced manipulation of official power.

After the Civil War, this country saw an avalanche of exploitation, manipulation, and corruption in office, writes author William Caldwell in his book Cynicism and the Evolution of the American Dream (highly recommended reading). Here, cynicism extends not only to state election officers but to their overseer – the court judiciary/system. Who else can hold them accountable? What other timely recourse is available for oversight of bad government actors under American law?

In 64 election-challenge-cases, judges declined to hear all cases but one. 

In many, the political, occupational, and financial retaliation against attorneys who filed the cases and challenged the government’s political narrative–was beyond harsh. It was designed to ruin and destroy the professional and private lives of those who acted in good faith for Americans who challenged overarching national narratives that the last election was fair and honest. The widespread perception across ‘common’ America is the last election was manipulated and stolen. The power of the state is punishing harshly and unfairly those who DARE to ask for the American open trial process for public exposure of underlying facts, discovery, and for a publicly-monitored trial decision on the fairness and ethics of those election practices. Are they American values? Or are they manipulated by political corruption? Don’t we deserve to hear and decide individually—by public trial process–where facts and evidence are openly presented?

If the lawsuit allegations are political lies, are underlying facts present, waiting to be discovered, processed, and presented in court at trial? The greatest risk of this process is truth to power.

Is truth being suppressed systematically, using legal tools designed to avoid the so-called ‘frivolous lawsuits’ – alleged to be filed in court by mentally incapacitated and unfit lawyers? Those are hard-ball political and bar corporation tactics now routinely being used to systematically suppress (and oppress) American critics, cynics, thinkers, open challengers, and, yes, attorney whistleblowers.

Who but? The moral implications of fitness to sue being herded through the narrow padlocks of preliminary court hearings is one of semantics – whether or not a citizen lacks standing to sue– is an affront to democracy, Americans, and the ideals we espouse for fair elections.  Government actors (as the above cases indicate) have no such pre-requirement to sue us, so the double standard – that citizens have a fundamental right to sue but cannot until they jump through court procedural hoops ad nauseam – is being used nationally by those in power to suppress the fundamental rights of American citizens to question politically altered traditional voting processes.

The lack of transparency and the exponential harmful impact of cutting-edge data processing technology means the capacity to alter electronic processing exists without accountability. Other more mundane alterations of voting dates, registration, verification, even mule-vote processing and other signature or verification anomalies all mean there exist invisible vote-changes and that Americans now are told to address by trusting those in power.

American skepticism is a national trait – from early pioneers, farmers, and cowboys to moon explorers, skepticism kept our ancestors alive in body and spirit – and thriving when bureaucracies and politicians were wrong and failed. Whether flaws in the recent voting changes are intentional or in error, skepticism is still a healthy American process.

The inability to challenge in court and obtain a public trial, to view and challenge the unseen manipulations of data and law, to expose manipulated voting processes, means the high technology voter processes (corrupted by unaccountable political actors) can exist. These processes are designed to invent, harvest, and file absentee ballots, fraudulently manufacture and/or falsify ballots and voter rolls, and other irregularities at the polls. These crimes arguably fall into the same category as this underhanded manipulation of the party primary registration calendar.

All are designed and enacted to alter a fundamental national tradition of voting—and appear to be accompanied by the certainty that courts everywhere will not open the doors (floodgates?) to citizen doubts about the authenticity of voter registration, certification, and the election processes. That’s the preliminary bar of unequal standing to sue protocol. It leaves citizens with no recourse at law.

Why should a state administrator be immune from these irregularities, manipulations, and violations at law? Where does this immunity come from? From the invisible protection of the overseeing branch – judges who slam shut the door to the courthouse?

This is a cynical age. National political strategists and operators planted practices and campaigns leading to this now widespread cynicism of voters. Testerman’s lawsuit is a ray of hope that American rights still exist; and that election law overseers will recognize the basic duty to stop unequally barring access to the courthouse.

Caroline Douglas, J.D. is a former NH attorney, former co-author of the New Hampshire State Law Treatise on Family Law, and author of several law treatises, including The Dark Side, a law treatise on judging (with memoir). She is a national whistleblower and can be reached at nssri@pm.me

Note: as this op-ed opinion was being sent out for publication, a notice of the court’s decision barring the Testerman claim from the court was received – denied by the judge who raised the issue of standing. This proactive protection of a state court actor was based on an alleged lack of standing—by an oral ‘motion’ initiated by the judge. Slam the door shut. Firmly. Yet again.

The post Night Cap: Who Has Standing to Sue If Not US? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Donald Trump winning the Iowa Caucus is not a surprise – well, maybe to a few DeSantis and Haley staffers on Twitter – but that doesn’t mean no surprises are coming out of Iowa.

Trump’s winning was not in doubt. What was who came in second, and how close did they land to the winner?

AP, no fan of The Donald, doesn’t know that answer, but they called it for him at 8:30.

Donald Trump won the Iowa caucuses on Monday, seizing a crucial victory that reinforces the former president’s grip on his party at the outset of the GOP’s 2024 nomination fight even as he faces extraordinary legal challenges that could complicate his bid to return to the White House.

The magnitude of Trump’s success is still coming into focus and it was not immediately clear who would emerge as the second-place finisher, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis or former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley. Caucus voters endured life-threatening cold and dangerous driving conditions to participate in meetings that unfolded in hundreds of schools, churches and community centers across the state.

The winter weather was a test fidelity, which likely played a factor, but reliable primary and caucus voters tend to turn up no matter what. The difference will be who showed up in addition to that to cast a vote for their favorite.

The Trump Campaign did not wait to celebrate:

“The people of Iowa sent a clear message tonight: Donald Trump will be the next Republican nominee for President. It’s now time to make him the next President of the United States.

Early results had Trump with 75% of the vote. A more sober average brings that down closer to 60%. The actual total will take a while longer to work out, but the Dems aren’t running it (their “caucus” doesn’t even count), so we should know well before morning those final results.

We’ll have an update at 8 am, if you want to sleep in.

 

HT | Red State

The post AP: Donald Trump is the Projected Winner of the Iowa Caucus appeared first on Granite Grok.

I used to agree that teachers are not being paid enough, but not so much anymore. I do believe we should support students going to college for teaching degrees. It is the only group I would agree to help with paying college loans, no others.

First, Schools have no business teaching social issues in a manner to sway students instead of teaching them to learn for themselves. If students know a teacher’s belief in certain social issues, then the teacher is not teaching; they are preaching.

Second, schools have no business taking on the medical issues of students. School nurses were supposed to be there for emergencies only, then either call an ambulance or the parents. It is not the job of schools to diagnose children, offer medications, or give recommendations for medical care.

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

Some schools have been giving covid tests without parental notifications, suggesting students have ADD or ADHD and recommending medications, sending students home with antidepressants, and lying to parents and not informing parents when a student suffers from gender issues. Some New Hampshire schools have a policy to omit the truth, which is lying to parents when it comes to gender issues.

One Maine school just recently was accused by a parent of sending a bag of medications home with the student, including Zoloft, a strong anti-depressant.

In Exeter, the school banned a student from a sporting event for being overheard, saying he would not use They or Them in conversation. A lawsuit is pending, and I hope Exeter loses big time.

Then, of course, what I believe to be smut in schools, which one teacher already told me they did not care how young children were to read about sex. That is fine as their opinion, but schools are not set up based on one person’s opinion. When books rated at 14 years of age are handed to an 11-year-old, as happened in a Maine school, this is unacceptable.

Now, as for the scores, I do not know about other state schools, but NH has some very poor proficiency scores on the state tests, even in the better southern schools like Exeter and Hampton. The state testing shows only around 75% of students are proficient in English, 65% are proficient in Math, and only 60% are proficient in science. These scores are from the State website based on Exeter, Hampton, Brentwood, and Portsmouth.

Until public schools improve the scores and stop forcing their social beliefs onto students, pay raises are not justified. There must be a way to connect teacher’s pay to the success of their teaching. I wish I had an answer, but I do not. The Educational System today is failing; something needs to be done.

The post Teachers Pay Should Be Relative to The Success of The School or The Class appeared first on Granite Grok.

The proper response, whenever someone tells you that Biden has “failed” on the border, is to laugh in his or her face because that person is either very stupid or thinks that you are very stupid. America’s open-borders are INTENTIONAL.

They are not a failure; they are a resounding success … because the goal of the Left is to transform America into a socialist-based-on woke state.

The estimates that I have seen are 10 million new illegals since the Biden-Regime took over. Do you really believe that these people want to assimilate? The Biden-Regime is creating new countries within this country. And the vast majority of the residents of these new countries (and their children after them) will vote Democrat and give the Left permanent control of government.

But just keep pretending that America’s open-borders are a failure and that somehow we can work with and find common ground with the people who opened the borders in order to replace us.

Well, he’s correct. It’s only a crisis for people who love the country. For people who want to burn down the country, the border is not in crisis. It’s a tremendous success.

Whether he gets a second term or not, Biden has been the most successful Dem president in our history. https://t.co/IJjTXSJmee

— Jesse Kelly (@JesseKellyDC) January 13, 2024

The post Face It Bitter-Clingers … Biden Has Been A Far, Far More Successful President Than Trump appeared first on Granite Grok.

I have one purpose in writing this article: as a former trial attorney, I believe that it is a fundamental right of every man, woman, and child to seek Justice in our courts for legally recognized wrongs that they feel have damaged them.

On Tuesday, January 16, 2024, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on SB304-FN. This bill guarantees to all citizens- including those who see themselves as transgender – the right to seek justice when they feel they have been improperly abused, mutilated, and castrated by their medical care team, including their treating physicians and surgeons.

The bill would extend the legally recognized protections afforded by the New Hampshire medical malpractice laws (RSA 507E) to Gender transformation treatment and surgery, thereby giving all citizens, including those who identify as “transgender” folks, the same rights to seek justice as everyone else.

I hope to enlist your support. Please consider the following:

Imagine now that you are a very accomplished, high-powered Trial attorney. You have a big office with a big desk and lots of well-paid attorneys working for you. You are in very good standing with the legal profession and the courts, and you have sworn to provide legal services of the highest quality to all those who have a need that you can help fulfill.

On one wall of your office, you have a painting of the founding fathers signing the U S Constitution that they had drafted. On another wall, you have a picture of Martin Luther King with the words “Do Justice.”

Next to you on your credenza is a picture of Mom with the look that says, “Don’t be a scum  bag; help folks.”

You hear a knock on your door. The door opens, and your young paralegal ushers in your 2 o’clock appointment- a young lady who offers her name, Sandy. She is neatly dressed in a lady’s business suit; she wears minimal but appropriate earrings and a necklace. She has a small amount of make-up and appears quite lovely.

She sits in the chair directly opposite of you and opens the conversation by thanking you for agreeing to see her. You then ask her why she feels she needs a lawyer. 

In response, she opens up one of two briefcases she brought and pulls out two packages of photos. She directs you to the first package. It contains on top, a picture of her at 15, standing at the beach with her mom and dad. She looks happy and healthy and very much a beautiful young girl.

The next picture shows the same 15-year-old, very naked, in a surgical center, just moments before breast removal surgery. To your eye, her breasts appear to be quite normal and very attractive.

The next photo revealed the same young lady three months after surgery. Instead of the breasts she had, she now has a very noticeable, very substantial scar that essentially went from one side of where her breasts were to the other. 

You carefully put the photos back into the package and look at Sandy, who is now sobbing. She says nothing but asks you with a point of her finger to look at the second package.

The second package shows a photo- a very intimate photo- of what looks to be a very normal vagina. The next picture shows the same area only now, the picture is of a gaping surgically created “hole” where her vagina and uterus used to be. She has been laid completely raw, and you are looking at her muscle, her tendons, everything left once the skin and external female parts were removed.

The final picture, taken months later, shows the same area where her vagina had been. The open hole has been surgically stitched together, and in place of her vagina, there is an appendage extending from her body. The surgeons have taken the vaginal skin and attached it to her clitoris to form what vaguely looked like a penis.

Sandy waits for you to finish and then hands you two feet of medical records that she had in her second briefcase. As you thumb through them, what you see are medical records showing that she had taken hormones since she was thirteen, was still taking them, and was suffering serious side effects. The records also show that for about five years, she was constantly in need of surgical revisions to the original surgery to stop bleeding and to reform the disfigured areas that the surgeons created. Moreover, the records show that she had had surgery to transform her face with masculine lines, replacing her former female structures.

You turn then back to Sanday and ask her to somehow convey to you what you are seeing. ” I want to help you, Sandy. Please tell me what I am seeing and what you need from me.”

Sandy is now openly sobbing. She reaches again into her briefcase and pulls out more records. These are records from her various and numerous counselors and psychiatrists who saw her before and after her surgery. Before the surgeries, way before, when she was 13, these folks diagnosed her with “situational anxiety; bipolar depression; gender dysphoria.” 

“Was this your visit when they diagnosed you?” you ask.

“Yes,” she replies. “After only twenty minutes. They told me that there was a real danger I would commit suicide unless I had immediate treatment. They recommended to me that I undergo hormone treatment to become a boy and that after the hormone treatment succeded, I should have the transgender surgery. They told me it would make me healthy. And happy. “

“Did they tell you anything else?” you ask.

“Yes, they told me to listen to these podcasts of other transgenders so that I could learn all about how to be happy. I listened to only one but I listened every day.”

“Did you then have the “top” surgery where they removed your breasts?” you ask.

Yes, I did. Two years after the hormone treatment and two years of hiding my breasts with binding, I did what they recommended. They told me to use their surgeon as he is the best.”

“How did you feel before the surgery, and then how did you feel after?”

Before, I felt worried and hopeful. They assured me I would be “fixed” by the surgery. They told me that I was trapped in a woman’s body and that until I became a man, I would never have any chance to be normal. After the surgery, I was horrified. When the bandages came off and I saw the scar, I realized what I had not really understood – I no longer had breasts. I cut off my female body parts. I cried for weeks. My parents insisted I go back and see the counselors. I did, and I told them how unhappy and desperate I was. I told them I wanted my breasts back. For the next two years, they “counseled “me. They showed me all kinds of studies from universities like Yale that showed how great the surgery was. They told me that after I transitioned to being a man, I would lead a new life as the man I was supposed to be. They constantly told me to trust them and that I would become who  I was meant to be.

After two years of this “counseling,” I had the second surgery. When all the bandages came off and I saw my new male appendage dangling off where my vagina should have been, I was overwhelmed by a feeling of horror, I remember the surgeon telling me in the exam room how proud he was to see the new “penis” he had fashioned for me.

“Penis?” I screamed. “This is not a penis. It does nothing. It has no erection. It has no sperm. I cannot make love with it. It’s just a cartoon version of a penis, a piece of garbage that just tells me the crime you committed on me!” 

Sandy then paused. She then sobbed uncontrollably. 

She then said, ” I am a woman. They lied to me. They told me that I am a man inside a woman’s body… after talking to me for 15 minutes. I was only 15 years old. 

They told me I would be better off mentally and spiritually without my breasts. They told me they had done this breast removal to hundreds of young girls, and all of them were very pleased and had a new sense of freedom.  I have since learned that many of these girls who had the surgery hated it, regretted it, and regretted the lifelong scar they now had. Each one of them said they wanted to have their breasts back. “

Sandy sobbed again.” I will never know what my breasts will feel like when the husband I will never have touches them. I will never be able to breastfeed my children, which I now will never have. They lied to me.

They should have told me about all the girls who reacted as I did. If they had let me talk to them, let me see the scars they got, I would never have agreed to do this to myself.”

Sandy again paused but then continued, more angry than before.

“I told them I did not want the bottom surgery. I told them to stop all the transitioning hormones. I told them I wanted to remain a woman, have babies, a husband, and a home with children. They refused to listen. I was just 15. They told me I was going to commit suicide if I stopped. They arranged a Zoom call with a TikTok transgender, and he convinced me to trust the Doctors. So I did. And when I saw myself after the surgery, I realized really for the first time, I just let them butcher my womanhood -I let them cut me into a freak of nature with no hope ever to be the woman or the mom I know I now want to be. I stormed into their offices and yelled at them with all I had to yell with. They called security and told me to leave. They sent in a prescription for all kinds of drugs to calm me down. And then told me to get another Doctor.

I tried to commit suicide three times. I was committed to a 72-hour observation many more times. I don’t want to live inside the male body they surgically carved into me. The only thing that keeps me going is that I don’t want them to get away with this. I don’t want them to do this to anyone else. I want Justice.”

Question: if Sandy presented herself to you, and presented her story to you, and asked you to help her get “JUSTICE,” what would you do? Does she have a right to be heard.?Does she have a right to tell her story to a judge and a jury and ask them to render a fair and impartial verdict?

SB 304 fn says she does have that right.

NOTE: It does say she wins. It only says she has a right to be heard, a right to present her case to the jury and ask them to do justice.

The transgender lobby-well funded, well-heeled, well trained- says Sandy has no such right. They say that SB 304 fn should not be passed because people like Sandy should just SHUT THE HELL UP, STOP WHINING, TAKE THEIR NAROTIC DRUGS AND GO AWAY. Why? Because they say, “We are special. You cannot sue us. We are immune from being sued. Now go away.”

On Tuesday, whether or not Sandy and anyone like her has a right to seek Justice in the courts will be set down for hearing. If you want Sandy to have her day in court,  it is up to you to stand up for her. Make your view known. Attend the hearing and speak your piece.  I guarantee you the transgender folks will.  God bless them, but I hope they fail.

It’s up to you in more ways than you know. 

 

 

The post A Bill To Protect Citizen’s Sexuality From Abuse and Negligence by Their Doctors appeared first on Granite Grok.

“Trump is Hitler.” “Trump is a dictator.” The Regime-Media, Big-Tech, and all the other usual suspects – most of whom couldn’t even define dictator because Joe Biden has been the most dictatorial President in history – have made this their mantra. Because?

Because what wouldn’t you do to stop the next Hitler? Answer: Nothing. Nothing is off the table to stop the next Hitler. NBC “News” has an article on today’s (1/15) RCP normalizing the idea of a military coup against Trump should Trump somehow get elected despite the rigging of the election:

Now, bracing for Trump’s potential return, a loose-knit network of public interest groups and lawmakers is quietly devising plans to try to foil any efforts to expand presidential power, which could include pressuring the military to cater to his political needs.

What NBC “News” is promoting is an insurrection or a coup. A military that answers to “a loose-knit network of public interest groups and lawmakers” and not the commander-in-chief is an insurrection or coup.

The deranged Democrat-media-industrial complex has added military coup prep to assassination prep in its quiver of weapons it will use against the country if Democrats lose the 2024 elections. They’re clearly worried they won’t be able to rig this election like they did in 2020. https://t.co/lUP0hfRw6W

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 15, 2024

Never forget this tweet for the rest of your life. This is an admitted plan, in advance, for the military to no longer observe the military chain of command. This is military-run government. This is a plan to end civilian-run government. https://t.co/7SRcM7JHDG

— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) January 14, 2024

Openly admitting that they are planning a military coup if Americans re-elect Donald Trump.

All to protect democracy of course. https://t.co/65JFH8DeJy

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) January 14, 2024

The post NBC “News” Already Normalizing A Military Coup Against Trump appeared first on Granite Grok.

And yet another week starts with… mockery, ridicule, and occasional insights.

Take heart – there will be both a Wednesday and Friday Edition.  Last week’s Friday Edition.

Remember, ridicule and mockery are effective weapons:

1. Ridicule cannot easily be fought
2. Ridicule makes the enemy angry, and angry people make mistakes
3. For those in the “squishy middle” a Thought Splinter (and Part II and Part III and Part IV) can often be hidden inside humor.

Now, let the mockery and mayhem begin.

 

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

 

 

See the concept of the Thought Splinter again.

 

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

 

 

 

This quote applies:

“NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE HUMAN MIND TO BELIEVE WHAT IT WANTS TO BELIEVE, NO MATTER THE CONFLICTING EVIDENCE.”

― BRIAN HERBERT, HOUSE HARKONNEN

 

 

Learn what you can while you can.  I just ordered another book on foraging.  And speaking about learning:

How to Learn Something New—And Make It Stick (duolingo.com)

 

 

Is there a precedent for this?  Any lawyers want to chime in?  I can’t imagine how it’s Constitutional – not that the Left gives a carp about that – to forbid the accused from speaking on their own behalf.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comedian Evan Sayet – after his “waking up” (see this seminal essay) had this to say:

He Fights (townhall.com)

 

 

 

 

Hey, I know… let’s invite them in by the metric f*ckton.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remember, in 2017 (!) what Fauci said:

 

 

This was one of the critical data points in my growing skepticism.  Working in my field, one learns to NEVER say things definitively – sometimes to the point where it’s so ingrained it bugs my wife.  The fact that he was so definitive, so sure, really rang my alarm bells.  Especially when, IIRC in 2022, he said some statement that was full of weasel words like should, and is likely to, etc.  The contrast really sticks out to me.

 

 

 

I don’t mean to be cruel, but… if you haven’t figured it out by now, make sure to take choline supplements for 30 days prior to your Jab.

 

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

 

PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA

 

The Grok does a good job of highlighting upcoming legislation; recently I made several posts about such in the NH Patriot Gab group based on their alerts.  But if you live in NH I also urge you to at least get on the mailing list of RebuildNH.

RebuildNH – Liberty for New Hampshire

As long as we still – at least in theory – have free speech and the right to petition our government, let’s use them.  Also don’t forget Jury Nullification.  Because IMHO we’re approaching the point where the fourth box is being increasingly seen by many as the only possible option… and if it starts – as I believe it will, alas?  I want my conscience to know and believe I tried everything else first.

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

Land grab, pure and simple.

 

 

 

 

 

Only one box?   I’ve targeted by new acquisition based on a conversation I had today.  Just to diversify my ammo use potential.  And, of course, at least 1000 rounds to go with it.

 

 

 

#TEXIT

 

 

 

 

 

It’s not incompetence.  They made it up as a test to see who would obey.  And there are multiple videos out there of people screaming at people for not staying six feet apart, or being harassed out of stores for not wearing a mask.

Fear.  Fear, pure and simple.

 

 

Good point!  I remember when our kids were bottle-age, I’d mix a bit of peanut butter into their formula bottles.

 

 

 

 

What I want to know is – who still has faith in the government?

 

 

Basically, they don’t work.

 

 

 

 

Emotional decision-making is what drives the fear porn.  To wit, be afraid of climate doom:

 

 

 

Don’t forget to eat your bugs to save the planet!

 

 

 

When dealing with Democrats there’s always a caveat.

 

 

And I still vote to add dipping your finger in indelible ink to avoid people going from polling place to polling place in states that have same-day registration.

 

 

 

 

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

 

Pick of the post:

 

 

At this point there’s no substantial difference between the two-faces of the same uniparty.

“Legal” For Illegals To Vote In Presidential Election In Arizona … – Granite Grok

As I understand it, not truly legal, but there’s no means to stop it.  And in general:

 

 

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

 

Palate Cleansers:

 

—

—

 

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

 

Come back Wednesday for another edition.  Same Meme Time.  Same Meme channel.

Please do consider buying me a coffee.

Buy Me a Coffee

 

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

 

The post MONDAY MEMES appeared first on Granite Grok.

To us dinosaurs, life used to be a system of meritocracy. You worked and studied hard to get ahead at school, work, and life. You planned well and surrounded yourself with positive mentors. You were proud of your accomplishments, but not to the point of being brash. The action that disrupted the equilibrium was nepotism.

Because of this system, we continued to build a country on the excellence of its people. A few decades ago, things changed, and the system was turned upside down. Meritocracy was replaced with parity. It became the social norm to replace winners and losers with participants. Everyone played the game, and leaders in all facets of life were now chosen based on their grades on the DEI scale and not on the ABCs. Competency and excellence that once were colorblind are directly measured on one’s shade of the rainbow. This new scale does not improve society.

The sports and news worlds focused on Foxboro this week as the end of an era in New England Patriots history was marked by the departure of Coach Bill Belichick. The book is closed on a quarter century of excellence that was the envy of most and the target of hate and jealousy by some. There will always be questions about whether Brady or Belichick deserved the credit for the dynasty that brought six Lombardi trophies to Gillette Stadium and New England. I will yield to the sports folk to debate coach versus quarterback. I will tackle Kraft.

If not for Robert Kraft, pundits would not be debating the person responsible for the dynasty, for there would not be one. Like the rest of us, Kraft was a frustrated fan who cheered for a team that suffered from mediocrity for forty years. Everything changed with the team, town, and even New England when Kraft stepped up and bought the Patriots in 1994, preventing the team from moving to St. Louis and setting the stage for the most successful twenty years in a football franchise.

Kraft established a level of excellence that should be a model to learn from and emulate, but instead, some want to tear it down or watch it crumble. Excellence is no longer something to strive for but to avoid. Parity is the new norm. The demise of the Patriots since the departure of Tom Brady is not Bill Belichick’s or Robert Kraft’s fault. The Patriots are doing exactly what the league is designed to do: return to the pack. Free agency, the salary cap, and even the requirements for staff hiring are intended to prevent dynasties. Kraft is a dinosaur, like us, and will fight the norm, and my money is on him to succeed.

Many of us still remember the hapless Patriots. I saw my first game in 1964 at Fenway Park, one of the many homes of the Pats until Kraft built them a permanent residence. Knowing the past made us appreciate what Kraft, Belichick, and Brady gave us for twenty years. Fortunately for YouTube, we can relive those thrills with the click of a remote. But for our younger fans who know nothing but championships and duck boat parades, this period of rebuilding for the Patriots is a new and uncomfortable experience.

It is made more difficult because we were blessed with too much success, and damn, it was a great run. In this WOKE era, we should ensure our kids understand the how and why of the Patriots story. Maybe they will focus on propping up merit and success and reject those who want to suppress them with Woke. If this happens, this week will end an era, but WOKE and DEI, not excellence, will end.

 

The post Can There Be Too Much Success appeared first on Granite Grok.

I remember way back in the early 2000s when I was exploring my politics. After 9/11, I wanted to know how that might happen and realized years of disinterest left me unprepared to discuss it. Politics. Some might argue I still am. But I tried to learn. I started with the Founding documents and kept going.

Lurking on websites was vital. I could read news and opinions and then skim through comments to see what others felt and why. The first time I dared to add, my voice was likely precarious, but it didn’t end badly. I think Early Red State (2005-2006), and I was nervous, but ideas must be laid out, explored, and tested right or wrong. A few years later, the pile of questions and ideas needed a better outlet, so I started a free WordPress blog. I still have it.

Many articles, connections, and years later, I’ve written on at least a dozen platforms, some for pay and others to get the questions, challenges, thoughts, and observations out of my head. I’m still doing this after fifteen-plus years and probably 25,000 pieces of content later, you probably want me to shut up and tell you who this week’s Commenter of Week is.

I will, but I said all that because we have a lot of folks who aren’t shy about sharing, and at least a few do it as themselves. That’s not a dig on those who don’t or can’t. You have your reasons, and I’m good with that, but at some point, any one of you might want to take the next step as I did, and we’re here for you even if you don’t want to use your actual name. We need to know who you are, but no one else does.

So, congrats to NHnative. You are this week’s winner for this. It wasn’t just a comment but an excellent idea.

 

One of the most significant plagues rotting NH is our court system… reading this article, I don’t have to tell you how bad it is.

I’d like to know why this is okay with the residents of NH, first of all.

Second, I’d like everyone to know that it’s not that hard today to find yourself IN this corrupt court/legal system.. it’s only then will most people understand what a crisis we’ve got here that just rolls on with seemingly no real efforts to fix anything.
So yes, this does really impact us all.

It’s not really IF you’ll have a turn, it’s when.

The majority of folks in NH don’t have the extra money to hire attorneys and take this on like Laurie did.. and this is precisely how this system is designed to work.

Laurie, what I’d love to see you do is start a non-profit, build a team, and help citizens learn what they need to know to represent themselves pro-se to go to court.
NH has a shortage of attorneys, and it’s become more clear that We, The People out here, need somewhere we can go to learn the ropes of taking more and more on ourselves in court.

 

NHnative, if you’d be so kind as to email me an address I can ship to, I’ll send you your “prize.”

To everyone else, again, damn difficult decision. We’ve got more commenters and comments this week, and again, I can only afford to reward one a week at the moment, but I can still give you a shout-out because there was plenty of great stuff. David Ss, Mike Remski, Bowana, Josue Lugo, Neil Johnson, Dan Batten, Gary Davis, Old Vet, Rick O’Shea, Bryan W, Steve Earle, LunarDog made me laugh (was not a finalist for that), Asperous for “Stop referring to “Lia Thomas” as she/her,” NITZAKHON, gramps, Jay Eshelman, Tombstone Gabby, and more.

As a reminder, if you see a comment you think should be considered, email it to me. In the first two weeks, I received one of those, and I’d like a few more each week if possible.

Thanks for reading and commenting!

The post Our Next Comment of the Week Winner Is…? appeared first on Granite Grok.