Monday • April 21 • 2025
Vol.XVII • No.XVII
Manchester, N.H.
Mitt Romney showed us all this week why he cannot be considered a true Conservative or even a Republican and why it is a good thing for the GOP that he will be retiring from the Senate when his term expires. Romney appeared on CNN and gave a mixed message on his view of Donald Trump. Let’s try to break it down.
There was a cursory chat about Republican policies, but then the conversation got around to Trump. It was interesting that Romney had some praise for Trump’s domestic platform but had nothing good to say about his foreign policy. This is where I believe Romney went off the rails and began to contradict himself and confuse the Biden and Trump records.
For example, Romney thinks we are safer and more of a leader internationally under Biden and that we will be an island unto our own under Trump. I completely disagree with this statement. First, Trump was the only president in the last 50 years not to involve the US in a conflict on another shore. Trump kept Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran in check for four years. Trump put pressure on NATO to anti-up on their fair share of costs. He used tariffs when necessary and made it understood that we would defend ourselves. As Reagan said, strength is the best defense. Nobody will push you if they know you will put them on their backsides. Biden and his minions have no understanding of that approach. Appeasement has us dumping billions into Ukraine, our best ally in the Middle East, being attacked on two fronts, and Iran weeks away from a nuclear missile. Biden has also destroyed our sovereignty by opening up our southern border.
Romney says it is all about character for him, and in his opinion, Trump has none. I will stipulate that no one is without sins, but to say that Biden is a man of character makes me question Romney’s acuity. Joe Biden has been using his position in Washington to enhance the Biden coffers, not to enhance the lives of Americans. Fifty years of sucking from the government dole with little to show for accomplishments. He has had two previous runs for president but had to withdraw when claims of plagiarism surfaced. He won in 2020 because of Jim Clyburn and the Democrat voting machine.
I agree with most that Trump is his own worst enemy with his mouth, but someone like Romney should recognize you measure someone by what they do, not by what they say. While Biden is showing his character, 10 million illegals have stormed our border, 300,000 have died from Fentanyl poisoning, our country is as divided as ever, and our education system is leaving every child behind. If that is what character gets us, the Mitt, stay home on Election Day and stop doing interviews. Comments like yours are music to Democrat’s ears and a sour note for every Republican.
The post Mitt Romney Interview Shows Why He Should Be Leaving The Senate Sooner Than Later appeared first on Granite Grok.
Is there such a thing as one single source of truth? Is it the government, social media platforms, TV, radio, a book, or a political party? Probably not. All of these things come from people, and we all make mistakes. Nobody is right all of the time about everything.
Our government and the social media platforms say they want to protect us from misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation. Do you believe them? Is that what they’re doing? Or are they just censoring viewpoints they don’t like for the power and control they can acquire? Let’s think about it.
They censored evidence the covid virus originated in a lab in Wuhan, China. We now know that’s true. Even China doesn’t dispute it. They censored claims the vaccines didn’t prevent infection and that masking didn’t stop transmission. We know they got it wrong there too. They censored ideas about natural immunity. They censored opinions about election irregularities. They censored reports about a laptop belonging to a presidential candidate’s son. They censored evidence questioning the extent of global warming and its consequences. The list goes on and on.
The point is we need to take what we see, hear, and read with a grain of salt. We should probably look at the qualifications of the author. We should probably pay attention to their record of being right or wrong, as the case may be. The quality of our judgment depends on our sources and our ability to get a sufficient variety of sources to be able to hear dissenting positions.
A pretty good way to sift through a variety of positions and information we acquire is to discriminate. That is, to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features of the information we have accumulated. We should distinguish by discerning or exposing differences. Only then can we recognize or identify as separate and distinct, the positions of the various sources. Discrimination, you see, is a good and necessary thing… but I digress.
A censored opinion may often be called “misinformation” yet turned out to be true. We know our government and its Big Tech allies even suppressed information they knew was true. They colluded in their efforts to do so. Things such as the adverse effects of the Covid vaccines. That censorship blinded some Americans to the risk of the vaccines, which led to lethal outcomes. Doubt it? Look up the case of Ernest Ramirez and his 16-year-old son, Facebook, and the White House.
When the government and the social media platforms anoint themselves the arbiters of truth, they suppress “misinformation.” But if anything can be learned from the Covid debacle, it is that no one; not a prime minister, a president, not Anthony Fauci, not the White House… No one has a monopoly on that essential commodity… truth.
The government and the dominant media platforms were wrong about the vaccines, medications, masks, ventilators, business lockdowns, school lockdowns, the virus’s origins, and the Hunter Biden laptop. Yet they say we should rely on them to identify “misinformation,” really?
We shouldn’t. There is only one way to arrive at the truth. The way we do so is through open, uncensored discussion and debate. Nothing is more deadly to the truth than centralized censorship. Centralized censorship is precisely what the government and the media platforms are imposing on us. It is absolute tyranny. The government should never have the power to determine what is true, what is false, and what is an error, misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation.
That role cannot be left to the social media platforms. They are as centralized and maybe more centralized than the federal government. We have to grasp that, being dependent on the government means you can be made to do its bidding. This was made clear by the Twitter files released by Elon Musk. Look it up if you don’t understand the reference.
Censorship is mind control. That’s why governments want it… for the control and the power it brings. That is exactly why they shouldn’t have it. Think about how this plays out in the political sphere. Speech is how individuals learn about political candidates. It is how political opinions are formed. Without free speech, there can be no free elections.
When the government controls election speech, it controls elections. When the government controls elections, you no longer live in a democracy or a representative republic. Too many Americans think free speech is something only for them, not their political opponents. Their view is that censorship is desirable, and the First Amendment is just a quaint 18th-century artifact.
Well, no. The point of freedom of speech is that all of us should be free to explore all sorts of ideas. That is the only way we can test claims of truth for error. The ability to do those tests for ourselves is critical. None of us is infallible. None of us has all of the truth. We depend on others to correct our mistakes and teach us what we don’t know.
Perhaps the most important thing we can do is to speak up for freedom of speech. We must stand, not just for ourselves, but for everyone else, most especially those with whom we disagree. No one has a monopoly on truth, and equally as important, we all have a right to be wrong and be heard. That’s how we learn and get better. That’s why we need open, uncensored discussion and debate.
The forces arrayed against free speech are formidable. Their censorship or attempts at censorship will be their everlasting shame. Your defense of freedom of speech will be to your everlasting credit. It may be the most important thing you ever do.
The risk of one-party rule, if free speech is captured, is severe. Success in the implementation of government censorship will irreparably damage our country and the possibility of freedom for people everywhere.
The post Night Cap: What’s Wrong with Censorship? appeared first on Granite Grok.
(white) goldstandard-03-07-24-S.pdf
(gold) goldstandard-03-07-24-S-y.pdf
The post Senate Gold Standard – March 07, 2024 appeared first on NH Liberty Alliance.
We have dueling COVID updates from last week. The Centers for Democrat Control (CDC) continues to behave like a political entity instead of a Public Health Concern. On the one hand, it has been decided that COVID is officially like any other seasonal flu. Five-day quarantine is no longer advised.
My first reaction to this was, “Someone is still making people quarantine for five days if they test positive for COVID”? Based on the institutional wealth-transfer machine of in-home diagnostics, called the PCR test. Unlike the CDC, the PCR was never meant to do what it is being asked to do. The CDC, at least in some form, one day now long past, existed to further public health—no more.
But they’ve given a Divine Nod to its local public health missionaries at the state and local level to treat COVID like any other flu. Here’s the updated guidance and a warning. Put down whatever you are drinking. There’s a good bit of self-contradicting stupidity, and we wouldn’t want you blowing liquids through your nasal passages.
Here are a few examples.
Based on competing research by increasingly more competent and trustworthy sources, none of these three things is true. CDC is being CDC, which leads hand in glove to the next point and our headline.
“Today’s recommendation allows older adults to receive an additional dose of this season’s COVID-19 vaccine to provide added protection,” said CDC Director Mandy Cohen. “Most COVID-19 deaths and hospitalizations last year were among people 65 years and older. An additional vaccine dose can provide added protection that may have decreased over time for those at highest risk.”
“Today’s recommendation allows older adults to receive an additional dose of this season’s COVID-19 vaccine to provide added protection,” said CDC Director Mandy Cohen. “Most COVID-19 deaths and hospitalizations last year were among people 65 years and older. An additional vaccine dose can provide added protection that may have decreased over time for those at highest risk.”
According to The Dossier, that’s dose number 9.
The ninth shot, which is currently only recommended for seniors but will soon be authorized for all ages, is considered a booster that targets the Eris variant, or EG.5.
But what Pfizer and Moderna don’t want you to find out is that the Eris variant no longer exists.
Ordinary flu, which the CDC has declared COVID to now be, is already a moving target for the vaccine to Beach Front Property pipeline. Medicine makers have been guessing all along and profiting from the false sense of security created by the systemic peddling of random chemical injections to protect people who don’t need it from the flu. Or, as in this case, from a flu they will never catch.
Booster number nine is currently in limited release, but Big Pharma Exec property taxes don’t pay themselves. A rollout to a broader audience is expected, which will also help Big Med keep the Public Health Industrial Complex and its bureaucratic enables on a string.
Some number of fully fear-mongered and, as yet, uninjured jab enthusiasts will be waiting to rush to the nearest CVS or Walgreens for their “free” updated lipid nanoparticle fix.
JN.1 is the hot blonde, by the way, dominating the varient party scene the way Taylor Swift sucks up camera time at Chiefs games. And much like Taylor’s boyfriends, there will be a new one some day soon. Damaged relationship lyrics are a lot like Pfizer checks to the media and Public Health Industrial Complex “Researchers.” There needs to be a catalyst. They don’t just write themselves.
The post CDC Approves Updated Booster for a COVID Variant That No Longer Exists appeared first on Granite Grok.
“Eleven conferences — the Atlantic 10, Big East, Big South, Big Ten, Big 12, Conference USA, Mid-Eastern Athletic, Pac-12, WAC, Southeastern and West Coast — recently told ESPN that a home school with a post-game celebratory court storm could be subject to a fine under certain circumstances. Some have precise penalties, while others have general language regarding disciplinary measures and their applicability.” – ESPN.com
I love watching fans storm a court or swarm a field after a big win. The primal, elemental, and spontaneous outpouring of joyous humanity celebrating a special sports triumph always moves me. So, do the proposed restrictions infringe on 1st Amendment provisions or the right to assemble? WWBKD? (What would Bobby Knight do?)
Watch the end of the movie hoop classic “Hoosiers” when the Hickory High fans storm the court to embrace their heroes. Or YouTube the old Boston Garden after “Havlicek stole the ball!” Or Fenway Park on that magical October 1, 1967, after Rico Petrocelli caught a popup setting up the BoSox for their first World Series in decades. Six-foot-6 pitcher Jim Lonborg was swept away to centerfield and a mad mosh-pit of delirium.
Primal. Elemental. Joyous.
There are, of course, dangers when waves of humanity are unleashed, overpowering 70-year-old ushers and the lone security cop. Mob mentalities take effect. Havlicek was battered and bruised by fans after he stole the ball. He called them “ruffians.” Lonborg’s uniform was ripped to shreds. I’m sure that today, in various New England locales, grandfathers share pieces of cloth with their progeny, explaining, “This is what Jim Lonborg wore when he pitched the Sox to the pennant in 1967.”
Seriously.
And when those gridiron goalposts come down, they can injure even the most hard-headed football fan.
Hence, the proposals for court storm policies.
“This is why we can’t have nice things, people!”
These outpourings, these court storms, aren’t entirely spontaneous. When the Celtics beat the Lakers at the Garden in 1984 for the NBA title, fans surrounded the court for a while before the final buzzer, waiting to pounce.
On the college level, one can be sure that ne’er-do-wells have courtstorm strategies that involve not hoisting a hoopster but hugging a cheerleader. Truth.
But for the most part, the joyous storms and swarms are unscripted. Who knew Havlicek was going to steal the ball?
Next month marks the 50th anniversary of Hank Aaron breaking Babe Ruth’s career home run mark. Film/video of that milestone moment in Atlanta will be shown everywhere. And accompanying Aaron on his historic round trip, you’ll see Britt Gaston and Cliff Courtenay. The two Brave fans were only 17 when they ran onto the field from the first-base stands and caught up with Aaron. Now Britt and Cliff are immortal. They even made this column five decades later.
Court storms and field swarms are de rigueur everywhere at countless high school championship events. Players, parents, and peers no doubt dream of that ultimate title moment marked by Gatorade showers and heroes hoisted in celebration.
Like so many others, I also dreamed of such a moment. But most of us never taste that sweet championship nectar.
My high school senior year saw me and my Groveton High School Purple Eagle basketball teammates in a state tournament semifinal game at Plymouth State, trying for a spot in the title tilt. Half the gym was purple as busloads of fans came down from the North Country. Sadly, we fell way behind, 27-12.
Still, in the second half, we chipped away at the lead, and the purple-clad folks took heart. Closer and closer we came and louder and louder were the GHS fans. I remember scoring in the last minute to cut the lead to 47-46 as the gym exploded. A dam was about to break to release a purple flood onto the floor.
But we ran out of time. The white-clad players enjoyed a court storm as the purple rain fell not.
I stood watching the other team get swarmed while a lone figure hurried to me from the purple side—tears streaming down her face. Her back to the celebration, my girlfriend offered a very public embrace. I’ll always remember that.
So, most athletes never experience a court storm. But sometimes, kids offer opportunities for parents to vicariously experience “swarm joy” when offspring win titles denied to their dads and moms. When my daughter’s Concord High School softball team won a state championship, I (thankfully) did not run out and leap onto the growing pile of players celebrating a title. But that was also, in a way, my storm/swarm moment as well.
And, upon further review, perhaps the lonely gesture of that teary hug offered to a losing basketball player is perhaps of equal—if not more—value than a leap into that fleeting mosh pit of sports joy experienced by that happy few band of brothers (or sisters) fortunate enough to grab sports’ ever-so-elusive brass rings.
The post “Storming the Court” – And the First Amendment appeared first on Granite Grok.
Today during a hearing of House Special Committee on the Division for Children, Youth and Families (regarding DCYF), something interesting and (perhaps) wonderful occurred. A recommendation was made to ask those testifying to swear they were telling the truth (under penalty of perjury), and a Democrat objected to it.
To borrow from RebuildNH, who, in all fairness, beat me to the punch breaking this news (on Telegram),
This morning, the House Special Committee on DCYF, chaired by Rep. Leah Cushman, required every person testifying to take an oath before giving their testimony. This is unusual for House committees, but it is in statute and is therefore within the rights of the People’s representatives to do so. With the level of outright lying we’ve seen on other committees (ahem, executive departments testifying in front of the HHS committee), thanks should go to the Republican representatives insisting on truthfulness. On the other hand, Democrat members objected to this move, calling a requirement that people testifying tell the truth “insulting.”
In this excerpt, Rep. Sandra Panek makes the suggestion, citing the relevant state statute at 4 minutes (in the video below.
Pursuant to RSA 1414, which states that any Senator or Representative, while acting as a member of the committee, of the legislature, may admininster an oath to any person who may be examined before such a committee. I would like to require an oath of the witness and all witnesses testifying before this committee. The testimony we are taking is concerning a very serious subject matter, and we must ensure truthfulness. There have been various committees, both ad hoc and standing that have heard lots of testimony, relative to family law matters, and in many cases can go on and on, and take up lots of precious time. And sometimes it was later found out that the testimony was infactual. What we want to do is establish that this process is eliciting factual information so we can make the most informed decisions, based on the testimoney we received.
Democrat Rep. Lucy Webber immediately objects.
It’s something that we normally do not do. This is not a tribunal. This is a fact-finding mission and it seems to me that to require an oath is way outside of our normal procedure. And as one who assumes people standing in front of us are going to be truthful, I think it’s, it’s, frankly kind of insulting to our witnesses but I also .. the point of this commission .. committee, is to discover issues with DCYF, it is not to prepare the ground for some kind (of) future prosecution. And so I think that the administration of an oath is both unnecessary and insulting and I would really prefer to get a ruling form the speaker’s office as to whether it is an appropriate thing for us to be doing because I’ve literally in 18 years never seen it.
The Committe Chair (Rep. Leah Cushman) thanks Rep Webber for her input, but decides to require the oath, after which there is some additional remarks. I’ve excerpted the exchange below. The Full committee hearing can be viewed here. My question to the readers is this. Is it time to change the practice of assuming those testifying before any legislative committee are telling the truth (to the best of their knowledge) and asking them to swear an oath affirming that what they have to say is the truth under penalty of perjury?
Or maybe (just) public officials and (in particular) members of the executive branch, as observed in the pull quote from Rebuild at the beginning of this piece?
I’m sure you have thoughts. Here is the excerpt 4 min in to about 7 min. (The debate on this matter continues up to just past the 12-minute mark in the full version before anyone is sworn in).
!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":"v4enpql","div":"rumble_v4enpql"});
The post When Witnesses are Asked to Swear an Oath to Tell the Truth – Democrats Object appeared first on Granite Grok.
You elected them to New Hampshire’s Citizen Legislature to represent you. When they don’t show up, you’re not being represented, are you? And with the razor-thin majority, every vote matters, so, as promised, we are releasing our first NH House Republican Attendance Report.
This week’s update offers a year-to-date percentage of how many votes they did not miss (you can do the math to determine the percentage they did miss). This is an important metric, and while it does not include voice votes, Roll Call votes are typically critical votes on issues important to Republicans.
We’re not telling you what to do with this information or that, in some cases, a “republican” Rep. missing a vote isn’t good for Republican priorities, just that they’ve missed a percentage of roll call votes, you should know this, and can pursue that with them if that’s how you roll (including a thank you to reps who always find a way to be there when it matters).
The House roster is available here if you are unsure who represents you (unlikely in this audience, but possible).
The NumbersThere are currently 201 Republican Reps in this survey, of whom 112 had perfect attendance. An additional 57 had attendance better than 90% – 32 had attendance worse than 90%.
Note 1 – This is their attendance percentage for all roll call votes, including procedural motions and quorum calls. It does not include attendance for non-roll call votes.
Note 2 – No exceptions are made in these numbers for illness, family emergency, any emergency, or any other absence excused or not. They missed the vote, period. You decide what that means to you.
The numbers below represent how often they were present for Roll Call Votes Year to Date (Jan 1 to Feb 29th). Linda Gould, for example, scored 35.2%, so she missed 64.8% of all roll call votes.
Future installments will list NH Republican Reps by the number of actual roll-call votes they missed in the previous week.
Below are the 32 Republicans with attendance worse than 90% since the beginning of the session.
| 0.0% | Sanborn, Laurie (R, Bedford) |
| 35.2% | Gould, Linda (R, Bedford) |
| 35.2% | Piemonte, Tony (R, Sandown) |
| 44.3% | Cole, Brian (R, Manchester) |
| 46.6% | O’Hara, Travis (R, Belmont) |
| 52.3% | Varney, Peter (R, Alton) |
| 58.0% | Milz, David (R, Derry) |
| 58.0% | Trottier, Douglas (R, Belmont) |
| 64.8% | Khan, Aboul (R, Seabrook) |
| 68.2% | Lundgren, David (R, Londonderry) |
| 70.5% | Kenny, Catherine (R, Hudson) |
| 72.7% | Vandecasteele, Susan (R, Salem) |
| 75.0% | Mason, James (R, Franklin) |
| 79.5% | Bordes, Mike (R, Laconia) |
| 79.5% | Crawford, Karel (R, Moultonborough) |
| 80.7% | Dolan, Tom (R, Londonderry) |
| 80.7% | Foote, Charles (R, Derry) |
| 80.7% | Prudhomme-O’Brien, Katherine (R, Derry) |
| 81.8% | Beaudoin, Richard (R, Gilford) |
| 81.8% | Nutting, Zachary (R, Winchester) |
| 81.8% | Smart, Lisa (R, Meredith) |
| 81.8% | Testerman, Dave (R, Franklin) |
| 84.1% | Thackston, Dick (R, Troy) |
| 85.2% | Tenczar, Jeffrey (R, Pelham) |
| 86.4% | Guthrie, Joseph (R, Hampstead) |
| 87.5% | Doucette, Fred (R, Salem) |
| 87.5% | Infantine, William (R, Manchester) |
| 88.6% | Bickford, David (R, New Durham) |
| 88.6% | Polozov, Yury (R, Hooksett) |
| 88.6% | Renzullo, Andrew (R, Hudson) |
| 88.6% | Verville, Kevin (R, Deerfield) |
| 89.8% | Peternel, Katy (R, Wolfeboro) |
The post How Many “Votes” Has Your NH House Republican Rep. Missed So Far This Year? appeared first on Granite Grok.
And… it’s Monday! Ugh.
Take heart – there will be both a Wednesday and Friday Edition. Last week’s Friday Edition.
Remember, ridicule and mockery are effective weapons:
Now, let the mockery and mayhem begin.
*** Warning, a few possibly off-color ones, in case tender eyes are about ***
>>>>>=====<<<<<
BATF = Burn All Toddlers First
I read the excellent book NO MORE WACOS. Fascinating background.
Also: Federal Bureau of Incineration
No wonder he’s hated by the Left.
Is this a “Let them eat fruit loops” moment?
I’m torn. Yes, I’m on Gab and no, I’m not a PRO member. I appreciate fully that there is enormous expense associated with images and especially videos in terms of storage. And while I do NOT appreciate the enormous amount of anti-Jew and anti-Israel posts, I will – per Voltaire – defend their right to hold those beliefs and speak their mind. For in protecting even speech I hate, I protect my own.
So I am weighing going Pro, simply to continue to be able to share not just links but also images.
Ten percent to the BIG GUY, Joe getting $$$ confirmed.
The Public Disservice Of The Hunter Biden Testimony – Issues & Insights (issuesinsights.com)
What I find fascinating with the Left is that they ALWAYS double-down and deny. And, of course, the GOP fails to play hardball.
I remember my VERY pregnant wife taking her oath of citizenship, and beaming.
Did I post this before?
This year I definitely need to get the potatoes started earlier. We got a handful of fingerlings, nothing more.
The low valuation of Mar-A-Lago by the corrupt courts boggles the mind of anyone who looks at it with any sense of fairness.
Schumer Calls For Path To Citizenship For “All 11 Million, Or However Many” Illegal Immigrants There Are | Video | RealClearPolitics
In the movie GLADIATOR there’s a line: Rome is the mob. And the Democrats understand this.
Probably not everything, but a damned lot of it.
Read this take on resistance:
The 2nd Amendment is Obsolete, Says Congressman Who Wants To Nuke Omaha | Monster Hunter Nation
And on that:
Is that a real sign? These people better remember that there are people like my Jarhead friend who can hit a few-inch circle from 300-400 feet away. And some, like a friend of his, was a former sniper and can do that same small circle from even farther. And when the power goes out from shot-up transformers, and the water pressure dies, and there’s no refrigeration or purchases with electronic payments? And worse things?
Can I scream BINGO if these all get checked off?
I agree. As a former porn consumer, I realized the damage it was doing to myself and my perception of my wife and marriage and quit.
I run hot-and-cold on Ben Shapiro, but his book PORN GENERATION was definitely eye-opening. And I’ve read a lot / seen a lot of videos since then which confirmed my instinctive take on what it was doing to me.
Apparently a judge that mostly rules on… get this… traffic infractions. How in the Seven Hairy Hells does this person get to even impact Illinois’ ballot?
Speaking of porn; as I understand it, Japan is a sea of it. No wonder Japanese people, particularly men, are not getting married.
So… she should have just laid back and tried to enjoy it?????
>>>>>=====<<<<<
PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA
They’re going to go FULL BORE to silence you. And it will come to the US too, despite the First Amendment. It doesn’t even have to be official – just scare enough reporters with things like this:
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Uniparty. They hate Trump and, by extension, all MAGA people.
Had a chat with a guy at Synagogue recently. Political conservative, gun owner… we agree on our shared utter astonishment at the “That can’t happen here” mindset of so many fellow congregants. Another politically conservative Jew I know is also a gun-owner, similar comment.
This is a generations-long, FAITH DRIVEN effort. This is their religion.
That’s weird. James Woods is, IMHO, incredibly insightful.
Elon does seem to be rather… dual-faced on this, I have to admit.
Thank Hashem it’s not that easy!
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Link section (some mine, some from my Jarhead friend):
Come back Wednesday for this one.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Pick of the post:
Sowell. Enough said.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
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.
At least a few of the Several States, all run by political partisans exercising political will, attempted to keep a candidate for the office of President from appearing on an opposing (private) party primary ballot. The candidate, Donald Trump, asked the Supreme Court to review Colorado’s effort, and they have.
The question put before them was simple. “We granted former President Trump’s petition for certiorari, which raised a single question: “Did the Colorado Supreme Court err in ordering President Trump excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ballot?”
The US Supreme Court replied with, ‘It did err.’
Without getting into the weeds,
This case raises the question whether the States, in addition to Congress, may also enforce Section 3. We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency. …
Because federal officers “‘owe their existence and functions to the united voice of the whole, not of a portion, of the people,’” powers over their election and qualifications must be specifically “delegated to, rather than reserved by, the States.”
This 9-0 decision explores the thinking on both sides, so it is worth a read, including the separate opinions, but the gist is that according to the Supreme’s the states can’t do what Colorado tried to do. The Constitution does not grant them that authority.
DONALD J. TRUMP, PETITIONER v. Colorado ballot thingThe post Breaking – SCOTUS Rules 9-0: Colorado Can’t Remove Trump From The Ballot appeared first on Granite Grok.
Is there no limit to Mikey Graham’s Trump-Derangement-Syndrome? Apparently NOT. Now (writing this on 3/2) Mikey is promoting a piece by a CLINTON bureaucrat (IRS no less) that rewrites history … portraying Ronald Reagan as a warmonger who supported open-borders:
According to Oswald (from the linked post), Reagan would be supporting “aid” to Ukraine (i.e., money for the military-industrial complex) because he would see it as part of the Cold War against the Soviet Union
[Reagan] believed the Soviet Union was an “evil empire,” as he called it in his speech on March 8, 1983. … Reagan would be shocked by Republican resistance to send aid to Ukraine to fight Russia. Likewise, he would be incredulous at the flirtations with Moscow by some GOP members, …
Actually, Reagan would understand … as Oswald either does NOT, or thinks we do NOT … that the Soviet Union dissolved decades ago and that today’s Russia is NOT the Soviet Union. Moreover, Reagan called the Soviet Union “evil” because he believed that COMMUNISM was evil, NOT because he believed that Russia or the Russian people were evil.
What Regan would see as communism today is much of the Left’s (and Oswald’s) agenda: open-borders to transform America into a minority-White population, DEI, CRT, indoctrinating schoolchildren with woke. And, by the way, in case you’ve forgotten Reagan was pro-life and wanted Roe overturned.
Reagan was a man of PEACE. He did NOT want war with the Soviet Union. He repeatedly stated publicly that his goal was arms reduction … something that today would be total anathema to today’s supporters of Ukraine … but that to achieve arms reduction America needed to bargain from a position of strength; hence the military-buildup.
As for illegal immigration, Oswald claims that because Reagan signed an amnesty law that he would be in favor of open borders today. What is far more likely is that, having seen the Democrats renege on their end of the bargain (aided and abetted by the globalist/corporatist takeover of the GOP post-Reagan), Reagan’s position would be virtually identical to Trump’s.
Stated slightly differently, Reagan did NOT sign an amnesty law because he believed in open borders … he signed an amnesty law because in return he was supposed to get a secure border.
It was George H. W. Bush who when the Berlin War finally was torn down seemed disappointed that the Cold War was over. It was his warmonger son W who continued the Clinton-policy of strengthening China’s economy in order to enrich Wall Street at the expense of Main Street AND who invaded Iraq based on LIES told to the American people. It is the Bushes, the McCains, the Romneys, the McConnells, the Sununus, who have no place in today’s GOP. And that is a very good thing and something we can thank Trump for.
The post NH-NeverTrumpJournal Rewrites History … Ronald Reagan Was A Warmonger Who Supported Open Borders appeared first on Granite Grok.
Another week of comments, a school vacation week for many in New Hampshire, and yes – traffic dipped a bit with some folks traveling or doing more family stuff, but commenters will comment, and they did.
Thank you for that.
And I’m not ignoring all the fabulous comments by our authors and previous winners; I’m just trying to spread the love around a bit. You guys (authors and past winners) continue to engage in and encourage debate that has brought new readers and comments to GranitGrok, and that’s what this is all about.
And honestly, I’d give you all a prize if I could afford it, or – more accurately – pay authors for their excellent works, but we aren’t even at the pay Steve to do everything stage. It’s a work in progress—a lot of work but a labor of love searching for an income. The increased engagement helps, but it is also its own reward.
Great job everyone.
This Week’s Winner.
I think everyone did a great job with a side note to Lynn and Herb, who are downvoting more than the average number of comments. Make sure you are also commenting. I see at least a few remarks from Lynn but none from Herb unless I missed them. Don’t be a troll. You have a Disqus account, so discuss your concerns and share your perspective on the downvotes. We encourage readers to debate, agree, and disagree – you won’t get nixed for sharing a contrary opinion. We’re not Facebook or pre-Musk Twitter. Free speech matters; just be civil about it.
On that note, this week’s winner shared something I found not only brief – brevity is the soul of wit (Polonius, in Act 2, scene 2 of Hamlet) but inspiring. It belongs on mugs, T-shirts, and bumper stickers (and maybe we’ll do that at some point).
Bill589
This comedian expressed my view decades ago: “The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen.” — Tommy Smothers
As another reminder, this does not mean that the other comments were lacking or that other commenters did not provide value or insight or expand and extend the debate. We had a lot of great input (as we always do), but there can be only one (each week).
Bill589, please email me at steve@granitegrok.com to arrange to ship you a prize.
Note to Rick Kenyon and AllyforFreedom: I’m still waiting on a ship-to address for both of you.
The post Our Latest Comment of the Week Winner Is … appeared first on Granite Grok.
If you’ve missed it or are a glutton for punishment (as opposed to a gluten for punishment, which is what my spellchecker just tried to do to my pre-editing fat-fingered spelling of the former), HB1002 has gone around and come around after a valiant but failed effort to kill it on the floor of the NH House.
Those seeking to pass the bill would love to wrangle some number of reps to support a Rube Goldbergina Final Solution whose goal remains the same. Punish everyone for the misdeeds of an alleged few to benefit “The State” while embedding a deliberate decline of government transparency and accountability into the law.
This is a bad bill. How bad is it? In a casual pre-zoom meeting conversation late last week, I framed the problem again in what I hoped was a new way (to review my past efforts to undermine the passage of this crap wagon of a bill, look here). If there are a handful of near-do-wells making right-to-know requests with legitimate Cloward-Piven-esqe malice, what sane Republican would take the same approach to access to public documents as Democrats do to the right to self-defense?
To Democrats, every shooting, even the ones that the FBI does not set up, is not just an excuse to punish law-abiding people but a call to action. Gun owners, in total, must pay a price for the actions of the disorderly few. By making it difficult or impossible to exercise the right, you give the government a power that puts law-abiding citizens at risk – not just from those disorderly few but the very tyranny of government 2A exists to dissuade.
That’s HB1002.
Any added cost, fee, fine, or tax to access public records makes the mere idea of holding your local or state government accountable less likely. It limits the pool of those able to afford it. It encourages the government to make accountability less likely by ensuring it is unaffordable.
HB1002′ disarms’ citizens who might otherwise request public documents, discouraging civic involvement or engagement.
HB1002 is the information elitism bill, and making carve-outs for the media (including GraniteGrok) does not make it better, and if you don’t think it will be abused, you are lying to yourself and everyone else.
Would it not be a better use of our time to address the disorderly few towns that leverage government power and the taxpayer purse to hide the people’s business from the people than to find ways to encourage more towns to follow their bad example?
The post HB1002 is Treating “Government Transparency” the Way Democrats Treat The “Right to Self Defense” appeared first on Granite Grok.
Well, Jay Eshelman and I have finally found something we can agree on, so it’s probably worth reproducing here instead of leaving it buried in the comments section of his recent post. Here it is, in response to someone claiming that if we could just get 25% of kids to leave public schools, the system would collapse.
Actually, in NH over the last twenty years, attendance is down 15 percent, while spending (adjusted for inflation) is up 40 percent. Historically, removing kids from the schools leads to growth, which is the opposite of collapse.
There is a way out, though, which is to take the state supreme court at its word: Taxes should pay for the OPPORTUNITY to get an education.
Right now, that requirement is satisfied by giving a kid a Chromebook (about $150 at Walmart) and a subscription to Starlink (about $90 a month). With those two things, you’ve led the horse to water, and if he doesn’t want to drink, that’s his problem. Imagine dropping the per-student cost for a district from around $25,000 to around $1000. Any school board with the stones to do this could do it, right now, without any change in the law.
But that doesn’t solve the daycare problem, does it? If you still want to have subsidized babysitting, you can (again) take the state supreme court at its word: Taxes should pay for the opportunity to acquire the knowledge and learning NECESSARY to participate intelligently in the American political, economic, and social systems of a free government.
If something isn’t important enough to be mandatory, then it clearly isn’t necessary. And if it’s being provided at some school districts but not all of them, then it clearly isn’t necessary. It follows that no school should be using tax money to teach anything that isn’t (1) mandatory and (2) taught at all schools.
If parents want to pay extra money for more than that, that would be up to them. But they’d probably be silly to get those things through the schools, which are always more expensive (and nearly always of lower quality) than private options.
Note that the court is talking about knowledge and learning, and not ‘course credit’. So you can’t just say every kid should ‘take a course in technology’, or ‘take a course in science’. You need to say, specifically, what is to be learned and why it is necessary.
This would cut the curriculum (and associated cost) to about 10% of what it is now, which would actually be a good thing. As the Chinese say, if you chase a bunch of rabbits, you won’t catch any of them. It would be a lot better, and a lot cheaper, to have schools that succeed at producing students who can read and do math than schools that try to teach too much and consequently fail to teach much of anything.
If you can read and do math, you can decide later to learn any damn thing you want, with the help of thousands of people who are lined up to assist you with that, often for free. Which is what it means to be ‘educated.’
So, we’d still have to heat and light the buildings and run the buses, but the cost of the schooling part of the enterprise (including the cost of extra-curricular activities, like sports) would drop pretty quickly. Kids could spend a couple of hours a day, a few days a week, learning necessary material and then spend the rest of their time hanging out with their friends — or studying if they’re serious about learning and not being distracted by shuffling from room to room to listen to lectures about things that don’t interest them and that aren’t necessary for them to know.
But just thinking you accomplish any kind of significant change just by reducing attendance — without changing the fundamental nature of schools — is contradicted by history, as well as by reasoning.
The post Fewer Students + Business as Usual = More Dollars appeared first on Granite Grok.
Creating stunning outdoor spaces doesn’t have to break the bank, especially when you consider the charm and personality that DIY metal lawn ornaments add to your garden. But where do you start?
How can you incorporate these outdoor sculptures without overshadowing the natural beauty of your garden? We will guide you through easy and affordable options to create metal lawn ornaments that will enhance your outdoor space. From beginner designs to affordable intricate pieces, get set to turn your garden into an enchanting outdoor gallery.
Materials NeededBefore you begin, gather the necessary materials for your DIY metal lawn ornaments. These items can be found at your local hardware store or online:
If you’re new to metalworking or looking for a quick and easy project, here are some simple design ideas for DIY metal lawn ornaments. Get creative and add a personalized touch to your outdoor space!
CandelabraCut out large circles from the metal sheet and use tin snips to create zig-zag patterns around the edges. Attach multiple circles with nails or weld them at the center to create a candelabra.
Wind ChimesCut out various sizes of metal circles and drill holes near the edges. String them together with wire or fishing line, creates a beautiful wind chime.
Garden StakesCut out different shapes from the metal sheets, such as flowers or butterflies, and attach them to long metal rods. These stakes can be placed throughout your garden, adding pops of color and design.
Garden SculpturesUse a template or create your design for a metal sculpture, such as animals or abstract shapes. Cut out the pieces, weld or glue them together, and place them in your garden for an eye-catching piece of art.
Advanced Design IdeasFor those with more experience in metalworking or looking for a challenge, here are some advanced design ideas. Explore intricate welding techniques to push your skills to the next level.
Metal ArborsCreate an elegant entrance to your garden by welding together metal pieces into an arbor. You can add vines or other plants to grow around it and create a stunning focal point.
Garden BenchesCut out long strips of metal and use a bending tool to create the curved shape of a bench. Weld or bolt the pieces together and add cushions for a comfortable seating option in your garden.
Metal Water FeaturesUsing metal sheets, you can create beautiful water features such as fountains or ponds. These not only add visual interest but also provide soothing sounds of running water.
For those looking for more inspiration or specific design templates, browsing online resources such as Lesera can provide a wealth of ideas and products to ignite your creativity. They offer garden decorations that can either complement your DIY projects or inspire new ones with their unique designs.
Discovering About Metal Lawn OrnamentsDIY metal lawn ornaments are a budget-friendly way to add character and charm to your outdoor space. With the right materials and creativity, you can create unique pieces of art that will bring joy to your garden for years to come.
So gather your materials, choose a design, and get ready to impress your friends and family with your handmade metal yard art ornaments. Transform your outdoor space with creativity and enjoy the process of crafting unique pieces.
Did you find this article helpful? If so, check out the rest of our site for more informative content.
The post DIY Metal Lawn Ornaments: Easy and Affordable Options appeared first on Granite Grok.
The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic convened a hearing on Feb. 15 titled “Assessing America’s Vaccine Safety Systems, Part 1.” Intended to bolster public confidence in vaccines by reviewing the nation’s data systems used to track reports of adverse events following vaccination, the subcommittee’s initial hearing also focused on vaccine injury compensation programs.
Vaccine Injury CompensationOhio Congressman Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) opened the proceedings with a brief history of vaccine injury programs in the US. Rep. Wenstrup explained that most vaccine injuries are compensated under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), but that claims of harm from COVID-19 “countermeasures” are covered under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) authorized by the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) of 2005.
Wenstrup expressed his concern that poor government support of vaccine injury victims could undermine public trust and fuel vaccine hesitancy:
Three Wise Men?“As of January 2024, CICP has only compensated 11 claims out of the more than 12,000 that have been filed for COVID-19 vaccines. Because of its design, CICP payouts are also significantly smaller than VICP – an average of about $3,700 compared with almost $500,000 dollars in VICP. It appears that CICP may not be designed or equipped to handle a vaccine that was so widely distributed – and mandated for many – as COVID-19 vaccines were. I have concerns that we wouldn’t be able to expect people to line up and get vaccinated during the next pandemic if they feel they are abandoned.”
Three authoritative figures testified before the Select Subcommittee:
Peter Marks, Director of the Biologics Evaluation and Research Division of the Food and Drug Administration, defended the safety and effectiveness of vaccines and attested to the usefulness of injury reporting programs.
Daniel Jernigan, Director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Dr. Jernigan stated that “CDC staff have analyzed data from over a million VAERS adverse event reports,” but also failed to address the victim compensation aspect of current legislation.
George Reed Grimes, Director of the Division of Injury Compensation Programs at the Health Resources and Services Administration, oversees both CICP and VICP. Grimes explained the stark differences in payments between injuries from COVID-19 vaccines (CICP) versus most other vaccines (VICP), but also standards of proof – CICP awards require “compelling, reliable, valid, medical, and scientific evidence” that their injury was the “direct result” of a COVID-19 vaccine.
Grimes cited the President’s FY 2024 Budget of $15 million to operate the CICP, which now has over 35 full-time staff members:
“Additionally, due to other improvements, the CICP is now processing claims at a faster rate. For example, in 2020, the CICP averaged zero claims resolved per month; in 2023, the CICP resolved more than 90 claims per month – that average would be expected to increase even more significantly under the President’s FY 2024 Budget.”
The government is spending tens of millions of dollars to handle approximately 13,000 CICP claims at the rate of 90 per month, which works out to a bit over twelve years to process existing claims – assuming no more are filed. An October 2023 Reuters report claimed that 97% of processed COVID-related claims so far (1,129 out of 12,000) had been denied and 32 found eligible, with “[f]our people to date hav[ing] actually been paid, receiving an average of $2,148 each.” There is no right to appeal or introduce witnesses.
To spend $15 million annually to take twelve years to deny 97% of complaints and only pay out $2,000 in 2024 dollars each is a strong disincentive for vaccine injury victims to bother filling out the paperwork. It is also a result that might leave Americans distrustful of the government, as Wenstrup explained in his opening remarks:
A Ready Solution“… while serious injuries caused by vaccines are rare, the government has assumed the responsibility to compensate for them. In doing so, vaccine manufacturers have been shielded from liability. Therefore, the government has an important duty – one that is essential in preserving trust in vaccines and how we message completely and honestly about them.”
One proposed solution would be for Congress to redirect COVID-19 claims to VICP, which already hears claims more quickly with a clearer process and more generous awards. This program is funded by a 75-cent tax per vaccine and would instill much more confidence in an mRNA-leery public than the CICP labyrinth.
Grimes seemingly intimated his support for this initiative:
“HRSA is committed to working with Congress to ensure that the resources and staffing are available to increase CICP claim reviews and processing. Furthermore, without congressional action, HHS does not have the administrative authority on its own to move claims from the CICP to VICP.”
Dr. Meryl Nass, a Maine physician who has questioned the official narrative on COVID-19 vaccinations, offered this opinion to Liberty Nation:
“My question for the Select Subcommittee would be, ‘Why are there no victims testifying? There have been a lot of problems with official assessments of vaccine safety. Why not ask those who have suffered?’”
Transferring COVID-19 claims to the VICP would improve fairness to injured Americans, whether or not it restored trust in mRNA vaccines. The Biden Administration determined that COVID-19 claims would remain in CICP through 2024: the bipartisan “Vaccine Injury Compensation Modernization Act” seeks to “shift pending COVID-19 vaccine claims from the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) to the VICP.”
Perhaps this problem will be addressed by the Select Committee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, at “Assessing America’s Vaccine Safety Systems, Part 2.”
John Klar is an Attorney, farmer, and author. Mostly farmer… And Regular Contributor to GraniteGrok and VermontGrok.
The post Night Cap: Vaccine Safety Heads to Congress appeared first on Granite Grok.
We’ve had a handful of very relevant content in recent days about the troubles in the New Hampshire House. The slip Republican majority gets wins in the morning only to lose later because Democrats keep score better and are more patient and focused on their agenda.
The moment they have a headcount majority, they bring bills back and kill them or pass them, depending on their ideological pleasure, because Republican Reps let the building.
Between that and just not showing up or asking to be excused when every session has votes, we need to win, and a lot of ground has already been lost that should be ours.
And yes, there will always be circumstances where a Rep. can’t be there or must leave early, but shouldn’t that also apply to the other side? And are we or are we not in an ideological war to keep the New Hampshire advantage?
This isn’t a game or a hobby, and the Left plays for keeps. We should, too.
I will be sharing a year-to-date summary, including a week-by-week attendance for every Republican on the House Roster. In the following weeks, until the end of the session, we will report the previous week’s attendance. Votes missed.
The first installment should arrive before the next House Session.
Stay Tuned!
The post We’re Going to Publish Weekly NH House Republican Attendance Reports! appeared first on Granite Grok.
When Ohio banned DEI programs at universities from taking public money, Kent State merged its Diversity Equity and Inclusion offices with Human Resources and (ironically) renamed it the Division of People Culture and Belonging. Division, indeed.
DEI is about Discrimination, Exclusion, and Indoctrination. Dividing us into tribes that become itches in constant need of scratching. This balkanization keeps us distracted and at each other’s throats while the uniparty elites rob our posterity blind. Several states (Ohio, Texas, and Florida – there may be others) have enacted rules and laws that limit or restrict public funding for DEI, and not everyone is trying to be as clever as Kent State.
The University of Florida eliminated all positions focused on diversity, equity and inclusion and halted its DEI-related contracts on Friday. ..
Axios is heartbroken at the news and worries about the escalating war against “how race and gender are addressed in its educational institutions.” Snowflakes are melting. Social Justice Warriors have been triggered. How dare they dismantle a program focused on systemic racism targeting people of non-color? It’s racist, I tell you.
My question is if they have. Historically, when the asshattery of the Marxist cultural messaging machine finds itself exposed to too much daylight, the cockroaches do what they did at Kent State. Make that stuff disappear, change some names, and create a Potemkin facade of compliance. It may well be that the Florida Law has managed to root out all the linguist loopholes in advance, but the White Tower never gives up on a bad idea without a fight.
Excellent news, indeed, but?
When UNH got busted for harboring a so-called bias-free language guide, they immediately announced how pro-free speech they were, made the guide disappear (we saved it here), and retooled their web pages. No one was fired, and budgets were not cut, leaving all the infrastructure responsible in place. It’s still there, poisoning the hearts and minds of future generations or snowflakes, but New Hampshire’s State University System has managed to put on a good face. FIRE gives them good scores for free speech each year while underneath the facade, the cultural-Marxist virus spreads.
Defunding DEI isn’t enough. You have to put some teeth in it and keep an AG’s office that will enforce those laws. What happens when DeSantis has to leave office in 2026, and Florida doesn’t find a similar replacement?
That’s Florida’s problem, I suppose, until or unless the Feds institute something similar (don’t hold your breath). I also don’t see why such offices or programs could not be resuscitated with private money. I do find it encouraging that the University of Florida didn’t have or couldn’t find anyone in the private sector willing to fund it (if they even tried).
Wouldn’t it be something if no one with deep enough pockets thought DEI infrastructure was worth the price?
The post DEI … DIEs at the University of Florida appeared first on Granite Grok.
For years, House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) didn’t pay taxes on significant parts of his income. When the IRS discovered this, it allowed him to pay the missing taxes without any of the normal penalties.
In 2009, Representative John Carter (R-TX) introduced the Rangel Rule, HR 735, which would extend to all U.S. taxpayers the same penalty-free and indictment-free IRS treatment enjoyed by Rangel for flagrant tax evasion — as required by the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
I was thinking about this recently in a conversation where I was surprised to find that the people I was talking to didn’t know about RSA 193-H:2, which says:
On or before the 2018-2019 school year, schools shall ensure that all pupils are performing at the proficient level or above on the statewide assessment as established in RSA 193-C.
All pupils. There are no exceptions for pupils with special needs, pupils who don’t do well on tests, or anyone else.
Now, there isn’t a school in the state that has been within shouting distance of this since it was enacted. This means that every school in the state is in flagrant violation of the law.
So, it seems only fair that taxpayers in school districts around the state should be able to withhold their school taxes until the schools start complying with the law.
I know, I know — ‘the law’ requires them to pay those taxes. But ‘the law’ also requires the schools actually to teach kids to read.
The Rangel Rule, generalized to what we might call the Rangel Principle, simply says that if government institutions can ignore the law without penalty, then taxpayers funding those institutions should be free to do that, too.
Applied to this particular case, the penalty for withholding school taxes should be the same as the penalty for failing to teach kids to read. Which, apparently, is no penalty at all.
The post The Rangel Principle: If Schools Don’t Have To Teach Kids To Read, You Don’t Have To Give Them Your Money appeared first on Granite Grok.
After reviewing the new Strategic Plan for Governor Wentworth Regional School District, I would suggest trashing it and starting over. While it sounded promising with their placement of academic achievement as their top priority, nothing in this document shows the community how that will be accomplished.
The rest of the document sounds more like an appeal to the federal government than a worthwhile plan for the community to rally behind.
There are a few bright spots within the document found in Focus Area 3 Family & Community Communication and Engagement, but with all of the battles raging right. now, how does anyone have confidence this will help?
I will go through the document as it’s been presented here:
GWRSD_Strategic_Plan_2024 (1)
Focus Area 1 Student Wellness
This section looks like it’s paving the way for the district to transition to the CDC’s Community School model. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has a goal to turn every public school into a mental health and medical clinic. This may sound good on the surface, but as this transition begins to unfold, we are seeing all kinds of problems that parents should be aware of.
We’ve found personally identifiable mental health data on students being shared without parental knowledge or consent. This is a gross violation of privacy and ethics. Parents are also discovering that their children are receiving medical treatment and medication without ever being informed.
Those who are providing mental health assessments and services have not received the proper education or training to deal with some of the more serious mental health situations that arise. There are references to trauma, anxiety, depression, and even suicide. These are serious mental health issues that should only be addressed by a PhD-level Child Psychologist — not a teacher in the classroom or the school counselor.
The federal student privacy law was gutted several years ago during the Obama administration. It used to require parental consent to share sensitive data on students. That is not necessarily the case anymore. All of this data that is now being collected by various sources could be used against these students at some point.
Just visiting the school counselor can disqualify a student who wants to join the military, and now the U.S. Department of Education can now share information with other departments like the U.S. Department of Labor. Competencies are now shared with colleges and universities when a student applies for admission. What kind of behavior, values, or dispositions will be shared with future employers or colleges?
Focus Area 2: Culture of Belonging
This area begins with a call to things like equity and DEI. (Diversity Equity and Inclusion) There is nothing about students who come from religious homes. What does equity look like in public schools? It focuses on equality outcomes versus equal opportunities. Guaranteeing equal outcomes means less opportunities for gifted students or students who strive for excellence. DEI tends to focus on race and gender, leaving out any concern for other groups of students in the school.
This is more of a WOKE focus than any focus on real belonging. Real belonging should apply to all students regardless of political views, religious beliefs, or any other identity they use to divide us.
Parents do need to understand that their children will be in a school with other children who may have a different worldview. So, how does one make a school welcoming? Certainly not this way. This way divides children by their “identity” instead of unifying them.
School officials are not there to sway children in their beliefs, but they can certainly promote a safe and welcoming environment for all children. Sometimes that means compromise, sometimes it means teaching children to show respect and kindness to others.
This focus takes a good idea and turns it into a woke agenda instead. I’d watch that equity plan closely and also note the data collection is even included within this category.
Responsive Classroom is a program that will be used. I’ve seen mixed reactions from teachers on this. Watch for discipline or lack of discipline within the school community. Will there be real consequences for unruly or bad behavior? Teachers need a classroom where they can teach and need to be supported by the administration. Reduction in discipline can become a real problem when kids learn they can get away with unruly behavior.
Focus Area 3- Family & Community Communication and Engagement
This actually sounds good, although this is required in federal law: Parent Engagement is in Every Student Succeeds Act. But what does that look like in the schools? Parents are running into resistance just trying to remove pornographic books from the school library. Parents are concerned about biological boys and girls using the restroom opposite of their biological sex. The same is true for locker rooms and sports teams. Something like this normally requires a common sense compromise so that all children are served in their public schools.
Oftentimes, parents who do not want their children exposed to pornographic books or want their children in a sex-segregated restroom are shunned and called transphobic. Picking sides isn’t a solution, but finding a compromise can be.
All competencies for each grade and subject should be included in this area. Parents should be able to access this information on the district website. Parents should also be able to observe their child’s classroom, and also feel welcomed.
Focus Area 4 – Academic Achievement
This may be the biggest disappointment. While a statement offers hope, nothing in this plan explains how this will be accomplished. Instead, there is a lot of time spent on actions that do not produce quality results. Schools now align their curriculum to Common Core and Next Generation Science Standards. These standards are dumbed down, and district administrators should be focused on identifying those problems and showing how they will raise the bar.
Multiple pathways or extended learning opportunities still require adherence to the dumbed-down standards. Where will they raise the standards for students on any path?
Differentiated instruction? How? That normally means that kids will be learning off of the computer or participating in group work as the teacher becomes a facilitator. This minimizes the important role of the teacher as an instructor. Where has this been successful at improving academic outcomes? Changing up a classroom this way should demand independent and peer reviewed studies that show any of this improves academic outcomes.
How does the MTSS-B help academic outcomes? The Multi-Tiered System of Support for Behavior is a mental health framework. We already know the multiple problems with this federal fad. Federal money comes into the school, the school counselors turn over personal mental health data on students to Keene State BHII, and they develop a fluff report that all is well. Meanwhile, we have teachers in Keene who are leaving the profession because behavior is out of control, and consequences have been turned into mental health treatment by school personnel who are not educated or trained in the profession.
Finally, they include Portrait of a Learner in this strategic plan. This is another national fad focused on data mining personal information on your children. What does that do for academic outcomes? Nothing.
Battelle for Kids was created by Battelle, an applied science and technology company that uses technology to track behaviors. The program was incentivized through policies and grants in the 2015 federal education law, the Every Student Succeeds Act ESSA. ESSA replaced No Child Left Behind and was signed into law during the Obama administration with bi-partisan support. These policies are an extension of Common Core reforms.
Some of Battelle’s strategic partners that direct states’ adoption of Portrait of a Graduate is CASEL. CASEL’s Tim Shriver admits teaching academics is no longer important.
Aurora Institute, ExcelinEd which is JEB BUSH’s org (who profits off of his online Charter Schools) and KnowledgeWorks, are working towards mass data collection of children’s values, attitudes and behaviors (aka..mental health) with a company called the Data Quality Campaign.
The Data Quality Campaign was instrumental in developing states’ State Longitudinal Data Systems. So, Portrait of a Graduate/Learner is, essentially, a program to expand New Hampshire’s State Longitudinal Data System, and start tracking children into all sorts of social services including health services, and into the workforce. You can read more about that here and from the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy.
In the final scheme of things, Portrait of a Graduate/Learner is the backbone for Social Credit Scoring and ESG scores for children.
New Hampshire
As the leader in implementing competency education, New Hampshire recognized the need for a state data system that was better equipped to communicate with district systems and provide necessary supports. The Initiative for School Empowerment and Excellence reduces the burden on schools and gives information back to schools based on regularly collected data to encourage student achievement through rigorous data use and analysis.
KnowledgeWorks is a Gates-funded organization (also based in Ohio) that the State Boards of Education paid to facilitate the districts’ adoption of Battelle’s SEL framework. (Pilot programs and legislation for Competency-Based Education will align “competencies” to those in Portrait of a Graduate) Local teachers are brought into the process to determine competencies, but only for show. In actuality, they are being shifted into becoming facilitators of the SEL system, and, over time, the entire system will be geared toward SEL.
What does this strategic plan do for the students? It facilitates the data-mining of their personal information to fulfill the goals of the federal government. This isn’t about helping students, and it’s not about what parents want for their children or schools. This is a federal agenda to meet the terms the federal government laid out in Every Student Succeeds Act.
As an education researcher and parental rights advocate, I’d refuse as much of this data-mining, SEL and mental/medical services as possible. Your child’s mental and medical health is important, but it needs to be done outside the school system where you are still informed, and your child’s personal information is secure.
The post On Local School District’s Strategic Plan: Trash It and Start Over appeared first on Granite Grok.
Sent by a reader, this radio segment is something you should check out and, if you agree, add to your quiver of rhetorical/active arrows. Patrick Madrid is talking to a mother who is trying to defend her daughter from the groomers and queer agenda in her local public school.
He offers great advice to Anai, a valiant Catholic mom gearing up for a showdown with her daughter’s teacher. Anai’s 16-year-old daughter is facing pressure to complete an assignment that goes against Catholic teachings on sexuality, sparking a fierce defense of faith and family values. …
Patrick’s strategy is a masterclass in rhetorical judo, advising Anai to use the language of inclusivity and authenticity to advocate for her daughter’s right to hold and express her beliefs freely. This approach not only safeguards her daughter’s emotional well-being but also holds the school accountable to its own stated values. It puts the teacher on the defense rather than the other way around.
This is some excellent table-turning… Madrid explains to the caller how to put them in their own ideological box, not to be mean, cruel, or argumentative but to get their buy-in on their own stated values so they have no choice but to confront that and maybe (just maybe) they decide it is better to leave her daughter alone.
Give it a listen! (10 min).
The post “How Can I Effectively Confront the LGBT Agenda at My Child’s School?” appeared first on Granite Grok.