Whoever thought we’d end up this way?

And I’ll add that the World Economic Forum /Davos people that believe they have the right to tell the rest of us how to live is that they are going to make bugs for us to eat dirt cheap.

The only constant in any of this is while I LIKE cooking with cast iron pans, I still hate cleaning them.

(H/T: Hot Air)

The post Palate Cleanser: What a Difference That 36 Years Can Make appeared first on Granite Grok.

Oh, Skip, you’re such a meany – how can you take food out of the mouths of babes in school yards!  You want them to go hungry and starve while in school?  They can’t learn that way?

You know, there was a recent piece on WMUR’s news that Police need more Constitutional training when at the Police Academy (which I can’t find at their website now). Instead, how about Legislators being put through such a class?  Now, I know that it will never happen because you can’t legislate a new requirement on top of what is in the NH Constitution (Part 2):

[Art.] 14. [Representatives, How Elected, Qualifications of.] Every member of the house of representatives shall be chosen by ballot; and, for two years, at least, next preceding his election shall have been an inhabitant of this state; shall be, at the time of his election, an inhabitant of the town, ward, place, or district he may be chosen to represent and shall cease to represent such town, ward, place, or district immediately on his ceasing to be qualified as aforesaid.

But given that I have quotes from State Reps showing how BADLY they understand the Constitution (Progressives and the Proper Role of Government – and your subservience to it), it would be nice to have them go through it. Unfortunately, if it was voluntary, it’s rather clear that those that would need it the most would refuse to go.

Like these Democrats who seemingly are violating the NH Constitution’s Unfunded Mandate Article once again just like they did with forcing School District to provide free menstrual products without the State funding it:

[Art.] 28-a. [Mandated Programs.] The state shall not mandate or assign any new, expanded or modified programs or responsibilities to any political subdivision in such a way as to necessitate additional local expenditures by the political subdivision unless such programs or responsibilities are fully funded by the state or unless such programs or responsibilities are approved for funding by a vote of the local legislative body of the political subdivision.

And the Union Leader has yet another story of Democrats wanting to further obviate local control (as much as one HAS local control in a Dillon’s Rule State) by forcing schools to provide both breakfast and lunch to students. Oh, it sounds nice – it’s always for the children, isn’t it. But like with Chris Sununu’s “Public Health trumps EVERYTHING” (meaning the Constitution strictures on Government), these Democrats (and only Democrats are sponsoring this) have decided they don’t have to pay attention to our foundation law – OUR SOCIAL CONTRACT!

On Wednesday, the House education panel considers whether the state should require all local school boards to offer subsidized breakfast and lunch for lower-income families.

At present, 456 public schools in the state offer both meals while there are 153 school buildings that don’t serve either one; there are 27 schools that serve lunch but not breakfast. Rep. Arthur Ellison, D-Concord, and six other House Democrats are promoting this measure (HB 429).

So 70% do provide some food assistance. Just further the process of making the State all-powerful in all things. Power should ALWAYS be centralized, according to Democrats – and used as often as possible. There is no “limiting” of government at all in these peoples’ eyes.

Here’s the text:

HB 429-FN-LOCAL – AS INTRODUCED

2023 SESSION

23-0341
10/08

HOUSE BILL 429-FN-LOCAL

AN ACT requiring the offering of breakfast and lunch in all public and chartered public schools.

SPONSORS: Rep. Ellison, Merr. 28; Rep. Woodcock, Carr. 1; Rep. Hall, Merr. 9; Rep. A. Murray, Hills. 20; Rep. Horrigan, Straf. 10; Rep. Seibert, Hills. 21; Rep. Rombeau, Hills. 2

COMMITTEE: Education

—————————————————————–

ANALYSIS

This bill requires school districts and chartered public schools to offer both breakfast and lunch programs to students.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
23-0341
10/08

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Twenty Three

AN ACT requiring the offering of breakfast and lunch in all public and chartered public schools.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1  Schools; Food and Nutrition Programs.  Amend RSA 189:11-a, I to read as follows:

I.  Each school board shall make [at least one meal] breakfast and lunch available during school hours to every pupil under its jurisdiction.  Such meals shall be served without cost or at a reduced cost to any child who meets federal income eligibility guidelines.  The state board of education shall ensure compliance with this section and shall establish minimum nutritional standards for such meals as well as income guidelines set for the family size used in determining eligibility for free and reduced price meals.  [Nothing in this section shall prohibit the operation of both a breakfast and lunch program in the same school.]

2  Schools; Food and Nutrition Programs.  Amend RSA 189:11-a, VII(a) to read as follows:

VII.(a)  Each school district [which participates] shall participate in the National School Breakfast Program and each school district shall maintain annual statistics on the number of breakfast meals served to pupils.

3  New Section; Chartered Public Schools; School Meals.  Amend RSA 194-B by inserting after section 3-a the following new section:

194-B:3-b  Required School Breakfast and Lunch Programs.  All chartered public schools shall comply with the school breakfast and lunch requirements under RSA 189:11-a.

4  Effective Date.  This act shall take effect July 1, 2023.

LBA
23-0341
12/19/22

And I have to laugh at this “Fiscal Note”

(click to embiggen)

Translation: WE DON’T CARE HOW MUCH IT COSTS YOU!!!

You know, my town is now starting to talk about replacing the beach bathhouse and with that has been a traditional commercial kitchen. Which would have to be replaced and that’s why I’ve been talking up replacing it with 2 or three Food Trucks. They’ve already made the investments in such equipment so let the Free Market supply the needs of those that are hungry at the beach.

I dryly bring it up as these Democrat nitwits make NO allowance for very small districts or schools (I’m thinking of Croydon as an example) that probably DON’T have the 10s of thousands of dollars just laying around to stand up such a kitchen to serve such a small population of kids (what is it, 25??). And then service them. And staff them.  Think of the second and third order cost structures that are associated with this mandate (red tape, permitting, inspections, food sourcing, material/food storage, cleaning, cleaning supplies, staffing, taxes – it can be a long list).

That’s nuts! Which proves, once again, that Democrats only see individuals as ATMs to be plucked.

And unconstitutional because these “I want to FORCE you to my will” Democrats don’t care.

 

The post Another Democrat Bill Placing an Unfunded Mandate on School Districts – Food appeared first on Granite Grok.

“Reject expanded casino and video lottery gambling as a means to balance the budget or increase spending”

That’s from the Republican Party Platform. Guess NH State Senator Tim Lang, in his exuberance of being more than a State Rep, decided to “exercise his muscles” and forgot that Republicans are supposed to be known for a number of things. You know, “branding”?

Obviously, not much difference at all. Lou has been trying for years to get casino gambling into NH in a big way.  A big part of it was to establish a new revenue stream for the State that would provide MORE money to the State coffers.  And of course, being a Democrat, he already had ideas about how those millions of dollars would be spent – those dollars wouldn’t be around to burn a hole in anyone’s pockets they’d be in and out so fast. More money = Bigger Government.

And then there is Tim Lang (now my State Senator – such a bonus!).  How is he any different from “The Democrat Lion” of the Senate in this regard? From the Union Leader: if it sounds like a duck, if it walks like a duck, then….but FIRST, a message from his Republican Party’s Platform (Lang does call himself a Republican, right?):

We, the people of the New Hampshire Republican Party, do stand united in our dedication to preserving freedom, limited government, and unlimited opportunity for all.

We believe in free people, free markets, and free enterprise.

We believe that low taxes are the result of low spending; that government has a moral obligation to the people to be as cost-effective as possible, to always limit spending and growth of government, and to cut spending and cost of government at every possible turn.

We, the people of the New Hampshire Republican Party, pledge to our neighbors across our great, beautiful and proud state, that we remain dedicated to maintaining a limited, affordable government,

So what does Lang want to do?  Well, first thing, using that shopworn Democrat phrase of “It’s for the children!” is a quick giveaway. And as always, reformatted and emphasis mine:

New Senate Ways and Means Committee Chairman Tim Lang, R-Sanbornton, said it’s time New Hampshire joined six other states in regulating all gambling that takes place online in the state. Currently, residents spend millions each year visiting online sites to place bets on poker and other games of chance despite it being illegal here. As a result, Lang said it’s buyer beware, meaning if a rogue website takes a gambler’s money and fails to pay off a winning bet, the gambler has no recourse.

So first, he wants extend the reach of government into the Free Market (because that’s what it is right now) Which means that he must enlarge Government via headcount and cost to do that regulation.

And then decides that HE must make the Nanny State overreach even more. What, those gamblers don’t realize that Caveat Emptor doesn’t apply to them?  That Lang believes that HE must protect citizens from themselves?

Hubris. Condescending.

The New Hampshire Lottery doesn’t permit bets to be placed with a credit card. Bettors must pay cash or provide a debit card.

And that prevents them from losing money they don’t have (using a credit card that would run up debt).  Isn’t that enough? But here’s the Incoming Money Tide that has Lang running TOWARD it instead of running from it

The American Gaming Association estimates New Hampshire could collect $17 million to $48 million annually by having the lottery control these online bets.

And the “it’s for the children” hook to make it palatable.  A never fail option of scoundrels all over:

Lang’s plan is to use all profits to support a scholarship fund for income-eligible students to attend two-year community colleges in New Hampshire.

No mention of the overhead costs which I WILL remind y’all makes Government larger. And those costs will never go away. EVAH!

Remember, the Colorado Democrats want to do the same thing there by dangling out the education Shiny Object,by stripping its TABOR (“It’s ALWAYS About Democrats Keeping YOUR Money – Law Doesn’t Matter. Bait and Switch, Baby!”) – Taxpayer Bill of Rights – that returns “over-taxed monies” back to those that had been “over-taxed” in the first place. Those Democrats don’t want to return that money back to its rightful owners – taxpayers. And Lang doubles down:

“I think this would generate enough money to pay full tuition for every income-eligible student to attend community college, helping us fill a chronic need for skilled workforce in New Hampshire,” Lang said.

Sorry, Education is more than putting a person in front of a bench in some factory or office. Education is supposed to be in creating a responsible Citizen that can completely join in the process of Self-Governance for our Society – NOT to just be an economic cog in his wheel. Once again, he declares that the Free Market isn’t able to remedy the problem

And again, a bit of self-justification that immediately brought back to mind the earliest history of the Democrat based income tax: it will only tax the richest amongst us. After all, how many “impulse bettors” can there be in NH

“We’re talking about an impulse bettor, someone who plays 15 minutes of Texas Hold ‘Em while they are waiting for a meeting,” Lang said. “These aren’t people who are going to spend an hour or more visiting a charity casino.

And this says that there is NO difference between him and D’Allesandro

We’d be tapping into a whole new source of state revenue.”

And let’s return to the “Application” part of the Platform:

• Keep state government lean to allow lower business taxes
• Strongly oppose new taxes and fees, including an income, s, ales and capital gains tax
• Limit the growth of state spending to not more than the rate of inflation plus population growth
• Require super-majorities to raise taxes

So, there’s all that for the required background lesson on being a Republican.  So there will be those that will actively attack me for writing these words.  Well, let’s return to the Platform again:

We believe that we the people are strongest when we stand together, that it is our responsibility to hold government accountable and that it is through the integrity of the ballot box that we do so.

And so we shall.  And having the Free Speech to do so, GraniteGrok has the Right to point out the differences between the Parties – and when there should be and when there aren’t.

The post “New Revenue Stream”; So What’s The Difference Between Democrat Lou D’Allesandro and Newly Minted Republican Senator Tim Lang? appeared first on Granite Grok.

In January of last year, we lost a long-time activist and friend, Ed Naile. Ed inspired many as both the Chairman of the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers and a contributor to these pages.

Below is Skip’s original post announcing Ed’s passing as well as some of the comments below.

You can read Ed’s ‘Grok archive here.

 

Announcement – Long Time CNHT Chairman Ed Naile Has Passed

by Skip / 25 January 2022

“Just so you know, Ed passed on Friday.  So sad – what a great man…” That from a friend today.

From a couple of days ago: Evidently he has been in ICU in Concord Hospital for some time now.  At least a month, I think. Covid, then a blood clot which caused a heart attack.I called the hospital today and he is still in ICU and no visitors.

I considered him one of my mentors as Doug and I started up GraniteGrok.  I learned so much from him and realized how skilled he was in his Activism and how free he was to share the skill with anyone that wanted to hear and then apply it. He made the CNHT (Coalition of NH Taxpayers) space available to us as we started GrokTALK! as a weekly podcast, we and he combined forces on a number of different issues.

He was a man that stood on principles that right was right and wrong was wrong.  Fearless and took GREAT joy at beating those that thought that they were “all that and more” whether they were municipal officers and tax fraud to voter fraud.Did I mention that he was smart?

He made CNHT live up to one of the US Marine’s mantras: “No better friend; no worse enemy.”He enjoyed his activism and loved it when he won (which he did most of the time), especially in court. He once told me that when he entered the court, the other lawyer’s shoulders slumped. They knew that he knew more about the law than they did – and he was doing it for sport.

COMMENTS

    I am devastated to learn that Ed has passed. He was a mentor, an inspiration and the most extraordinary raconteur I have ever known. His loss is inestimable. I always imagined him having a horrific chainsaw accident but he was too adept for that. Our most heartfelt condolences to his family and innumerable friends and admirers. He was truly one of a kind. The world has suddenly gone grey. You left a great legacy of advocacy, Ed, and tireless effort. Thank you and God bless.
I never met him, and yet, from the very first time I read one of his posts on Granite Grok, I felt I knew him.

    Omg, I’m shocked. Just inconceivable. Heartfelt condolences to his family and friends. NH has lost a treasure. I hope and pray he’s looking down and guiding one or more of us to continue on the great things he has done for us all. He can never be replaced but we can do him proud.

    For at least three decades, Ed was there freely giving his time to share his tools of the trade to budding activists, to fight entrenched and unresponsive local officials, to bring too-cozy abuses of local taxpayer interest to light.NH ought to have an Ed Naile day.

    I’m speechless. Ed and I had a long back and forth here one time about the blue jays and feeding birds.What were seeing, what we were feeding them.It was nice to get off politics for a bit and just talk about regular things.What a loss. Skip and Steve and fellow Groksters, I’m sorry that you lost your good friend. What a terrible loss for our state.

    May he rest in peace

    I am devastated! Ed and I had quite a few conversations on and off line since I met him 4 years ago when I was running for state rep. He was a great man with a passion for fair elections in NH,which was one of my passions as well when I was living in NH.I have no other words…heartfelt condolences to all his friends and family. NH lost a great pariot.

    I REMEMBER MEETING HIM REGARDING VOTER FRAUD. OH MY GOSH! I LEARNT ALOT FROM THIS MAN! VERY INFORMATIVE & INTERESTING!!!

    So sad to hear this. Rest in peace Ed!

    Don’t have much to add beyond prayers for the family and I will miss his articles here. I had a few conversations about chainsaws with him but that was about it.

    RIP Ed, your common sense & sound reasoning will be missed!

    Ed and I had lunch last summer before I moved out of NH. Such a great guy. We collaborated on many projects and investigations. When I was on my town’s Budget Committee, he gave me hours and hours of advice & instruction. Later when I moved to Supervisor of the Checklist, he again gave me tons of time and assistance. Such a selfless guy that wanted good government – he was ok with the results if the process was fair and accurate. If we don’t like the results, we just work harder next time. I already missed our occasional get-togethers, and now I will cherish the memory of the last one. RIP, Ed. You did good.

    This is horrible news. Ed helped and taught so many people about election law. He will be missed by so many.

    Kathleen LaBonte:  OMG! I just found out with an announcement from Scott Maltzie in the Merrimack County GOP weekly update. I’m DEVASTATED, and the wind has been knocked right out of my sail. Oh do I adore that man, and no one made me laugh harder than to listen to his escapades. My favorite and treasured times with Ed would be helping to set up and take down the annual July CNHT picnic event…and, of course, to help with anything they needed during the event to keep things smooth running. I would be one of the last ones cleaning up so that I could sit and have a little catch up private time with Ed before we bid adieu. I will treasure always those events and that special time with Ed.I’m greatly saddened that I did not know he was in the hospital all that time. My head and heart aches for all that I do not know right now of what is happening to people I love. My sincere prayers and deepest sympathy to Ed’s family and all his dear friends….so many of them I know. May Ed be at peace, and resting in God’s hands.

    I only met Ed once, but followed him on GG. Our state, and our country has lost one of our staunchest advocates for voter integrity and honest elections.

The post Remembering Ed Naile appeared first on Granite Grok.

The women of Iran are leading the first female-led revolution in the history of the world, revising what bravery means. These women deserved to be named Time Magazine’s people of the year.

“The Iranian people’s nationwide protests erupted on September 16, 2022, after the death of a young Kurdish woman, Mahsa Jina Amin while in the custody of the Islamic morality Police.

How did we get here?

The upheavals of 1979 shattered the existing order and a turbaned charlatan that Jimmy Carter called a saint, Ayatollah Khomeini, skillfully steered the forces of change to promote his brand of totalitarian rule — a rule aimed at taking Iran backward to a primitive, violent, and misogynistic society.

In no time at all, Carter’s saint turned out to be the true devil he was. Khomeini’s mob started killing Americans, took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran with Americans as hostages, and launched a most virulent anti-American campaign that is bleeding America to this very day.

Carter made a bone-headed decision some forty-five years ago. Both Iranians and Americans paid dearly and continue to pay.

Islamic theocracy

Many Iranians sensed the catastrophic tragedy of Islamism and really began doing what they could to prevent it from destroying Iran’s nascent civil democratic system. Before long, Khomeini and his gangs capitalized on the frustrations of the masses, promising them everything under the sun while simultaneously murdering thousands of Iran’s best children who opposed them and their system of rule.

2009 Green Revolution

The world witnessed a massive anti-regime movement in 2009 by millions of Iranians, subsequent to the fraudulent re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The regime’s response to those protesting people was a set of dastardly measures typical of dictatorships. People were severely beaten, huge numbers arrested and herded like cattle into makeshift prisons, some were shot in the streets as they marched; others were raped and killed in Iran’s prisons. And the world simply watched. Now it was Obama’s turn. He too was hood-winked by the same Machiavellian Shi’a gang that took Carter on a ride of infamy.

The Obama Administration not only failed to voice its support for the people, but it also implied that what was happening in Iran was a kind of family squabble best left to be settled by Iranians themselves. A family feud indeed. One side of the “family” with legions of savages armed to the teeth, the Revolutionary Guard  (IRGC) and their hired thugs, and the other side of the “family” defenseless civilians using their voices to plead their case. The Islamic rulers spared no heinous means in mercilessly silencing the voices of the people.

No nation provided even moral support for the Iranian people while the savage mullahs and their thugs consolidated their rule of terror with impunity. The same scenario is recurring and the silence of the world is deafening while we are engaged in the Ukraine war.

2022 Iran revolution and the world reaction

The world leaders as usual were indifferent. The sanctions decided by the EU are finally toothless figurative politics. Only after weeks of protests did the EU adopt very limited entry injunctions and freeze assets.

By the way, did you watch the deafening sound of silence at the Golden Globes bash this past Sunday where the horde of self-righteous champions of women’s rights busily applauded each other without bothering to say a single word (except for Sean Penn) in support of the valiant Iranian women presently risking everything battling the women-oppressing Islamist rule?

Indeed it is times like this when principled freedom fighters are separated, by their words and deeds, from the frauds.

These young martyrs and so many others remain as eternal testaments to the depravity of the 7th-century primitive system and the horrors it has visited on innocent people. And these young victims of Islamic tyranny are by no means isolated cases. Tragically, women as a gender bear the brunt of Islamic misogyny. Women are systematically exploited, maltreated, and disenfranchised from their God-given rights.

When circumstances call upon us, society generates heroes. Heroes are those extraordinary people who make sacrifices and become agents of historical and social change. We sometimes speak of other forces that rule the world. The women and girls of Iran have shaken the core of the Islamic regime. Indeed, they are the true heroes of our time.

We should also salute Masih Ali Nejad, Nazanin Boniadi and Nazanin-Afshin Jam MacKay and many others who have risen to the occasion and have set themselves apart from the shameful gang of self-serving liberal women loudmouths who find themselves suddenly tongue-tied when speaking up do not serve their myopic and parochial agenda.

Women in Iran are chanting the phrase “Women, Life, Freedom” despite the threat of being shot and incarcerated by the régime. They are risking their lives. There are photographs of women raising their fists while the streets around them burn.

The decent humans of the world stood and mourned in solidarity with Iranian women’s freedom aspiration while their lives were cut short from the loving bosom of their families into the eternal embrace of Mother Iran.

They mourned their death, yet they all honored their call and summons: A call and summons to follow in their footsteps with iron resolve. A call and summons for the complete emancipation of millions of women, as well as men, who are suffering under the yoke of Islamic tyranny.

The brave women of Iran will shine forever as beacons of hope and a source of inspiration to those across the world who struggle for justice, equality, and liberty. This is the final scene. This is do-or-die. Nothing less than a subversion of this regime and recapture of Iran will stop these warriors. And it has been heard among people in Europe and the United States and all over the world. This time we see that these heroic people are determined to overthrow the rule of the mullahs.

The brave Iranian women are not stopping, nor will they any time soon. They are taking to the streets to cut their hair and burn their hijabs, indicating to the Islamic government that they will not stand for this totalitarian regime anymore. Time for the mullahs to pack up and leave.

 

The post Women, Life, Freedom appeared first on Granite Grok.

There is one thing to making mistakes, but showing no remorse compounds the misstep. To break the law and have such arrogance to say, “I have no regrets,” is to mock the matter.

To be the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States, and to blow off a severe violation of the law by saying, “there is no there, there,” is to indicate you believe you are above the law. That is the message I heard when Joe Biden took to the podium in California and went off prompter. He opened by saying how upset he is that reporters continue to press him on the Doc-Gate issue and not on what he is doing in California. With all due respect, Mr. President, we will decide what is important to us, and your breaking the law is a significant issue with Americans. The latest polls show 69% of Americans are not pleased with how you, and your Administration, are handling the breach of National Security.

The unknown is a big problem here for many people. We do not know the contents of the documents, how many documents, if all have been recovered, and most importantly, who had access. We are not getting all the facts to decide how big a problem Biden has created. Biden wants us to dismiss this breach as nothing, but when Trump was found to have done the same thing, Biden said Trump could not be more irresponsible. The arrogance is terrible, but the hypocrisy compounds the matter. Biden appears comfortable, expecting a very unbalanced application of the law; Trump is guilty, but Biden is innocent.

The many lies by the Administration over the last few weeks and the lack of explanation about the timing of information dispersed make even the Left-leaning media skeptical. We are witnessing this skepticism every day as the press corp peppers Karine Jean-Pierre with questions she deflects and refuses to answer. When they claim to be the most transparent, this lack of transparency is fueling the flames for more questions. These press briefings are ugly but have become don’t miss TV. KJP is now the punching bag for the Administration, and she is maximizing her condescending attitude toward all members of the press.

Nobody seems to know where this issue is going. The House is chomping at the bit to get members of the Biden team under oath. The Special Counsel is yet to start, so we do not know how she will attack the issue. One thing we do know is the Bidens, Joe and Hunter, are the first President and son duo ever to be investigated simultaneously. That is a dubious distinction. Will either be held responsible for their nefarious actions or will they both slide by above repercussions?

It isn’t very likely Biden knew the optics of his comments to the press and the people standing behind him. For some reason people think it is a show of strength to make comments with a group of speechless mannequins as a backdrop. In this case, Governor Gavin Newsom was standing directly behind the President. Many found this ironic as Newsom is making it evident that he wants Biden’s job in 2024. The scene was as if Gavin Newsom was waiting for Biden to fall on his sword, and Newsome was there to take up the sword.

One thing doesn’t balance. The President and his mouthpiece, Jean-Pierre, continue to say that the President takes the handling of Classified Documents very seriously. Yet, he has no regrets that he was caught with classified materials from the Obama Administration in his garage six years after the end of Obama’s time in office. Maybe what he means is he seriously takes classified documents. It is all in the order of the words.

The post There is No There, There appeared first on Granite Grok.

Is Dartmouth Health’s Pediatric and Adolescent Transgender Health Program destroying children’s future fertility and sexual function by administering puberty blockers to 10-year-olds?

“You can introduce [puberty blockers] at age 10 and a half as all of a sudden puberty is about to explode on this child,” said John Turco, MD, director of Dartmouth Health’s Pediatric and Adolescent Transgender Health Program at an October 13, 2021 presentation. “It doesn’t mean you’re saying this is clearly a transgender individual, but it gives you a few more years to talk about that, and most importantly, it prevents puberty from exploding on this kid.”

But the research tells us that administering puberty blockers to children isn’t just “buying time,” as Dr. Turco said in a 2016 Valley News interview. It’s a decision with serious life-long consequences.

Studies consistently show that if children with gender dysphoria are allowed to go through puberty, the vast majority become comfortable with their bodies when they reach adulthood. The most recent study followed a group of gender dysphoric children for over 20 years and found that 87.8% outgrew their gender dysphoria.

In stark contrast, over 95% of children who are administered puberty blockers will move on to opposite-sex hormones, and those who start before the age of 12 will never have any sexual function, according to Marci Bowers, MD, president of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health who identifies as a transgender woman.

“Every single child who was truly blocked at Tanner Stage 2 [ages 9-11] has never experienced an orgasm. I mean, it’s really about zero,” said Bowers in a video panel. “To be intimate with a partner is very important. We need to have our eyes open to that.”

Children who take puberty blockers and move on to opposite sex hormones will probably be sterile, according to Dr. Jeremi Carswell, director of Boston Children’s Hospital’s Gender Multispeciality Service. “If you are giving something that shuts down your estrogen or shuts down testosterone entirely, you’re going to stop . . . producing sperm or eggs,” Carswell said in a video. “If you never started, you’re not going to … advance the gonads to be able to do that.”

In his presentation, Dr. Turco didn’t mention the risk of sexual dysfunction from these chemically castrating chemicals.  He indicated that concerns about bone loss are outweighed by the dangers of puberty. “Allowing kids to go through, quote, the wrong puberty can have devastating effects, so you’ve got to balance that off things like bone density,” he said. 

“I thought that there’s been some research that suppressing puberty can lead to problems later on and that some children who were treated with those drugs became sterile. Is that true?” asked a woman in the audience.

“Whatever risk there is, I think it’s minimal,” responded Turco. “And certainly when you weigh it against this kid at age 10-and-a-half that has this strong and persistent feeling. You know you’re pretty damn sure this kid’s going to be a trans man or a nonbinary individual in the future.”  

Related: Transgender Ideology Harms Children

Administrating puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria also raises ethical concerns about informed consent. How can a child consent to puberty blockers if he has no conception about adult intimacy?

Dr. Carswell acknowledges that physicians are handing out these chemicals “a lot like candy, which is great in some ways, but it’s like, OK, well, we need to have a conversation.”

Because little is known about how hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones, England’s National Health service is strictly limiting their use for treating gender dysphoria, and requiring that children taking them be enrolled in a formal research program. Harvard Medical School Professor Marc Garnick, MD recommends that children taking puberty blockers in the US also be part of a rigorous clinical research study to evaluate their short- and long-term health effects.

Dartmouth Health has not responded to a request for comment.

 

The post Is Dartmouth Health’s Pediatric Gender Clinic Destroying Kids’ Sexual Function? appeared first on Granite Grok.

New Hampshire House Bill 260 might have a few folks steamed. It will fine operators 100.00 if they are driving with a pet in their lap. Is this a bridge too far, or do you think it is a good idea?

Only one state prohibits pets in your lap while driving, while other states have distracted driving laws (NH has one) that would apply when the pet might have been the cause of a distraction resulting in an accident.

I love my dog, and he is too big to consider having him in my lap, but I have mixed feelings about this. Having driven professionally, I understand the need for zero distraction, but the notion of further infringement on freedom annoys me.

I don’t have data on pet-in-the-lap-related incidents, but I suspect they are few. Therefore, this is unnecessary. We can apply the distracted driving law on the books if needed.

Your thoughts.

 

1 New Section; Motor Vehicles; Operating With Animal On Driver’s Person Prohibited. Amend
RSA 265 by inserting after section 105-a the following new section:
265:105-b Operating With Animal On Driver’s Person Prohibited.
I. A person who operates any motor vehicle on a public way with an animal of any size on
their person, or who permits an animal to impede his or her free access to and use of vehicle controls
or to obstruct their vision with any animal between the operator and the operators door is guilty of a
violation.
II. The fine for a violation of this section shall be $100.
2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2024

 

There is also a bill to require seatbelts for operators of motor vehicles (HB 222) if you’d like to rant about that.

 

The post Prohibiting the Operation of Motor Vehicles by Drivers with Animals on Their Laps appeared first on Granite Grok.

OPPOSE – HB 353, establishing an interstate compact for universal healthcare. This bill is as described: a first step towards socialized medicine.

We at RebuildNH have fought to remove more government from healthcare since watching the disastrous government response to the Covid pandemic, but this bill seeks to create a completely government-controlled healthcare system, beginning by creating interstate compacts.

Who pays? While the bill is unclear and doesn’t even remotely seek to estimate the cost, we know that all taxpayers will pay, handsomely.

Thursday, January 26th, N.H. House – Commerce Committee
11:00 AM LOB, Room 302-304

Click here to register your disposition.
 Email the committee.

The post Oppose Socialized Medicine in NH appeared first on Granite Grok.

The cold weather on both sides of the Atlantic last month seems to have had its effect on temperature, which fell sharply compared with November, lengthening the New Pause to 8 years 4 months, as measured by the satellites designed, built and operated by Dr Roy Spencer and Dr John Christy at the University of Alabama in Huntsville:

…Recall that the Pause graph does not constitute a prediction: it simply reports the longest period, working back from the present, during which the temperature trend is not positive.

As always, here is the full 45-year UAH dataset from December 1978 to December 2022, showing a far from dramatic global warming trend equivalent to just 0.134 C/decade:

 

(H/T: Watts Up With That)

The post Data Point: Warming “Pause” is now 100 months. Only a 0.134 C degree per decade appeared first on Granite Grok.

A Norwegian ferry company that moves people, vehicles, mail, and other freight up and around northern Norway has decided it must ban any and all Electric Vehicles from its ships.

Related: “Electric Vehicles Are Exploding From Water Damage”

The risks for ships from the transport of electric cars have been discussed since the Felicity Ace sank off the Azores last February. E-vehicles on board had caught fire and the blaze could not be extinguished. Finally, the huge ship sank with thousands of electric cars and vehicles from Porsches and Bentleys.

According to a report by the TradeWinds shipping news service, Havila shipping company boss Bent Martini said the risk analysis showed that the fire in an electric car required a particularly complex rescue operation. The crew on board could not afford this. Passengers would also be at risk. This is different for vehicles with combustion engines. A possible fire is usually easy to fight by the crew.

 

They burn extremely hot and fast, and are immune to traditional methods to extinguish car fires. As previously reported,

 

“The lithium-ion battery adds a different degree, when we talk about the fire dynamics of it,” FDNY Deputy Assistant Chief Frank Leeb said at the briefing. “These rooms flash over in just a mere matter of seconds.” …

The problem is that lithium-ion fires burn extremely hot and are virtually impervious to conventional firefighting methods that use water or foam. In fact, lithium reacts very badly to water, which is really a problem if firefighters are attacking a fire for which they don’t know the cause.

 

And it’s not just cars in garages, roadsides, or the ferry.

 

Larger lithium cells in cars, bikes, or (I suspect) even wheelchairs are creating risks, especially in apartment population-dense cities. New York City “Chief Fire Marshall Daniel Flynn says this is almost the 200th fire caused by a lithium-ion battery from a micromobility device just this year in New York City.”

 

The earth-wrecking, unreliable green-energy future will include a lot of hot, toxic fires. And what do those do? They release pollution and other emissions into the atmosphere.

And now, for the punchline. Havila shipping embraces ESG, promotes green ships with battery packs, and supports the renewable energy industry. And their cruise ships are advertised as the most eco-friendly on the Norwegian Route.

But no EVs on board.

 

The post “Green” Shipping Company Bans EVs to Protect Passengers, Freight, and Crew … appeared first on Granite Grok.

The first peculiarity of a spontaneous order is that by using its ordering forces (the regularity of the conduct of its members) we can achieve an order of a much more complex set of facts than we could ever by deliberate arrangement, but that, while availing ourselves of this possibility of inducing an order of much greater extent than we otherwise could, we at the same time limit our power over the details of that order. We shall say that using the former principle we shall have power only over the abstract character but not over the concrete detail of that order.

-F.A. Hayek ( “The Principles of a Liberal Social Order”)

Free Markets are just that – free from Government intervention or “guidance”. Consumers do just that – consume. Producers do exactly that – produce stuff that, hopefully, consumers want.  To do so, especially if it is a product vs a service, it is rare that a single company is so vertically oriented that they make everything their end product requires. Thus, that leads to all kinds of cooperation.

Some of it is organized by buyers relying on past trading partners that they trust to supply “widgets” they work for them. In other cases, it’s a search for other widgets and coming to terms with unknown folks they’ve never dealt with. And that process is continued all the down to the least sub-assembly or part. And that endpoint producer may never have known that Producer A ever wanted or needed their product. The only “organizing” may be simply a price point, a set of product specifications, and promised lead times; the people don’t know each other and could not have communicated beforehand.

The “ordering” is considered to be “spontaneous” and ad hoc in nature; there is no overall “Great Mind” that is in charge – people and companies just orgranize themselves in support of their own self-interests and goals.

Prof Don Boudreaux: …Market’s spontaneous-ordering forces…

For the market to function as well as is possible, we cannot pick and choose which particular prices and resource-allocation patterns we like and which we don’t. We cannot forcibly attempt to change the prices and patterns that we don’t like into ones that better suit our fancy, while expecting the prices and resource-allocation patterns that are not the direct objects of our intervention to remain unchanged. The enormous interconnectedness of markets simply will not allow such an outcome.

Not only is any such intervention an attempt to unfairly exempt some workers and resource owners from having to abide by the rules of the market, the unintended and unseen consequences – both economic and political – are very likely to be worse than whatever benefits might be expected from the ‘success’ of the intervention.

(H/T: Cafe Hayek)

The post Notable Quote – It’s Unfortunate That “Spontaneous Order” Isn’t Better Recognized appeared first on Granite Grok.

One of our readers directed me to this Twitter thread, and you should read it. John Lee Pettimore, a professional miner for 40 years, has seen it all, and he has some not-so-pleasant news about what we need to do to mother earth in pursuit of the Green Agenda.

We’ve covered some of this on these pages already, but there are a few revelations – new to me – that we can add to the toolbox.

Here’s how he starts.

 

As a miner for 40 years I have worked in various mines around the world. Gold, platinum, copper, coal, lead, zinc, oil and salt. I’m going to tell you something, and here it is. We will destroy the earth in the name of “Green Energy” Follow along and I will explain.

— John Lee Pettimore (@JohnLeePettim13) January 14, 2023

 

John goes on to explain the scope.

 

MiningWatch Canada is estimating that “[Three] billion tons of mined metals and minerals will be needed to power the energy transition” – a “massive” increase especially for six critical minerals: lithium, graphite, copper, cobalt, nickel and rare earth minerals

— John Lee Pettimore (@JohnLeePettim13) January 14, 2023

 

Over the next 30 years 7.5 billion of us, we will consume more minerals than the last 70,000 years or the past 500 generations, which is more than all of the 108 billion humans who have ever walked the Earth.

Emphasis Mine.

Mining requires the extraction of solid ores, often after removing vast amounts of overlying rock. Then the ore must be processed, creating an enormous quantity of waste – about 100 billion tonnes a year, more than any other human-made waste stream.

Purifying a single tonne of rare earths requires using at least 200 cubic meters of water, which then becomes polluted with acids and heavy metals. On top of that, imagine the destruction and energy required to obtain these essential metals:

18,740 pounds of purified rock to produce 2.2 pounds of vanadium 35,275 pounds of ore for 2.2 pounds of cerium 110,230 pounds of rock for 2.2 pounds of gallium 2,645,550 pounds of ore to get 2.2 pounds of lutecium Also staggering amounts of ore are needed for other metals.

By 2035, demand is expected to double for germanium; quadruple for tantalum; and quintuple for palladium. The scandium market could increase nine-fold, and the cobalt market by a factor of 24. (Marscheider-Wiedemann 2016 ‘raw materials for emerging technologies’).

Achieving even a fraction of the alleged green evolution will be messy and earth-damaging in ways so-called greens have not been told or never imagined.

There is nothing refined about mining. It involves crushing rock, and then using a concoction of chemical reagents such as sulphuric and nitric acid, a long and highly repetitive process using many different procedures to obtain a rare-earth concentrate close to 100% purity.

— John Lee Pettimore (@JohnLeePettim13) January 14, 2023

.

Do you think solar panels are “Green” Think again. There is nothing green about solar panels. Did you know we clear cut forests, not for panel placement but for the wood needed to produce the panels. Don’t believe me, have a read. https://t.co/wX4xCk9D9C

— John Lee Pettimore (@JohnLeePettim13) January 14, 2023

Green’ technologies require the use of rare minerals whose mining is anything but clean. Heavy metal discharges, acid rain, and contaminated water sources — it borders on being an environmental disaster. Put simply, clean energy is a dirty affair.

— John Lee Pettimore (@JohnLeePettim13) January 14, 2023

It seems unlikely that devotees, zealots if you like, of the Green Energy gods will be moved by these remarks.

And yeah, it’ll create jobs in China, Africa, and Russia, but they won’t be green. And for what? Energy solutions that can’t begin to meet our needs today, forget the all-electric future we’re ravaging the earth to pursue.

 

The post John Lee Pettimore: “We Will Destroy the Earth in the Name of “Green Energy” appeared first on Granite Grok.

Continuing with my “unstacking” of stuff. Note how the framing is stacked against one side of this argument. And no, this isn’t another Lloyd post:

A Conservative Recalibration on Climate Is Inevitable, But Bipartisanship Is Not the Endgame
What we need in the U.S. is rapid, complete, fair, and equitable decarbonization.

And yes, as always, reformatting and emphasis mine here. You could just read this title/subtitle combo and understand the rest of the post without reading. The burden of change is shoved onto Conservatives; WE have to take a knee to their ideas.  In fact, that “Bipartisanship” bit? Totally unnecessary. They know WHAT they want, they know WHEN they want it – but it won’t be fair and it won’t be “equitable”.

Our ideas don’t matter to them. Period.

How can it when you already declared that you’re perfectly willing to completely run over your opposition? And while the subject is, once again, a complete transformation of our energy supply and usage, it’s actually about WHO controls YOU?  They don’t CARE what you think – you just need to submit. And Sami Grover decided to lock onto conservative pundit Raymond Arroyo’s words about the midterm results:

Certainly, conservative pundits like Raymond Arroyo appeared to recognize the threat of not engaging seriously on this topic. Speaking on the “Laura Ingraham Show,” and later mocked by late night host John Oliver, Arroyo declared: “The Democrats were also very deliberate in their pitch to young people. They offered them drugs, recreational drugs; abortion; paid-off student loans; actionable policies that they were promising to advance—and also climate change!”

However incredulous, Arroyo’s commentary suggests something important: He recognizes that failing to offer meaningful solutions to climate change is costing his party votes (and future voters). On the one hand, this shift in awareness is a very good thing. Many of us concerned about the climate crisis would dearly love to see a shift in the Overton Window so we start debating how to best fix the problem, rather than whether the problem really exists in the first place.

Which, as I pointed out in the comments, was an ill advised take on his words (it’s clear he doesn’t listen often to the Ingraham show).  And then he “went there”:

The climate movement will need to be careful as that conversation shifts. Bipartisanship by itself is not the goal. Rapid, complete, fair, and equitable decarbonization is. To the extent that inter-party policy debates can advance that cause, we should welcome them. But we will also have to keep a close eye out for bad faith efforts designed to look like reasonable debate, rather than a meaningful contribution to getting us where the science says we so desperately need to go.

And I dryly note that his use of “bad faith” was yet another slap at those of us that just won’t “swallow” the Truth that they believe is theirs alone.

Vindaloo Bugaboo set the stage for the rebuttal (which Sami RARELY engages in) and asks the question that these Eco-Socialist never answer:

Bipartisanship by itself is not the goal. Rapid, complete, fair, and equitable decarbonization is.

Rapid: not possible.
Complete: there are applications where fossil fuels are absolutely essential.
Fair: impossible to define; therefore, irrelevant and a distraction.

And THE question:

Equitable: to whom? from whom?

This is why our youth are indoctrinated in GreenSpeak—because they’ve been fed a steady diet of propaganda amid histrionics, are unaware of the scope and cost of necessary change, and don’t have their own financial interests (yet) on the line.

When 63% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, even some who make six-figures plus, who’s going to pay for these green dreams?

My buttress to his points:

Took the words off my finger tips. Sami’s primary premise is false, arbitrary, and capricious.

What’s worst, is that he seems to believe that there are no tradeoffs either within any of those given domains nor across them.

He recognizes that failing to offer meaningful solutions to climate change is costing his party votes (and future voters). On the one hand, this shift in awareness is a very good thing. Many of us concerned about the climate crisis would dearly love to see a shift in the Overton Window so we start debating how to best fix the problem,

He also has a #FAIL in interpreting Ray’s words as something they aren’t. Grover is trying to have the thought that he’s moving towards Sami’s stance with the Overton Window bit. Grover would have known better if he had listened to him over a long period of time and would have caught what Arroyo was throwing.

It’s also clear that that he, VB, isn’t listening to folks like you, Bob Baal, me, and a few others here who actually bringing up and defending Conservative / Libertarian values.

And then I was accused by a THer of not understanding what “totalitarianism” really is when I said:

Or change being FORCED upon people. That’s totalitarianism.

disqus_kDxjrtCoRJ:

No, totalitarianism is an assertion that government has the right to control EVERYTHING. EVERY government forces some change on people. That’s the only reason to have government. By your criterion, the U.N. should send troops to prevent India from forcing people to change their still-too-common traditions of suttee and dowry murder.

Amusing, as when the British conquered India, they famously eliminated suttee and dowry murder at the start of that colonial regime. And it is clear that this guy has no idea what the Proper Role of Government is – and it isn’t to “change” people:

The UN is not a governmental agency.

Yes, Totalitarianism does have a bit of a spectrum. I’m also using the history of TH here of authors and commenters fairly often calling for government force to have others live their lives in ways that they otherwise wouldn’t.

Shouldn’t the Free Market, in which consumers should be making their own decisions for themselves, be the main focus EVEN IF YOU DISAGREE with their choices? It seems that, more and more, Government should be taking all decisions away from folks like me and you. Isn’t that totalitarianism?

What, then, WOULD be the definition of a free people?

Look at the title of this post – it is calling for all “Progressivism” (aka, socialism by a different name) and all but outlawing any other political thought (e.g., MINE which holds that each of us should be making the majority of life’s decisions ourselves) that runs counter to it in any way.

And then he stepped in it by not understanding basic definitions:

One cannot hold a useful discussion on anything if one doesn’t know and USE the proper definition of words. “Socialism” is decidedly NOT a synonym for “progressivism.” Socialism is used incorrectly by American conservatives as a pejorative for anything they do not like. The actual meaning of socialism is a highly specific economic structural concept. Socialism is an economic system in which the government owns the means of production, including the land, the factories, the trucks and aircraft, ships and railroads. Progressivism is the demand for an effective social safety net for all, i.e., for social security, one-payer health care, decent education for all, safe working conditions and, oh yes, an environment that can actually sustain life indefinitely. It has no more to do with socialism than “as-SOCIA-tion” football does. And yes, if the government literally took away ALL decisions from the people, that would be totalitarianism. But that is NOT the way you used the word the first time around…you used it as a term for enforcing any and all change. Do you support or oppose a woman’s freedom to make her own decision about abortion? I’m not asking for your answer, just providing a litmus test for you to judge whether you really oppose totalitarian government as much as you think. As for how to define a free people, I do so with this “MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS” principle: “In a densely populated, resource-intensive society, the practicable definition of liberty is that the power of government is limited by constitution, law, culture and government structure to prohibiting or mandating personal behaviors when and only when [1] the prohibited behaviors directly harm or substantially imperil the physical safety and health, the lawful and fairly earned property, or the legally established personal rights of other non-consenting people (i.e., those who have not agreed to assume risk); or [2] the mandated behaviors are critical to avoiding negligent harm to the physical safety and health, the lawful and fairly earned property, or the legally established personal rights of other non-consenting people. The natural resources of the Earth are critical to the survival and well-being of all people and are therefore subject to protection and management by governments under the democratic control of all the people of their respective jurisdictions.” What is YOUR definition?

So a history lesson was in order:

Back in the 1880s when Von Clauswitz was rolling up the various Germanic City-States, socialism was starting to rear its head. American Intellectuals that went to Germany to study were all agog with this new system that was completely antithetical to the Freedoms in the US Constitution / Declaration of Independence.

Instead, they conflated this foreign political philosophy with the Industrial Revolution and posited that Society could be controlled just as Men controlled the machinery in the factories; people became mere cogs and lost that quintessential idea of Individualism (actually, they hated it).

However, as they brought it back during the 1880s and 1890s, they understood that the word “socialism” had already soiled itself in the eyes of the American populace. So what did they do?

They renamed it Progressivism but continued on with its precepts. And after a few decades, they found they had despoiled that term as well.

So with perfect framing in mind, they started to call themselves “Liberals” even as their philosophy remained the same. And then despoiled that as well.

And we’re back to “Progressivism” once again, with the “renamers” believing that no one remembered this history (after all, they are 1984-ing American history as they stroll around).

But some of us DO and we like to point it out when the opportunity presents itself.

THANKS for allowing me to tell this tale once again!

And then one more shot – I challenged the author as to his premise but of course didn’t get an answer. I DID get an answer from another commenter that PERFECTLY encapsulates how the Left views us:

Hey Sami! How come the Left always says that Conservatives have to change their views (e.g., your “Conservative Recalibration”) and never a “Liberal” Recalibration?

BassBinDevil let the cat out of the bag:

Is it because compromising with Republicans in 2022 is like compromising with a cannibal? The party went off the rails 40 years ago.

Perfect. Just a perfect ending. Get them talking, then get them talking a bit more, and sooner rather than later, they’ll tell you exactly what they think (and generally confirms what you knew anyways):

compromising with a cannibal

And with that one phrase, you’ve shown the recalcitrance of the Left when it comes to “bipartisanship” in categorizing those that disagree with you as “first they kill you, then they eat you”.

Yeah, that gives me (and those like me) just the warm fuzzies to sit down to pow-wow.

Not.

Well, there you go, Sami! How now, now?

<snip>

Just look at the second part of Sami’s post title which spills the beans:

But Bipartisanship Is Not the Endgame

There is to be no compromise at all. Bipartisanship, BY DEFINITION, means compromise. Without it, there can be no compromise.

In Sami’s little game here, ONLY Democrats have the right to force and demand change. Republicans are only to obey as he’s calling for the loss of agency.

Do I have the right of it, Sami? That your call for compromise is just a sham (and a shame)?

Be intellectually honest here, Sami, as one of your devotees already called a fair number of us here “cannibals”. Right or wrong?

<snip>

They just can’t be honest with us…

…or themselves.

Never got an answer. Not that I expected one but it would have been nice to hear a wee bit of groveling.

I’ll close with this last insight from another Conservative: Kevin Bryer

Conservatives haven’t spent the last forty year stubbornly protesting the only energy source that can actually replace fossil fuels. You know, the only one that can actually achieve the goal of decarbonization, rapidly, completely, fairly, and equitably. So you really shouldn’t be surprised when people start to suspect that it’s not carbon your after, but civilization itself.

Of course, if that is not the case, perhaps you need to do a little recalibrating yourself.

He had exactly right:

The line and insight of the Day, Kevin. It is always about Control.

Without fail.

The post So, Treehugger finally said the Quiet Part Out Loud – Only the Left is Correct on the Issues appeared first on Granite Grok.

Biology was already in trouble. Identity Politics Zealots proselytizing their Marxist cultural mythology put them on notice over the gender thing. But if an organism’s structures do not classify its status, there can be no science, only faith. Oh, and evolution is ableist!

 

The paper, “Discussions of the ‘Not So Fit’: How Ableism Limits Diverse Thought and Investigative Potential in Evolutionary Biology,” published in American Naturalist last year, accused the field of evolutionary biology of “ableism.” To demonstrate this, the authors manipulated statistics to give the illusion that the field of evolutionary biology is particularly discriminatory against disabled people by inappropriately comparing rates of disability within evolutionary biology to society generally.

The paper argues that concepts like “fitness” and “natural selection” —  foundational to the field of evolutionary biology, which studies the diversification and adaptation of life forms over time — are “harmful” and have been “weaponized against marginalized communities in the modern day.”

 

Universities are the breeding grounds for this ignorance as it spreads into every intellectual well. A preeminent ideological theology whose dogma commands all others. And isn’t that rich?

Modern progressives have long accused the major religions, particularly Christianity, of being a backward and ignorant lot working to drag us back to the 12th century.

Christians built many of the first hospitals and founded some of our oldest universities. They collected knowledge from around the globe and secured it in their libraries. Hundreds of years later, their accusers have not only dumbed down government-run education, they are undermining science itself in the name of identity politics.

How long before Taxonomy is futile? If a man with a penis can be a woman, then any other mammal with one is just as easily reclassified as a female because someone feels like it or – sorry – is offended at the notion of rendering it.

Kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species. It’s rubbish. Evolution was always sketchy science with supermassive black holes in it, but at least it tried to be science. And a lot of good science has come from it. We continue to learn and expand our understanding of a diverse world. How long will that last?

Can it last?

Twenty years ago, we giggled at politically correct people. We laughed at the early versions of university speech guides ten years ago. Today the inmates are running the asylum and churning out millions of missionaries who have infected corporate and government culture.

One paper claiming that evolution is ableist seems amusing and easily disproven, but the paper’s assumptions are not the issue. The problem is the education system that created the people who wrote it.

I know a few folks have woken up and are trying to take it back at the K-12 level, but it may not be enough. We’re in some deep ‘you know what.’

The post Another Great Leap Backward: Biology Was Already Sexist, And Now It’s Ableist! appeared first on Granite Grok.

Yes, it’s back. And I thank NH State Rep Jess Edwards for stepping into the fray with his attempt with HB129-FN-LOCAL (and for NH State Rep Judy Aron that attempted to fix the wrong last session) that attempts to “cure” the Unconstitutional Act that became law back in 2019 as it violated Article 28-A.

I’m talking about that Culture War bill that the Democrats put forward concerning “Period Poverty” in which the premise was that girls’ families didn’t have the funds to acquire menstrual / hygenic materials on their own (shades of Sandra Fluke in that grown women not being able to afford birth control).  So the Democrats spun up SB142 back in 2019 to force School Districts to supply such products for free (er, Govt yet again being used to socialize everyone’s costs for something). You can go to the link are read everything but the Amended Analysis sums it up well:

This bill requires school boards to make menstrual hygiene products available, free of charge, in restrooms designated for girls and gender-neutral restrooms located in public middle and high schools.

The problem is that it violated the NH Constitution – Article 28-A (emphasis mine):

[Art.] 28-a. [Mandated Programs.]  The state shall not mandate or assign any new, expanded or modified programs or responsibilities to any political subdivision in such a way as to necessitate additional local expenditures by the political subdivision unless such programs or responsibilities are fully funded by the state or unless such programs or responsibilities are approved for funding by a vote of the local legislative body of the political subdivision.

In other words, the State cannot tell towns, cities, school districts, water districts, et al that they have to spend money UNLESS the State provides the money. Period (sarcasm intentional in this case). I keep hearing that Republicans are “the Party of the Constitution” but on this, they “conveniently forgot” all about it and I named the names at the time that voted to help Democrats in their Culture War / creeping socialism:

SB142 – Republicans that voted FOR this unconstitutional bill:

Senate: Jeb Bradley, John Reagan, David Starr, Ruth Ward
House: Max Abramson, Arthur Barnes, Charles Burns, Joel Desilets (REALLY, again you show up voting with Democrats???), Peter Hayward

And what made it worse still was Chris Sununu also signing the bill that made “Gender Identity” a protected class so Districts had to also put the dispensers in boys bathrooms (and the expected rebellious vandalism occurred in some cases, costing the districts even more.

So NH State Rep Jess Edwards put in HB129 that seeks to remedy the problem caused by Governor Chris Sununu and his support of the Left’s Culture War:

This bill requires the department of education to fund the cost of school districts providing menstrual hygiene products.  The bill also allows school districts to receive funds for providing menstrual hygiene products during previous school years.

Simple remedy to cure that unconstitutional act.  While I don’t like the continued cross-sexuality war that is raging in our schools, having the State honor and obey its foundational Law (the NH Constitution) is of higher importance right now.  And having the State pay now, which it should have in the beginning, makes it right.

The next step, in my opinion, would then to completely revoke the mandate all together and make it such that local control comes back into play. After all, isn’t that what Gov. Chris Sununu is touting all over the nation as he’s trying to raise his profile going hither and thither and getting in front of every camera and mic possible?

But remember, Sununu is the root cause for all of this:

• So, [Republican? Snicker!] Gov. Chris Sununu Told Us All That He Is Anti-parents and All in for the Teacher’s Unions
• Testimony in Opposition to SB 263 – “It’s not fair to force girls to compete against boys”
• Sununu Signs HB608 – Gender Rights Supersede The rights of Biological Women and Taxpayers
• Tearing out the bricks of Society’s Wall again – thanks Gov. Sununu for telling Social Conservatives to go stuff it. Again

Note: I did get an email from another State Rep that plaintively asked:

How do we get ourselves so wrapped up? This law is so ridiculous to have in the first place. We are paying for everything at the Schools (I get 28-a and agree, but how stupid are we?).

My response:

How Stupid?  THIS stupid: https://granitegrok.com/blog/2021/03/thanks-for-listening-nh-republicans-seek-to-roll-back-free-menstrual-products-in-public-schools-law

We fail because the Rs have NO Constitutional discipline. We fail because Rs are scared of the Dems. We fail because too many Rs #1 job is to get re-elected and not scared enough to do the right things correctly.

We fail because we get “out-messaged” – ALL the Rs should have stood up and ridiculed “period poverty” or at least done some homework on how bad it is instead of going along with “anecdotes”. We fail because Rs don’t challenge the Ds to stop being lazy and go do the work to create a non-profit, solicit monies, and pay for it themselves.

Or the Rs should have said “No, the State can’t do this – we’re suing” and done so.  Lately, I wish I had gone to Law school and done it myself. It’s a little late for me now – by the time I’d get through Law school and pass the bar, I’ll probably be dead.

Or do the non-profit themselves.  THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX in defeating the expansion of Government.  And in this case, protecting the “semi-Federalism” presented by 28-A.

The post And We’re Back Here Again because Republicans and NH Gov Chris Sununu Refuse to Honor the NH Constitution: “Period Poverty” appeared first on Granite Grok.

Post Traumatic Stress is not so much a disorder as it is a natural human reaction to things that happen to us, and new research alleges that Climate Change is now a growing cause of it.

There are so many things wrong with this research.

First, the subjects are Californians. Need I say more? I will.

The bulk of the trauma experienced as “climate” in this research was the 2018 California Camp Fire, a devastating blaze that killed 85 people and burned down thousands of structures, including homes and businesses. It was a wholly unique and terrifying event. The idea that people who survived it might have post-traumatic stress is like suggesting people a majority of those surveyed were less thirsty after drinking a tall, cool glass of water.

The reporting suggests that traumatic weather events resulting from Climate Change created PTSD-like symptoms and that mental health experts must be prepared to help the survivors.

The California Camp Fire was the result of political negligence and progressive priorities. It was started by an agin transmission line and spread by typical California winds in a state with a history of land-management neglect, especially forestland.

It was a Liberal-man-caused disaster and not the result of a warming planet or any other Climate Cult myth.

To be clear, the trauma is real, and some folks will carry that around their entire life. Some of them may need support. And yes, people have been traumatized by severe weather for as long as humans have tried to live on a planet that has it. It’s not new. It will always result in stress. Though I’d argue equally for that, there is significant unjustified stress created by false or incomplete narratives about things like climate (or COVID) which contribute.

The non-stop harassment of regular citizens creates plenty of stress, which is justified by events like the Camp fire or natural earthly weather.

It’s gaslighting.

A more accurate survey would examine the mental stress caused by excessive regulation and taxation – especially in California – resulting from the progressive obsession with using climate to launder tax dollars into certain people’s pockets. We could use call it Post Tax-Bill Stress Disorder PTSD). A genuine and complicated mental health threat with vectors from every level of government.

 

The study was published in PLOS Climate. I think they meant POS.

 

The post Post Tax-Bill Stress Disorder (PTSD) Linked to Climate Change appeared first on Granite Grok.

To all those who are sending in memes, thank you!  Keep them coming please, as it helps me gather weaponry to fight the Left.  Please do share this post, and if you share an individual meme, consider mentioning you saw it on the Grok!

A request: if you grab a meme from here, please do include a linkback to this post and say “Found here” or some such.  Helps me, helps the Grok.

Speaking of, from this week, Monday Memes and Meme Overflow.  Also don’t forget both complementary parts of my Survival Sunday feature:  PREP edition and SITREP edition.

 

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

 

 

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

 

First, a PSA.  In general, throughout my life, few have been in front of me in terms of my trust in, respect for, and deference towards the Thin Blue Line.  Police have an incredibly difficult job, a potentially very dangerous job, and I respect that enormously.  But if you recall from the last SITREP post, towards the end, I discussed Betrayal Trauma and what I see is it being one of the reasons why so many people do not want to see so many things going on.  Seeing the police, in country after country including the US, become basically enforcement goons for the Covidian tyranny – with scant few people saying I will not obey that order (Bill Whittle video, six minutes) – I am finding my trust in, respect for, and deference towards them vastly diminished.  And I’m traumatized by that.  I don’t want to view the police, any police, with suspicion.  Increasingly, I am.  (Consider this disqus comment, embedded within is a comment about a lone woman being shooed off a bench for resting in public.  Thuggery.  And by myriad accounts, few police had the decency to let things pass.)

I fear this is deliberately done.  Peoples are increasingly becoming hostile towards their militaries & police because of the last few years.  The police, in turn, know which side of their paycheck bread is buttered, and the anger towards the police turns those police (and more broadly the military) against those they are sworn to protect and serve (consider the military in the Netherlands against the farmers, who doubtless now view each other with suspicion and resentment).  And thus, the people – police and military – that should be our first line of defense are sundered from us in what I see as a shrewd divisive strike by the globalists.

So directly to my email box came a request to post the following video, link below.  Text from this article is here:

In the early morning hours of December 13th, 2022, officers from the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Department obtained a search warrant for a residence in Bear Paw, NC after a disturbance call made to 911 dispatch hours earlier.

In addition to obtaining the search warrant, officers from the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Department also requested assistance from the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians’ SWAT team and a siege of the residence was conducted.

Just before 5 AM that morning, SWAT officers tossed a robot equipped with cameras into the residence and awoke the sleeping couple.

Go watch that video.  I saw NO JUSTIFICATION for the shoot.  Also read the comments.

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

Mockery level: EPIC.  As is this:

 

 

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

 

   

 

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

 

 

And did anyone catch this at the WEF?  A crippling cyberattack inevitable within two years?  Another case of telegraphing the next move?

 

https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/wef-2023-cyber-attack-inevitable.mp4

 

Remember Klaus’ predictions as related by Candace Owens?

 

https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/candace-owens-on-inevitable-cyberattack.mp4

 

Just yesterday my daughter was asking about a coronal mass ejection and what that might do to the grid.  Would we survive?  Depends on how long the grid would be down, sweetie.  And from several years ago is this piece from Bill Whittle:

 

 

And reports of ongoing attacks on substations.  Yes, the grid is enormously vulnerable, and without hardening it and protecting it, it can be taken down whether naturally or by intent.  With the grid down… things get very, very difficult – and if down for more than a few days, a lot of people are going to die.  Which, if you recall, is the intent.

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

More EPIC mockery:

 

 

 

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

 

SURAK has a must-read essay at his new substack:

Murder by hospital – Surak substack blog

As he is wont to say, “They really do want you dead”.

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

Pick of the post:

 

 

The EPIC ones were notable – and all had value.  This, however, is the best because it is a necessary reminder that Crimes against humanity do not just include active murders or executions or prison guards.  They include those who contributed to the mass misleading of The People to enable and drive cooperation with these things.

 

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

 

 

Help a guy make a buck – buy a few of these!

Build Back Better – the hidden message Bumper Sticker | Zazzle

 

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

 

Palate Cleansers:

 

—

 

And suddenly, I now have a to-do list to start planning.

—

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

On Monday, Hollis Grok contributor Aaron Penkacik sent a shot across our bow about a new ATF rule that turns millions of law-abiding Americans into felons overnight. But it’s worse than that. Trying to comply with the rule is a trap.

As a refresher,

 

What the new rule demands are that anyone who owns a large format pistol equipped with a stabilizing pistol brace must register it with the ATF as a short-barreled rifle (SBR), or the short barrel removed and a 16-inch or longer rifle barrel attached to the firearm, or permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the “stabilizing brace” such that it cannot be reattached, or the firearm is turned in to your local ATF office, or the firearm is destroyed.

 

The rule is complex and poorly written but includes a grace period for you to license your firearm under the new rule. You have 120 days after it has been published in the Federal Register, and here’s where the trap comes in.

ATF is now handling all firearms background checks. They are busy. The process for required licensing of a qualifying firearm prior to the writing of the new rule could take a lot longer than 120 days. Adding millions of new requests in the days after they publish the rule means it will take longer. Years?

Filing requires you to provide the ATF with your name, address, and all sorts of stuff, including fingerprints.

Any request that goes unapproved for 88 days is automatically declined. At that point, the ATF’s default response is to engage in an enforcement action against you, and you’ve sent them all the information they need to find you, arrest you, and confiscate your property, because you tried to comply with their rule.

The violation is a felony; up to ten years in prison and 250,000 dollars in fines. And this is the ATF, so hide your dog (you can’t hide the gun you already told them you have).

If you want to watch it explained, I’ve included a video below with a lawyer for Gun Owners of America.

Now!

Last year, New Hampshire passed HB1178, which prohibits any state agent or agency from enforcing this sort of thing, but a provision in the law permits cooperation, and there’s nothing I see about stopping them – leaving us to wonder what the State will do.

We hope that any number of lawsuits will stall publication in the national register or prevent them from starting the 120-day clock. That the courts will tie it up and eventually toss it.

We want to hope that the justice apparatus in the Live Free or Die State would defend its citizens from arbitrary prosecution, given both the rule itself and the trap set by the ATF in the new rule.

There are no guarantees, and it is best to assume you’ve got no backup from law enforcement or the AG.

So, have any NH gun groups or 2A advocates mailed, emailed, or filed anything with anyone at the State or federal level about this pernicious rule change?

And what do you do if you have a firearm that fits the ATF’s new criteria and needs to be licensed?

Here is a link to the ATF rule change.

And here’s the video I promised.

 



 

The post Trying to Comply With the ATF’s New “Short Barreled Rifle Rule” (SBR) Is a Trap! appeared first on Granite Grok.

I have to admit, again, that I do spend quite a bit of time over at Treehugger “mining” for fodder. Sometimes, too much time because then I can’t decide what to bring back here and there are a lot of times, on a lot of their posts, my comments go in all kinds of directions. 

However, this one, not so much.

For years, Lloyd has been against gas stoves. The root cause, though, is the poor ventilation in most houses. But, given his “ELECTRIFY EVERYTHING” outlook, it turns out this was just another time to beat the drum against gas stoves back in November before the lastest round of “BAN GAS STOVES” Culture War (and Governance War) that just popped up when the CPSC’s Trumka said “yeah, we can ban that”.

The post is “It’s Time to Get Serious About Particulate Pollution“:

Nobody used to talk much about particulates. Like these guys having a smoke at noon in Pittsburgh in 1940, everyone was swimming in a soup of particulates from cars, from burning coal for industry as they did in Pittsburgh, and of course, from smoking. It was a given in our lives.

As Treehugger’s Russell McLendon noted:

 “People have been choking on manmade air pollution for roughly half a million years, ever since Pleistocene cavemen huddled around the first campfires. That was clearly worth a few lungfuls of soot — fire gave us warmth, night vision and cooked meat, most likely outweighing the times it gave us bronchitis.”

At least this last guy realized that life is a bunch of tradeoffs – Lloyd, being a purist, isn’t. His way / highway seems to be it and that highway is always in a search for almost to a complete ban on what HE decides is bad for everyone. And he set his gaze upon the insides of our homes:

Most of his post then goes into all the stuff that we should CARE about in our homes – and get rid of it. Simple because of Particulate Matter (yes, go read the post). Of COURSE, to eliminate everything, he calls for everything to be regulated. Everything.

Of course I couldn’t let it go:

So, Lloyd, I am hearing you say that EVERYTHING must be taken away from our homes in order to live well – just take that pretty in-home image of all the PM pollution sources.

So, no more kitchens for cooking, no cleaning supplies, no more “mood setting” candles (but what about them when the RE grid goes down…again?), can’t get rid of the mold because you took away our cleaning supplies, and how the heck can I air out the house when you take away the outside air? Dust mites galore, other allegens…why aren’t we all already dead?

And you can take my wood stove only out of my cold dead hands.

Heck, you’re presenting a pretty bad picture for those that are going to have a real hard time just with Heat and Eat because of Bidenflation and Green New Deal energy policies. How many more must die because of bad governance???

So many problems but no practical solutions.

Like minded Bob (most of the time), pitches in on Lloyd as well and let’s him know that there is more than just Green:

So, we take away everything that gives us joy. Like fried steak – that spills PM2.5 like you would not believe. We take away our floor coverings because particulates. We take away all of our pets, lots of contamination there. And at the end of it we still end up dead!

And it kills tens of thousands of people every year.”
Perhaps it’s time to remind ourselves of something:

It’s not how long you play the game for that counts it’s what you do with that time in the game that shows the quality of your life.

He’s not wrong, you know. What medical experts / COVID queens and the Lloyds of the world do is hone in on the smallest or single parts of Life. But to them, that’s ALL Life should be about – and they demand that we make their concerns our AND to the same maximal amount as they do.

Sorry, I’d like to think that I’m not a single or two dimensional kinda guy. That’s not how most of us live our lives (though I do admit I spend more time doing the blogging stuff than might be good…but that’s my decision, not theirs, and I don’t force it on them).

And I left a last comment to that effect and pointed out the biggest difference between them and us:

So, we take away everything that gives us joy.

Indeed. They lock into these issues that normal folks don’t care about and demand that we obey them as they turn our lives upside down and inside out. They demand that we accept that their issues MUST be ours as if we have no agency of our own.

We Normals only have such agency as they allow us to have as they manipulate Govt to bend us to their wills.

No choice, no freedom of our own. Only the freedom to obey.

Sure. Cold dead hands wrapped round that cylinder atop your shoulders.

 

 

The post Treehugger – Yep, I’m Unstacking Stuff. Treehugger Was against Stoves before They Were against Stoves. appeared first on Granite Grok.