For any enterprise to succeed, it has to take actions that will move it toward its goal. Perhaps more importantly, it has to say no to actions that won’t do that.

This means it has to articulate a goal in a simple, straightforward way so that whenever it is contemplating a possible action, it can ask: Will this move me closer to the goal? If so, it’s worth doing. If not, it isn’t.

That is the role of a mission statement. It’s a kind of guiding star, a way of deciding when to say yes and when to say no.

For example, this is the mission statement of Southwest Airlines: ‘To be the world’s most loved, most efficient, and most profitable airline.’

Here was President Kennedy’s mission statement for the space program: ‘This nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.’

Simple, but not easy. Ambitious but achievable. And very, very clear.

One of the largest enterprises in New Hampshire is its public school system. What is the mission statement for this enterprise? Unfortunately, no one seems to agree on that.

The more people you ask — legislators, judges, bureaucrats, parents, teachers, taxpayers — the more answers you get: To provide children with bright futures (college and career readiness) and pleasant presents (sports, hobbies, opportunities to socialize with friends); to create a workforce for employers (with subsidized daycare for employees); to allow us to compete in the global economy; to promote tolerance and inclusivity, and so on.

But the public school system does have a mission statement of sorts, at least on paper.

The state constitution is clear in saying that education is ‘essential to preservation of a free government.’ That’s the why.

The state supreme court is clear in saying that it is the responsibility of the state to provide ‘each educable child an opportunity to acquire the knowledge and learning necessary to participate intelligently in the American political, economic, and social systems of a free government.‘ That’s the what.

The legislature has been clear in saying that ‘schools shall ensure that all pupils are performing at the proficient level or above on the statewide assessment.’ That’s the how.

That last bit is buried so deeply — in RSA 193-H:2 — that you almost have to be Indiana Jones to find it. And it recently survived an attempt to repeal it on the grounds that no one was really taking it seriously.

But what would happen if we adopted RSA 193-H:2 as the mission statement for our public school system? That is, what if New Hampshire embarked on what we might call the ‘Granhattan Project,’ a program similar to the moon landing or the development of the atomic bomb? A program attaching a real sense of urgency to a goal that is simple but not easy, ambitious but achievable, and very, very clear.

Something like: ‘This state should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of bringing 95% of students to a 12th-grade level of proficiency in reading.’

Note that in achieving this goal as a society, we would position students to achieve their own goals as individuals: To create their own bright futures. To attend college, or train for a career, or start a business. To learn more about whatever they want, whenever they want, for the rest of their lives. To be active creators, rather than passive consumers, of public discourse on subjects like tolerance and inclusivity — or taxes, public health and safety, criminal justice, welfare, or any other matter of public policy. They would be able to participate intelligently in the political, economic, and social systems of a free government. And in doing so, help preserve a free government.

But we can only do this if we have a yes that is clear enough and understood to be essential enough to let us say no when we need to. To turn away from incidentals that distract from essentials. To follow our guide star instead of veering after each new shiny bauble that appears on the horizon.

And if teaching every student to read is the wrong mission statement, let’s come up with a better one.

How might we do that? One way would be to encourage stakeholders to make lists of all the things they think schools should be doing. Compile the lists and see which items show up 95% of the time.

(It’s the same basic idea as voting for the Baseball Hall of Fame but with a higher threshold.)

The idea is to find consensus in order to avoid contentiousness, to cooperate with our limited resources instead of competing for them, to pull together in a common direction instead of pulling in a dozen directions at once. To chase just one rabbit and catch it instead of chasing a dozen and missing them all.

Zig Ziglar expressed the idea behind a mission statement this way: ‘You can’t hit a target you cannot see, and you cannot see a target you do not have.’ And even more simply: ‘If you aim at nothing, you’ll hit it every time.’

I have yet to see a more accurate description of our public school system. We can do better, and we need to do better. A great first step in that direction would be embracing RSA 193-H:2 instead of eliminating it or continuing to ignore it.

 

[This was originally published at the author’s blog at Bare Minimum Books.]

The post The Granhattan Project: 95% Literacy By 2030 appeared first on Granite Grok.

I went grocery shopping yesterday and observed paranoid culture in action. The few (both employees and customers) who never stopped wearing a mask have been joined by a few handfuls of others. Mask tyranny has crept back into the collective consciousness.

Several patrons were masked—more than I usually witness. But the majority of the customers, and they were numerous, were going about their business as if they’d not heard the news. There’s an election coming, and we’re at DEFCON ONE.

Arguably, there’s been mixed messaging. Both a Hollywood studio and a major Hospital chain had announced mask mandates then walked them back. But news that other hospitals were priming the mask mandate pump have littered news feeds for days and the online chatter is seeping into the subconscious.

The trained mules are already getting masked, but the CDC hasn’t released any mandates, according to the CDC. This is all organic terrorism.

Lone wolves, if you prefer.

Officially,

 

The agency also doesn’t currently have any mandate in effect, and the “CDC’s advice for individual and community actions around COVID-19 are tied to hospital admission levels,” the spokesperson said.

Earlier this week, a CDC spokesperson told NBC News that there have been no agency discussions about bringing back mask mandates, which comes as a handful of hospitals and offices around the country started reimposing them this month. There has also been speculation that federal officials may bring back mandates or even push for lockdowns, similar to what happened in 2020.

At the same time, the CDC hasn’t issued any updated guidelines regarding mask mandates on its website.

 

The CDC has “recommended that transportation workers, travelers, passengers, and others get the COVID-19 vaccine “before they travel.” This must be to ensure that they catch COVID and bring it home, but nothing about masks, as if they’d need to say a word. The usual suspects know the drill.

 

• In Massachusetts, UMass Memorial Hospital confirmed in a statement on Aug. 24 that it would reimpose masking for staff. Patients and visitors are exempt from the mandate, it stated.
• In New York, several upstate hospitals have required masking for anyone who goes into the facilities.
• In California, a Kaiser Permanente facility in Santa Rosa said it would reimpose its mask mandate, but it then issued a statement several days later saying it only applied to staff.

 

Smoke and mirrors. There were plenty of studies prior to 2020 that showed masking as ineffective for reducing flu transmission. There have been scores of new studies since that confirm that, plus research indicating a rise in health risks.

The only benefit to masking is regime-based. They and the peeps can identify who the rouble makers are becasue they aren’t wearing them.

That works for me.

 

The post CDC Says No Mask Mandates …For Now. appeared first on Granite Grok.

In our sports vernacular, the expression “losing your fastball” is a euphemism for no longer being able to perform to previous standards. After fireball-throwing Yankee pitcher Jim Bouton lost his fastball in the 1960s, he threw knuckleballs to extend his career.

Everyone “loses their fastball” eventually, as time takes that inevitable toll on one’s cognitive and physical skills. Even Tom Brady eventually retired from football.

When brain surgeons lose their fastballs, they need to retire, lest someone gets accidentally lobotomized. Would that politicians had the good grace to do likewise? Even the great Winston Churchill sadly held on as British Prime Minister into his eighties when he was well past his political prime, to the general detriment of his country, circa 1955.

The late Hall of Fame running back Jim Brown retired in 1965 at the top of his career, after nine great seasons, as opposed to Hall of Fame outfielder Willie Mays, who was a sad shadow of his former self when he retired in 1973 after 23 big league campaigns. He held on too long.

Our 46th U.S. President, Joe Biden, clearly lost his fastball long ago, as we all watch his daily decline—muttering, stuttering, shuffling, and falling down as his mendacious incompetence embarrasses and endangers our country. Some say he never had a fastball to begin with, that he made it to the top as a junk pitcher with spitballs, screwballs, curve balls, and sliders—along with lucky timing and the proper patrons.

(Thanks for foisting Joe Biden on us, President Barack Obama. Not.)

All of which brings us to revered New England Patriots head football coach Bill Belichick. It was only four years ago that he won a record sixth Super Bowl as Pats head coach. He was seen as a genius by many—the “greatest coach of all time.” Since then, of course, he lost Brady (his fastball?) and the team’s struggled. The Pats didn’t even make the playoffs last season. His staffing choices, personnel decisions, and play calling come under increasing scrutiny and criticism. The Pats seem to be on a treadmill to oblivion.

Is Belichick pulling a Willie Mays?

Belichick and Seattle Seahawk coach Pete Carroll are in their seventies. No other NFL coach is older than 64. L.A. Ram coach Sean McVay is only 37 and won a Super Bowl at age 34, demonstrating that one doesn’t have to be old to be successful.

Belichick trails the all-time winningest NFL coach, Don Shula, by 30 victories. Might Shula’s 328 career wins be a personal goal for the Pats coach? That would take at least three more years.

Sometimes a fresh face is needed. In 1988 the struggling Red Sox replaced manager John McNamara with Joe Morgan at the All-Star break. The BoSox won their next 12 games.

Another lousy Pats season will only increase the calls for Belichick to retire. If the team can have a successful season, then that might be even more reason for Bill to step down and retire to Nantucket on a positive note.

Philadelphia Athletics manager Connie Mack managed that team from 1901 until 1950. During his last season, the 88-year-old Mack saw his team go 52-102 and finish in last place in the American League. One might wonder why the A’s owner kept Mack in the dugout for so long. Well, Connie was the owner!

Pats owner Bob Kraft, himself 82 years of age, will no doubt have a candid conversation with Belichick if the Pats flounder. Many team owners somehow retain their fastballs. And fans have fastballs too. Time will tell.

As for Joe Biden, he apparently thinks he’s who our country needs as president for another four years. Most disagree. Ditto re: 77-year-old Donald Trump. America needs a 2024 version of Joe Morgan. A younger, fresher face.

And voters never lose their fastballs!

 

State Representative Mike Moffett of Loudon is a former sports management professor. He chairs the House Committee on State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs.

The post Biden, Belichick, and Fastballs appeared first on Granite Grok.

With the Sanborn scandal breaking the news just hours ago, it unsurprisingly spawned much discussion online. I thought about my House Committee assignments article at the beginning of the year.

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

I’m unsure if there’s enough material aside from the usual WMUR and NH Journal offerings in an ordinary internet search on the Sanborns. I took an even closer look at House LEADERSHIP assignments. We already know that most, if not all, committees are evenly divided, including the ones of great public interest. Remember Education, for example, sent SB 272 to the whole House without any recommendation due to it being a tie? Go figure.

I found Democrats with vice chairmanships in the following four committees: Children and Family Law, Fish and Game, Public Works, and Rules. And on top of that, Leishman is a Finance CHAIR! Under no circumstances should any intelligent person give the checkbook to ANY Democrat, ever.

What was Sherman Packard thinking?

And about our Speaker, I am calling him out as a Uniparty establishment RINO and think that a House coup might produce some good, assuming his replacement is not Wilhelm. I would recommend someone competent, seasoned, and respectable. Judy Aron, Carol McGuire, or Paul Terry might be a few ideas to consider, but perhaps there are others(both people and noteworthy reasons).

And let’s not forget that in addition to the Speaker opening a corrupt can of worms, he called former Rep Anne Copp a bitch for not wearing a mask while the microphone was on.

 

 

The post Mr. Speaker, YOU are the Captain of this Ship of Uniparty Corruption! appeared first on Granite Grok.

We can put the entire Biden corruption situation to bed. Eric Swalwell has told us so, and you have to believe a U.S. Representative who slept with a Chinese spy. At least it was a female Chinese spy. This fact obviously carried some weight with Eric’s wife.

She is still with the scumbag.

Hakeem Jeffries, the Minority Leader in the House and on the short list of Democrat presidential candidates, doesn’t need to review or justify the facts. He just knows the U.S. people recognize Joe Biden as a good and decent man; therefore, all he did wrong was of no consequence. What a crock. Joe Biden is an older man who sucked off the American taxpayer for his entire career. He never had a private sector job or created anything besides huge phony LLC bank accounts funded by bribe money from foreign countries and entities. He plays the system like a Stradivarius, but he, Hunter, and the whole rotten family are playing off key.

I have tried to maintain a modicum of decency and civility in my writing and feel I have been successful in over 1,000 publicized posts. I cannot be in this case. Biden, the Democrats, and the mainstream media are gaslighting us Americans. We need to blow out the torch on this load of B.S. There is nothing good or decent about this man who hoodwinked the American people into putting him and his doctor wife in the White House. He is a conman who made a career in the Senate by fooling the voters of Delaware. He failed twice in his quest for the Presidency and had to withdraw both times after being found to be a plagiarist. And somehow, he got Barack Obama to choose him as a running mate. He ran for President a third time to save the soul of America. He needs to pray to God to save his blackened soul.

Forget the let’s go high when they go low. That will make us the better person but losers. We have to meet these people where they live in the swamp and the gutter. It is not a joke. Whether local, state, or Federal, the Democrats have one mission. That is to control our lives, make us dependent on Government, spend our money like drunken sailors, and keep themselves in power. They will never have the best interests of the people in mind.

These people hate America. This is why they want to destroy or distort American history. This is why they despise patriotism and why they promote Socialism over Conservatism. It is all about raising the few to a higher level and to hell with the general population. They call everything on the Right racist, which is the epitome of projection. They are failing our children with indoctrination instead of education. And Joe Biden, the man who promised to return decency and civility to the White House, has been the most divisive President in history. And the only thing he has brought to the White House is a low-life, alcohol and drug-challenged son who is there to avoid the law. The apple does not fall far from the tree.

The post Joe Biden Is A Good And Decent Man-Not appeared first on Granite Grok.

Looming mask mandates are a hot topic as Hospitals ponder reimposing them on not just staff but patients. The variant chatter is also getting louder, along with calls for a fresh round of vaccines or boosters. The speculation is whether enough people have had enough of that.

One American, the guy who was in charge when the original mandates hit the stress, the commander and chief “booster” of operation warp-speed, has some thoughts about it.

 

Former President Donald Trump on Wednesday accused “left-wing lunatics” of fear-mongering about new COVID-19 variants in order to justify the reintroduction of their left-wing lockdown and mandate policies, which included the use of drop boxes and mail-in ballots in 2020, in a bid to rig the 2024 election.

President Trump made the remarks in a video posted on Aug. 30 on Truth Social, saying that his message should serve as a warning to every COVID-19 “tyrant” who not only wants to “take away our freedom” but who would be playing into the hands of those wanting to exploit COVID-19 restrictions to interfere in next year’s election.

“The left-wing lunatics are trying very hard to bring back COVID lockdowns and mandates with all of their sudden fear-mongering about the new variants that are coming,” President Trump said in the video.

 

One of my issues with Trump since the pandemic has been his continued talk about how he helped make Operation Warp Speed possible. Even after he was shown the door and the vaccine he helped fast-track proved to be a dangerous disaster, every speech included an ode to his involvement in helping get those vaccines out into the world. He may still think that’s a good thing, I’m not sure, but he has come around on the rest of it.

 

“Hear these words: We will not comply!” the former president continued. “We will not shut down our schools, we will not accept your lockdowns, we will not abide by your mask mandates, and we will not tolerate your vaccine mandates.”

 

Watch for yourself and let us know what you think.

The post Watch: Trump has Some Thoughts about the Election Infection and Rumored Mandates … appeared first on Granite Grok.

Please explain to me how any GOP Presidential candidate wins when the “swing States” continue to allow ballot-harvesting … when we have “Election Month” instead of Election Day, so Democrats can harvest votes before voters even have a chance to compare the candidates … when Zuckerbucks and the equivalent continue to flow into “swing States” effectively converting local elections offices into Democrat GOTV operations … when the Deep State continues to interfere in elections … when the Regime-media and Big Tech continue to censor the “news” (Maui? What Maui?). And if your answer is … Elon Musk is with us! He’s with us! … know that Twitter (now X) is reinstating censorship for the 2024 election:

Twitter’s new policy, called “Freedom of Speech, not Freedom of Reach” in a nutshell (see @Safety)

(And, yes, I know it’s “X” now, but honestly it’s just the same old Twitter, censorship and all)

When he locks my account, know I appreciate every one of you who have stood by me. pic.twitter.com/fmoVL7YGCb

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) August 31, 2023

 

The post Twitter (X) Reinstating Censorship For The 2024 Election … But Just Keep Pretending 2024 Won’t Be As Rigged As 2020 appeared first on Granite Grok.

RCP Polls continue to show Donald Trump as a Republican Primary-voter favorite for the nomination. Economist/YouGov has Trump with a 36-point lead. HarrisX has it at 45 points. But the Young Republican National Federation Convention picked DeSantis over Trump.

The Young Republican National Federation (YRNF) hosted its annual convention in Dallas, Texas, from August 16 to August 20. The organization focuses on registered Republicans ages 18 to 40, to “provide them with better political knowledge and understanding of the issues of the day,” according to its website.

After the five-day convention—which included speeches from Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Florida Congresswoman Kat Cammack and former Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake—36.6 percent of the attendees indicated that they wanted to see DeSantis as the next Republican presidential candidate. Trump trailed with 35.4 percent of the vote.

 

DeSantis took the poll with a 1.2% margin, which is something. It’s a big something, actually. It means that if Gov Ron can get young Republicans off the sofa and out from behind whatever screen they are staring at, his chances improve a lot. Bad news for everyone else, though.

 

The other GOP candidates polling in the top five were businessman Vivek Ramaswamy (9.1 percent), former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley (7.5 percent) and South Carolina Senator Tim Scott (5.5 percent). Roughly 6 percent of participants indicated that they wanted someone else as the next nominee, according to poll results.

 

Wait, there’s more.

 

Republican voters also appear to be attracted to younger candidates. Several polls taken after the first GOP primary debate last week showed that the two youngest candidates on stage—DeSantis, 44, and Ramaswamy, 38—were considered the “winners” of the two-hour event.

In one such poll taken by The Washington Post/FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos, 29 percent of the Republican voters surveyed said that DeSantis won, while 26 percent selected Ramaswamy. Another poll, by Leger for the New York Post, found that 23 percent of the 1,800 self-identified GOP voters interviewed said that they felt Ramaswamy came out on top, while DeSantis earned 21 percent of the vote.

 

Vivek has come a long way from being nobody in the political realm, which explains why he has been taking a beating (at the debate and everywhere else). I’ve received a pile of emails from folks with links, grousing about his sketchy background. I’m not rising that wave at the moment. When Trump ran in 2016, we were quite brutal about his lack of experience and past ties to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton. We backed him to keep Hillary at bay when he won the nomination, but we weren’t as excited about it as we could have been.

But it worked out. Trump may not have been the most polite president, but he did something no other Republican did. He pushed back hard and kept a lot of promises. As Grokster Aaron Warner wrote a few days ago about Trump’s supporters,

 

They voted to protect the border, he promised to build a wall, and he did.  They wanted more jobs for Americans, and he delivered manufacturing plants to the states.  They wanted to get out of endless wars, and he refused to start any.  They wanted fewer taxes, and so he cut them.

Though he was pilloried as an arch-white supremacist, misogynist, and racist, he somehow managed to create an economy where more black female entrepreneurs succeeded than at any time in history. He freed black prisoners and guaranteed funding to Historically Black Colleges ten times longer than America’s first black president, Harvard’s very own Barack Obama.  CNN’s own black analyst, Van Jones even had to tip his hat to Trump’s victories for black Americans.

We wondered about NATO spending, so he took the member countries to task.  We didn’t want to suffer the economic disaster of the climate change accords in Paris, so he withdrew us from them.  We were tired of fearing Middle Eastern terrorists like ISIS, so he took them out, and we were even more tired of funding them by buying their oil, so he opened up our pipelines and made us energy-independent.

 

He blew it on the pandemic, mostly by surrounding himself with the wrong people and then letting them have a microphone every day. At least a few Republicans I know will never forgive him or can, and if that’s you, be you just remember the left will try to steal the election regardless of who the nominee is.

As for DeSantis, I’d like to see him poll better. It would keep Trump on his toes and force him to address tough questions like, if they play pandemic politics again, what are you going to do? He posted some video on that here (I have a write about it at 6:30), so that’s a step in the right direction, and we know he’d hold money back from states that deprived you of your rights – assuming he’s serious – but how do we know until he is pressed for direct answers?

That won’t happen if he skips all the debates that he could. Someone polling 30-40 points ahead of the nearest challenge has nothing to gain by standing next to a bunch of folks who, combined, still have less support. But I’d like to see him take the heat. Debate is good. And DeSantis might have found some wind he can get beneath his wings.

 

 

The post DeSantis Trumps Trump in Recent Poll appeared first on Granite Grok.

Without the erroneous public perception and judgment of the state as just and necessary and without the public’s voluntary cooperation, even the seemingly most powerful government would implode and its powers evaporate. Thus liberated, we would regain our right to self-defense and be able to turn to freed and unregulated insurance agencies for efficient professional assistance in all matters of protection and conflict resolution. —Hans-Hermann Hoppe, The Production of Defense

In contemporary times, the state has assumed an aura of sacred infallibility, commanding zealous and unquestioning devotion from its citizenry. This blind allegiance mirrors the fervent tribal reverence once conferred upon shamans in ancient societies, where faith and tradition superseded rational inquiry. However, unlike those organic, community-rooted systems of old, the modern state’s claimed supremacy stems not from any factual basis or empirical assessment but rather from pervasive myths surrounding its purported omniscience and benign intentions.

The State as Manmade Myth

Despite the prevailing sentiment, the state does not innately possess powers exceeding those held by ordinary individuals. The state is a human invention, devised as an organizational tool to coordinate collective affairs, not as a deity to be worshipped without reservation. And yet the average modern citizen acquiesces without resistance to the state’s declared authority, obeying its often ambiguous dictates as if they were divine commandments inscribed in stone.

Like pagans conducting rituals to appease temperamental spirits, voters today participate in elections and political processes, hoping to shape their nation’s destiny and align it with their own interests. But these efforts primarily serve to perpetuate the mythological legitimacy of the state apparatus, just as pagan rituals functioned to intensify a shaman’s exalted status among the tribe. Neither shamans nor states truly possess the far-reaching powers attributed to them by their faithful adherents. Their authority stems not from empirical facts but from the circulation of persuasive myths and the inculcation of social conditioning.

By recognizing the human origins and agenda-driven mythmaking processes that grant legitimacy to state power, we can begin to fundamentally reevaluate the relationship between the governors and the governed. This shift in perspective empowers us to challenge the sacrosanct prestige of the state and explore alternative organizational forms that prioritize individual autonomy, voluntary cooperation, and spontaneous order.

The Fiction of State Omniscience

The misplaced confidence in state authority is often rooted in an inflated notion of its knowledge and capacities. The state is frequently portrayed as an omniscient, omnipotent entity capable of expertly designing and engineering society, as well as benevolently guiding the masses toward enlightenment. In reality, no singular organization or institution, irrespective of the resources and technological prowess at its disposal, can ever hope to attain total insight into the unfathomably intricate and constantly evolving network that is human civilization.

The belief that imperfect and fundamentally limited human institutions can completely understand and manipulate dynamic social systems is a fiction, a delusion of grandeur. And yet millions of people continue to voluntarily relinquish their personal agency to the mythic idol of the state, placing implicit and unquestioning faith in its imagined omniscience and benevolence. They surrender autonomy over their own lives to participate in the spectacle of elections that promise change yet repeatedly fail to deliver meaningful reform to unseat entrenched interests.

The Triumph of Spontaneous Order

In stark contrast to the top-down control paradigm, free-market anarchists argue that authentic and enduring social order largely arises spontaneously from the bottom up, not by centralized governance and imposition. The evolutionary emergence of diverse human languages provides a compelling illustration of this basic principle in action.

Language developed gradually over millennia through decentralized networks of voluntary interactions between individuals and groups seeking to communicate, cooperate, and find shared meaning. No central authority or government decreed the proper grammar or vocabulary, yet complex and subtle linguistic structures emerged informally over time through practical usage and the adoption of successful conventions. The structures of language arose spontaneously from human action but not human design.

Similarly, individuals can successfully cooperate to fulfill basic human needs and organize complex societies without reliance on authoritarian oversight or coercion. By leveraging reason, trial and error, reputation, competition, and the universal human capacity for recognizing and pursuing shared interests, people can develop sophisticated consensual social systems far exceeding in complexity and subtlety than any state bureaucracy could hope to articulate through legislation.

Robust extended orders in the form of organic moral codes, common law jurisprudence, sound money, and dynamic markets all evolved through decentralized processes well before the rise of the modern bureaucratic nation-state. Even ecosystem development and the self-organization of nature reveal the remarkable capability of spontaneous orders to achieve symbiosis amongst diverse constituents following simple, localized rules, but there’s no conscious, top-down design.

Decentralized evolutionary processes demonstrate the power to generate functional complexity and harmony that vastly exceeds the boldest designs of even the most well-meaning political planners and social engineers. The pledge of allegiance to centralized authority is philosophically flimsy when contrasted with the beauty of emergent spontaneous order arising freely, unencumbered by parasitic external manipulations. Though the state holds aspirations to achieve and maintain order, it cannot duplicate the dynamic elegance and intricate complexity birthed by decentralized networks of freely cooperating individuals.

Unveiling the Façade

On closer and more critical examination, the projected aura of state power and authority unveils itself as a thin façade. The state is comprised of intrinsically imperfect human institutions that remain vulnerable to the same pitfalls and limitations as any other human endeavor. Its weaknesses and failings become rapidly apparent whenever its policies or attempts at social engineering prove unsustainable, provoking unrest and ultimately open resistance from the populace meant to submit to its authority.

When the state aspires to abolish private property ownership and dictate every aspect of economic behavior from the top down, it leads to catastrophe. Totalitarian experiments in social engineering imploded under the weight of their own internal contradictions. No individual or institution, no matter how ambitious, can substitute their limited knowledge and flawed human judgment for billions of dispersed decisions and transactions made by localized actors with direct knowledge of their own unique circumstances and subjective values.

Like a cancer, government bureaucracies grow unrestrained, coalescing into sprawling hierarchies that centralize power. This concentration enables an endless list of egregious civil liberty encroachments—warrantless surveillance, censorship, and prohibitions. These symptoms underscore the diagnosis: unfettered state power threatens freedom.

The Path beyond State Worship

When contrasted with the darker aspects of human nature manifested in the predatory state, the decentralized philosophy of voluntaryism and free-market anarchism provides a compelling antidote to the destructive impulse toward state worship exhibited across societies. It seeks to completely dismantle the veneer of legitimacy and pedestal upon which the state stands and restore agency to the sovereign individual as the fundamental unit of ethics and civilization.

Free-market anarchism strips power away from entrenched, coercive, elite institutions and vests it within ordinary people possessing the natural capacity to successfully cooperate through voluntary exchange. In place of the state’s monopoly on legal violence, voluntaryists recognize that rather than attaining power, common people are most fulfilled when empowered to pursue their own diverse values and self-interests harmoniously and noncoercively to the greatest extent possible through economic and social freedom. They realize humanity’s potential through emancipation from domination.

In envisioned anarchic systems, individuals would be liberated to contract with one another on their own terms and by their own consent. Voluntary interaction allows decentralized solutions to emerge based on direct feedback, spontaneously coordinating the needs of the participants involved. Without a coercive centralized authority legally imposing its limited will and ignorant grasp of local knowledge, voluntary decentralized networks can permit an outpouring of diverse bottom-up solutions adapted to a tapestry of local conditions and individual preferences.

Superstition, blind submission, and abandonment of personal responsibility may have dominated premodern tribal communities. But retaining these anachronistic psychological tendencies manifest as irrational faith in state power represents regression, not human advancement. True progress demands skepticism, critical analysis, and debunking of the many myths cloaking the state. Only through emancipation from falsehood can the politics of sociopathic domination be displaced by voluntary civil cooperation grounded in the advanced economics of free choice and sound money.

As the mental shackles and superstitions of obedience-based state worship are cast off, ordinary people regain control over their economic and social destinies, realizing the transformative potential of unrestrained cooperation through the exercise of their natural liberty. Freed from the depraved folly of submitting to human political authority and emboldened by an ethical philosophy of self-determination, we can forge a new path forward toward unprecedented human flourishing. The crucial task before us is clear: we must challenge institutionalized assumptions, shatter existing paradigms of collective identity that diminish individual worth, and evolve society beyond the crippling grip of mysticism, coercion, and unreason. A brighter future awaits those willing to abandon the false prophets of the past while actualizing their own innate power as individuals to shape our shared destiny. But the price of transcendence is eternal vigilance.

Michael Matulef | Mises Wire Mises Wire We heartily encourage reprints and shares of Mises Wire articles. If you wish to reproduce an article in your blog, magazine, radio show, newspaper column, classroom material, textbook, discussion group, website, or any other venue, please do so. The original publication source must be included in an appropriate place.

The post The State as Modern-Day Superstition: Unraveling the Illusions of Authority 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!

Speaking of, from this week, Monday Edition and Wednesday Edition.

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

I was listening to Jeff Kuhner talk about this.  If – and it’s IF – Trump can strip away another 10-15% of the black vote, that’s yuuuuuge.  The problem is… it’s not the votes that count.  It’s who counts the votes (and fabricates as many as needed)… as we saw in 2020.  And IMHO 2022.  On rising black support for Trump:

BLACKS FOR TRUMP……more and more! (barenakedislam.com)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

Specifically on Covid / medical – because it’s that important to highlight:

Suddenly & Unexpectedly – Coquin de Chien’s Newsletter (substack.com)

Fascinating work.

—

Mortality Rates are lowest among the Unvaccinated in all age-groups (theleadingreport.com)

The unJabbed aren’t dying.  So who is?

 

 

—

 

 

On trust:

Bob Balayone: Aug 25, 2023, “Alberta woman dies after being denied transplant for refusing to get COVID vaccine. Sheila Annette Lewis refused the COVID-19 vaccine, and was denied a lifesaving organ (substack.com)

Now, I’m not suggesting anything, nor advocating anything.  But MHO is that if those who set this policy suddenly developed high velocity lead poisoning, or some such, and I were on the jury of the guy who did it… I’d accept the They needed a little killin’! defense.

And the CDC?

10 Years After HHS Asked CDC to Study Safety of Childhood Vaccine Schedule, CDC Hasn’t Produced It • Children’s Health Defense (childrenshealthdefense.org)

Covid to blame for just 1% of weekly deaths from all causes across the US, CDC data shows | Daily Mail Online

Don’t forget they’re shutting down the VSAFE adverse event data collection program… just as they’re also recommending Jabs for everyone.

CDC Now Refusing New COVID Vaccine Adverse Event Reports in Its “V-Safe Program” – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

 

 

 

 

 

—

 

Dr. Michael Yeadon needs no introduction:

 

https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/believe-them.mp4

 

—

Norway LOCKED man in psychiatric ward for questioning mRNA shots (substack.com)

They’re dead set to stifle any information that doesn’t meet The Narrative.  More:

The Road to Totalitarianism (Part 3) – CJ Hopkins (substack.com)

Related to totalitarianism and being watched, at least IMHO:

Invisible QR codes embed object data into infrared tags (newatlas.com)

—

MRNA Stock Game Over? Not Quite, As Moderna Boosts Its 2023 Outlook. | Investor’s Business Daily (investors.com)

Now how would they know this?  Speaking of the Jab companies in general:

Pfizer Admits Cover-up: ‘mRNA’ Covid Shots ‘Modify’ DNA – News Addicts

 

 

 

A new study shows covid injections cause VAIDS in children – The Expose (expose-news.com)

 

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

 

 

 

Bayou Renaissance Man: Ominous warnings from Tucker Carlson – assassination and war

I am seeing increasing numbers of memes highlighting the absolute inaction of the GOP in the face of Democrat actions against Trump, against free speech, guns, and liberty in general.  I’ve posted many.

Election Integrity T-Shirts Banned at 8th District GOP Fish Fry: Attendees Told to Turn Shirts Inside Out or Leave — Allowed to Re-Dress After Exit of Kemp and Raffensperger at the Event | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft

It’s one big club.  And you ain’t in it.  Consider this bit of backstabbery at the GOP Elite levels:

 

https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/charlie-kirk-on-gop-coup-against-trump.mp4

 

 

My view is this: the Deep State and uniparty are terrified of Trump.  Why?  He set back their plans.  And he demonstrated what being actually pro-American / America First meant and what the results were.  Absent him, they had plans:

 

 

So even as every attack on Trump seems to increase his support, I have zero doubt they’ll get desperate enough that they’ll off him.  Or, at least, will try.

 

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

 

PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA

 

Politics — Not Science or Health — Behind Return of Mask Mandates, Critics Say • Children’s Health Defense (childrenshealthdefense.org)

Worth reading in its entirety.

 

 

OK, so it looks like mask mandates are coming back, at least spottily.  Let’s start planning NOW on how we will fight back.

There is certainly open non-compliance as an individual.  But I’m thinking about other strategeries as well:

• Arrange no-mask invasions of stores. Get 10-15 people together and go in at once, flash mob style.  I’m up for that from the get-go.
• If you have a lot of people interested, stagger them. Hit one store, then 30-45 minutes later have another group hit a different store.  If you have enough people do it again at another location.  So overwhelm the police that they see the wisdom in not enforcing it.
• In parallel, tell the police they have the option to simply not enforce them.  If you have a family member or friend who is a cop – time for a heart-to-heart conversation.

 

 

Make sure you tell them WHY.  Not to the clerks – they’re just employees.  To corporate, via letter.  Emails and website messages can be set to be File-13ed automatically with certain key words.  Letters, while old fashioned, have more significance.  Post about it to friends.  Get them to write in too.  Create an avalanche of letters.

 

 

ANY OTHER IDEAS????

 

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

 

Maui Police Chief Ordered Cops To Block Cars From Fleeing Fire Allege Eyewitness.

 

 

The police are supposed to be our first-line defenders.  And they’re being coopted into being our enemies.

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

I used to tell students…the difference between poetry and you is you look in the mirror and say, “I am getting old,” but Shakespeare looks in the mirror and says, “Devouring Time, blunt thou thy lion’s paws.”

 —Jim Harrison

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

In the Shadow of Trump

 

 

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

 

Pick of the Post:

 

 

IMHO guaranteed to make any liberal blow their gasket.

 

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

 

Collected links with commentary, mildly organized:

 

Big Fat Lies about Saturated and Unsaturated Fats – The Expose (expose-news.com)

Highly recommend the book:

The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet

—

Canada Forest Fires Trend Has Gone Down Since 2000, Data Defy Alarmist Claims (notrickszone.com)

Inconvenient data.

Over 1,600 Scientists Declare There is No Climate Emergency – Geller Report

It’s not up to a majority vote, or “consensus”… it’s what the data say, and what good scientific practices like replication say.  And peripherally, related to fires:

Over 2,000 Children Missing From Lahaina Public Schools Two Weeks After Maui Fire: Report | The Gateway Pundit | by Kristinn Taylor

—

Jacksonville sheriff: “The problem is the individual”, not guns – Bearing Arms

Brings to mind the Reagan quote:

We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.

—

Bayou Renaissance Man: Credit cards are flashing danger signs for the economy

Multiple signs are pointing to a crash.  From the same site:

Bayou Renaissance Man: When the State decides it, not you, “owns” your children

I’m aware of a number of families that are banding together to homeschool their children as a group, hiring a trusted teacher (paying partly in cash, partly in kind) to oversee their learning, sharing the burden of supervising them at a central location each day, and planning joint extra-curricular activities.  They see it as defending their kids – and I can’t disagree.  I only wish more families were following their example.

OK, Groksters, I think we need to get working on this as a backup in case our schools go loony.  Or they mandate the Jab.  I can teach Math, Science, and depending on, a couple of other subjects.  And from a Telegram contact over in the UK:

3 Ways for Parents to Navigate Destructive Gender Ideology in Schools

And on corrupting kids in general:

HORRIFYING: New Mandatory Hospital Staff Training Promotes Sexually Transitioning 4-Year-Olds – Geller Report

Los Angeles Public Schools Partners With Trans-Radicals Who Push Sex-Change Surgery On Children – Geller Report

And the madness continues:

Sooner or later, these transgender freaks and their commie ‘woke’ enablers will find themselves on the receiving end of a bullet right between the eyes (barenakedislam.com)

—

South Africa: Attackers Chant “Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer” Before Stabbing Woman with Spear | The Gateway Pundit | by Richard Abelson

No no no, South Africa is a rainbow nation and this could never happen.  Speaking of violence (cheesecake alert – NSFW):

Rule Five Political Violence Friday | Animal Magnetism (frombearcreek.com)

—

The Charge is the Fraud – The American Mind

ANYTHING to keep Trump from running.

Trump Beating Biden Big IN 2024 General Polling – Geller Report

Dershowitz: “[There’s] No Plausible Case For Denying Donald Trump The Ability To Run For President” (rumble.com)

“Orange Man Bad” is enough.  Related:

CASE CLOSED: All Trump’s lawyers have to do to exonerate their client is show the court this video (barenakedislam.com)

 

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

 

Palate Cleansers:

 

—

 

Turn the O into a zero and the other i into a 1 and you probably have a really good one!  Now, one that I learned is to use the first letter of a phrase, and then change some similar to the above.  One that was mentioned when I worked in automotive was “1ltdmCrf!”  “I like to drive my Corvette really fast!”

—

 

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

 

And don’t forget… come back Monday for another edition.  Same Meme Time.  Same Meme channel.

 

The post Memestream News: Friday Edition appeared first on Granite Grok.

A reader alerted me to this bit of news—Bud Barn, a purveyor of ‘Premium Cannabis Products Made (and taxed) in Vermont,’ is advertising on Keene, NH, radio. Even if they are trying to capture the ears of Vermonters who work in Western New Hampshire, to quote a different local, weed ain’t legal here.

Related: Legal Weed in California Leads to More Marijuana Enforcement (not less).

New Hampshire has a medical marijuana program. Sentences for possession have been reduced. But it is still illegal, and you can’t cross the border with it – that’s a federal crime.

From CFAH.org

 

• In general, the use, possession, and sale of marijuana and its derivatives are illegal in New Hampshire, and it is the only state in New England where this applies.
• Marijuana is legally available to people with certain medical conditions, and there are limits to the amount that qualified patients may obtain.
• Recreational marijuana is still illegal in New Hampshire, although it was decriminalized in 2017.
• The laws also apply to cannabis-related products such as edibles, tinctures, and topical ointments, and to the sale or possession of drug-related paraphernalia.

 

So what gives with the marijuana radio? I’ve no clue and have yet to ask anyone who might know except you folks. You are no less informed or connected, so consider it a homework assignment. How can a Keene radio station sell airtime for a product from a neighboring state (that cannot legally travel across state lines?) and is illegal in this state?

I’m not passing judgment on whether they should be able to advertise in NH or not, but the reader had some intriguing observations.

 

“How many kids and teenagers are hearing this blasted on our radio every 15 minutes?”

I don’t believe our radio waves should be polluted by forcing us to be subjected to the promotion of “Recreating as you choose” using a product that is currently illegal in NH- in a state dealing with a drug crisis.

Afterall, there are clear reasons it’s still illegal here- so why are allowing the use of an illegal drug product to be advertised here?

 

Legalization here is increasingly likely if someone can convince the NH State Senate how the state may best profit, thus my continued objection (a recent bill would have created state-run dispensaries). But I am otherwise indifferent to what adults do in their spare time, tempered by certain realities that make legalized drug use a bad idea (here and here for examples).

There are numerous potential mental health issues from long-term or excessive use. And I have always had serious concerns about state management of the commodity as a revenue source, more recently explored here. And, of course, the Fed’s ongoing prohibition on legal gun ownership and marijuana use, to which I sense they are a bit clingy despite recent trial balloons to the contrary.

But that’s all a side conversation. An out-of-state marijuana vendor is advertising on Keene radio. For all the reasons mentioned above, what’s the deal with that?

 

Update: “Because of federal prohibition, marketing channels overseen by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are off limits for cannabis brands, including radio and television broadcast.”

Ruh-Roh, Raggy!

The post Weed is Still Illegal in New Hampshire so Why is Bud Barn in Vermont Advertising on Keene Radio [Update] appeared first on Granite Grok.

Dan, in his Surreply in his Election Law suit against Gov. Chris Sununu and other officials, elected and appointed, uses Bruen to buttress his argument.  Thus, it is worth reviewing to see the actual underpinnings to his case but from my uneducated eye (and Dan’s explanations), the reach of Bruen may well extend FAR beyond that of “keep and bear arms”.  Reformatted, emphasis mine:

OCTOBER TERM, 2021

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus
NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

The State of New York makes it a crime to possess a firearm without a license, whether inside or outside the home. An individual who wants to carry a firearm outside his home may obtain an unrestricted license to “have and carry” a concealed “pistol or revolver” if he can prove that “proper cause exists” for doing so. N. Y. Penal Law Ann. §400.00(2)(f ). An applicant satisfies the “proper cause” requirement only if he can “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community…

…Petitioners Brandon Koch and Robert Nash are adult, law-abiding New York residents who both applied for unrestricted licenses to carrya handgun in public based on their generalized interest in self-defense. The State denied both of their applications for unrestricted licenses, allegedly because Koch and Nash failed to satisfy the “proper cause” requirement. Petitioners then sued respondents—state officials who oversee the processing of licensing applications—for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that respondents violated their Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights by denying their unrestricted-license applications for failure to demonstrate a unique need for self-defense.

<snip>

In Heller and McDonald, we held that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. In doing so, we held unconstitutional two laws that prohibited the possession and use of handguns in the home. In the years since, the Courts of Appeals have coalesced around a “two-step” framework for analyzing Second Amendment challenges that combines history with means-end scrutiny.

Today, we decline to adopt that two-part approach. In keeping with Heller, we hold that when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”

<snip>

Heller, 554 U. S., at 634 (quoting id., at 689–690 (BREYER, J., dissenting)); see also McDonald, 561 U. S., at 790–791 (plurality opinion) (the Second Amendment does not permit—let alone require—“judges to assess the costs and benefits of firearms restrictions” under means-end scrutiny). We declined to engage in means-end scrutiny because

“[t]he very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government—even the Third Branch of Government—the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon.” Heller, 554 U. S., at 634.

We then concluded:

“A constitutional guarantee subject to future judges’ assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional guarantee at all.” Ibid.

Sounds like the Left’s constant whine that Constitutional Rights have limits just got shotgunned.  Or by cannon fire (which, contrary to President Asterisk Biden, are legal for one to own (see Letters of Marque, US Constitution). Not just the 2nd but ALL enumerated Rights.

And the part that Dan said to review concerning the applicability of Bruen to other Rights above and beyond the above:

In sum, the Courts of Appeals’ second step is inconsistentwith Heller’s historical approach and its rejection of means-end scrutiny. We reiterate that the standard for applyingthe Second Amendment is as follows:

When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstratingthat it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.” Konigsberg, 366 U. S., at 50, n. 10.

C

This Second Amendment standard accords with how we protect other constitutional rights. Take, for instance, the freedom of speech in the First Amendment, to which Heller repeatedly compared the right to keep and bear arms. 554 U. S., at 582, 595, 606, 618, 634–635. In that context, “[w]hen the Government restricts speech, the Governmentbears the burden of proving the constitutionality of its actions.” United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., 529 U. S. 803, 816 (2000); see also Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U. S. 767, 777 (1986). In some cases, that burden includes showing whether the expressive conduct falls outside of the category of protected speech. See Illinois ex rel. Madigan v. Telemarketing Associates, Inc., 538 U. S. 600, 620, n. 9 (2003). And to carry that burden, the government must generally point to historical evidence about the reach of the First Amendment’s protections.

<snip>

If the last decade of Second Amendment litigation hastaught this Court anything, it is that federal courts tasked with making such difficult empirical judgments regardingfirearm regulations under the banner of “intermediate scrutiny” often defer to the determinations of legislatures. But while that judicial deference to legislative interest balancing is understandable—and, elsewhere, appropriate—it is not deference that the Constitution demands here.

The Second Amendment “is the very product of an interest balancing by the people” and it “surely elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms” for self-defense. Heller, 554 U. S., at 635. It is this balance—struck by the traditions of the American people—that demands our unqualified deference.

Or speak our minds.

I make no claim to be a lawyer and don’t play one here or elsewhere. However, ordinary citizens are not denied the ability to opine on those things that are important to our everyday lives. That includes legislation (although we may not be legislators) and court decisions (although we may not be jurists or judges). These things matter and matter a lot – the word “esoteric” should never be used by some, especially by the Left in their worship of “experts”, to close down debate simply because we are ordinary people. After all, they serve only given our consent – their Powers stem from our consent (even as it seems they have taken that premise to have free reign to rule instead of governing).

In talking with Dan, it seems logical that one can substitute “Second” for any other of an Individual’s Right under the Bill of Rights. It is the historical analysis, not just that it was applied to the Second Amendment in this case, that is of the most import.

The post Since Dan Richard Referenced SCOTUS Bruen Decision, Here’s the Important Bits (Abridged) appeared first on Granite Grok.

WASHINGTON, DC — In a 7-2 ruling that protects anti-government speech, the U.S. Supreme Court has narrowed the scope of a federal law that makes it a crime to “encourage” illegal aliens to remain in the country.

In United States v. Hansen, the Supreme Court held that the law, which prohibits encouraging or inducing illegal immigration, must be interpreted as forbidding only the intentional solicitation or facilitation of certain unlawful acts and not as prohibiting a substantial amount of constitutionally protected speech. Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute and FIRE had filed an amicus brief warning that laws that criminalize mere encouragement of civil disobedience could chill speech essential to advocating for political and social change. For example, speech encouraging civil disobedience was a powerful tool in movements for the abolition of slavery, women’s suffrage, civil rights, and protesting government overreach in the face of COVID-19 lockdowns and policies.

“This statute laid the groundwork for the government to muzzle any nonviolent, political speech that challenges government injustice,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. “This is exactly the kind of law that would have rendered countless Americans as criminals, from Revolutionary War patriots to Martin Luther King Jr., for encouraging resistance and civil disobedience in the face of government tyranny.”

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv), a person is prohibited from encouraging or inducing a noncitizen to enter or remain in the United States when doing so would be in violation of the law. The law is a felony and carries a penalty of up to five years imprisonment. Helaman Hansen was charged with violating this statute, among others, and moved to dismiss this charge on grounds that the law is facially overbroad by penalizing protected speech in violation of the First Amendment. Hansen’s attorneys argued that the statute would punish the author of an op-ed criticizing the immigration system or a minister who welcomes undocumented people into the congregation and expresses the community’s love and support. The trial court rejected Hansen’s argument and found him guilty, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and ruled that the statutory provision is facially overbroad because it criminalizes speech such as encouraging an undocumented immigrant to take shelter during a natural disaster, advising an undocumented immigrant about available social services, telling a tourist that she is unlikely to face serious consequences if she overstays her visa, or providing certain legal advice to undocumented immigrants.

On appeal, however, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning and indicated that the statute should be interpreted narrowly in such a way as to avoid any such constitutional violations. The Court noted that the statute could penalize acts of smuggling noncitizens, providing counterfeit immigration documents or fake social security numbers, or making fraudulent representations to take advantage of noncitizens for personal financial gain. While Rutherford and FIRE had argued that the Court should have gone further and struck down the statute for being viewpoint-discriminatory and chilling protected speech, the majority noted that nothing in its ruling prevents a future defendant from challenging the statute as being unconstitutional as applied to him in violation of the First Amendment.

 

Erin Glenn Busby, Lisa R. Eskow, and Michael F. Sturley with the University of Texas School of Law’s Supreme Court Clinic advanced the arguments in the amicus brief.

 

HT | Rutherford Institute

The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties organization, defends individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or violated and educates the public on a wide spectrum of issues affecting their freedoms.

 

Editors Note: While we would not encourage illegals to “stay in the country,” protecting that speech also protects all anti-government speech” including suggesting the illegals be returned home (which these days are more likely to be considered “anti-government” than its opposite).

The post Supreme Court Protects Anti-Government Speech … appeared first on Granite Grok.

Several readers have forwarded a story about a Canadian father jailed and fined for misgendering his daughter in public. But he wasn’t jailed for that, not exactly. He was fined and imprisoned for ignoring a gag order that prohibited him from publicly objecting to the forced hormone therapy to which he did not consent.

 

Hoogland — who was featured anonymously in the Daily Wire documentary “What is a Woman?” — took legal action after a Canadian children’s hospital in 2018 told him that his daughter, who was then just 13 years old, was going to be injected with testosterone, despite Hoogland refusing to give his consent. In British Columbia, the Infants Act permits minors to consent to their own trans treatments if doctors think it’s in their best interests; parents’ consent is irrelevant.

 

America is already on the track. Many states, even my own (New Hampshire), have districts re-gendering kids at school without parental knowledge or consent. States like California are trying to toss kids into the genderizer without consent but with full knowledge, and if parents object, it starts looking like Canada.

The US DoJ and local jurisdictions have not been shy about intimidating parents who object to adult material in grade schools or teaching their children they are systemic racists. Arrests at school boards over various issues have increased as local tyrants work to silence parents and taxpayers alike.

Robert Hoogland was fined and jailed for six months, not for being disruptive or (allegedly) obstructing a meeting. Not even for objecting to the hospital injecting his 13-year-old daughter with hormone treatments (over which he’d filed a lawsuit). It was for refusing to be gagged and publicly speaking about his objections.

 

The court said that the girl could move forward with the testosterone and said Hoogland was barred from publicly “misgendering” his daughter, meaning he couldn’t refer to his own daughter as his daughter. Moreover, Canadian media was banned from publishing Hoogland’s name in any coverage via a publication ban. Hoogland told The Daily Wire such bans allow people to hide what they’re doing to children, despite these same people claiming trans treatments are helpful, good, and even lifesaving.

 

Insidious.

Canada is using its monopoly on ” health care” to sanction chemical experimentation on children that have permanent “side effects” (many of them dangerous to the life and well-being of the child). A deliberate government act paid for and defended with taxpayers’ dollars on which neither the press nor the people may publicly comment, protest, or seek redress.

Hoogland was punished for daring to question the government-run medical-industrial complex, which has to hit home here in America, where the FBI worked inside social media companies to suppress or censor Americans who questioned COVID response policy.

Many businesses and states fired employees because they’d lose government funding if detractors were freely allowed to dissent. From jabbing children to elderly parents or spouses, “Health Care” may have become one of this decade’s most significant threats to liberty.

Hoogland is happy to be out. To have taken the risk and, after only serving two months, been released. That’s not a win, but he should feel privileged to have not been diagnosed as mentally incompetent and recommended for medically assisted suicide.

 

 

The post What Losing Free Speech Looks Like appeared first on Granite Grok.

New Hampshire’s one-man independent video journalist, Dave Ridley, is back producing regular content for his “Ridley Report“! After YouTube demonetized his channel, Ridley abandoned it in order to protect it from being deleted due to YouTube’s new habit of issuing “strikes” against politically unpopular channels, ultimately resulting in their termination. However, he was disappointed in the other competing services to YouTube and their comparative lack of viewers.

However, recently, fans and sponsors encouraged Ridley to get back to regular production and he’s stepping up, with new videos being recorded and released as I write this. Welcome back Ridley! You can follow his new channel on Odysee and Bitchute.

Here’s his latest “ambush” video where he confronts some surprisingly open and accountable Keene Library “trustees”:

September 19th is a critical special election for the seat that will determine the balance in the New Hampshire House.

Please Submit Group communications or Press Releases to editor@granitegrok.com.
Submission is not a guarantee of publication – Publication is not an endorsement.

This past year with the New Hampshire House was essentially tied between both major parties, and we have seen an effective stalemate when it comes to policy decisions. This virtual tie has led to numerous good bills dying in the House. In fact, this past year, 57 of the 199 roll call votes were decided by less than 5 people sitting in the chamber, so every vote counts!

This is where you can help! The former Rep. from Northwood and Nottingham has resigned, and there is a special election to fill his seat. This former rep only showed up once, and therefore, this is our one opportunity to pick up a seat with a candidate who cares about protecting medical freedom, education freedom, and parental rights.

RebuildNH wants to let the voters in Northwood and Nottingham know about this special election: First, please contact your friends and family in Northwood and Nottingham and encourage them to vote in the special election September 19th.

We reached out to both candidates and the other candidate refused to fill out survey which could be an indicator that they are hostile to our issues.

Jim Guzofski, a former selectman and school board member, turned in an almost perfect survey and cares about the rights we work to protect.

Additionally, we have set a fundraising goal of $2,500 so we can mail some postcards into the district talking about Jim Guzofski. Please consider contributing.
Donate Here

Towards Liberty,

Melissa Blasek
Executive Director, RebuildNH

The post State House Special Election Alert appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Black, Brown, and Red communities have been programmed for generations to support the Democrat Party. They have been gaslighted to believe that Democrats have their backs and are the Party to protect and serve the little guy. They listen to their President talk about racism and the poison of White Supremacy.

They talk about the white threats on people of color as the biggest threat to Democracy. There is no proof of White Supremacy or systemic racism in America. People like Joe Biden, Barack Obama, and Al Sharpton have made careers on the backs of minorities, and the only way their cash flow continues is to stir the ashes to keep the flames of racism burning. They are using the ghost of slavery to keep people of color enslaved in the Democrat mantra. People of color are seeing through the lies and recognize they have been giving away their votes to the Mighty D and getting nothing in return. People of color are realizing they are more Conservative than they knew. They love God, the Nuclear Family, and the Country, and these are not the concerns of Democrats. Democrats have abandoned these people and all people in the middle class.

Look at the inner cities and the rampant crime and deplorable housing conditions. These cities have been abandoned, and as the Left calls to defund the Police, they become increasingly more dangerous.

Schools are failing all Americans, but specifically children of color. The falling grades are crucial, but so is the constant message of racism, oppression, and lack of opportunities for students of color. Absenteeism and dropout rates are skyrocketing for minorities. The future looks bleak without an education, making gangs’ attraction stronger.

The influx of millions of illegals will pressure low-skill/paying jobs, hurting minorities disproportionately. This labor pool will keep wages down, making Biden inflation more painful. There is not much in the Democrat platform that will retain the minority vote, which is indicative in the latest polls. Trump attracted 8% of the minority vote, but the latest polls show a rise to over 20%. This is huge for Democrats who feel they never had to work hard for this vote. Not so, any longer. The Democrats have taken this voting block for granted and will now pay the price.

Minorities, especially the Black voters, have awakened. They have heard enough of racism and want a fair shake. They see this from the Republicans. They do not want to hear about Equity and want an equal opportunity. They want to secure the borders and end this scourge of illegal immigrants moving into every city and absorbing much of the resources normally used for the low and middle-class.

Ironically, they see the head of the Democrat Party is an 80-year-old white man. They see the diversity of the Republican Party, which not only has a plan for the country and the cities but better reflects the look of today’s America.

Right now, it is talk, but in 2024, these folks will take their voices to the ballot box, and if the polls are accurate, the Democrats will be disappointed with the results. They should not be disappointed as they are getting what they deserve. We Conservatives welcome these minority groups and ask them what took them so long to cross over.

The post Minorities Finally Seeing The Light appeared first on Granite Grok.

Pediatricians who aren’t on board with pronouns, puberty blockers, and hormones are guilty of “transphobia” and need help, according to Dartmouth Health staff. They suggest pediatricians reflect on their “implicit bias” and that they “do some personal work in understanding how biases negatively affect the care they provide.”

In their American Academy of Pediatrics article, endocrinologist Frances Lim-Liberty and Jessica Smith, nurse practitioner and program coordinator for the Dartmouth Health Pediatric and Adolescent Transgender program, claim that pediatricians who “lack knowledge” may default to the “watch and wait” approach to see whether children will outgrow their confusion without affirmation and medicalization. “This method is outdated and harmful, denying resources needed to explore gender identity.” Never mind that research consistently shows that about 80% of children will outgrow their gender dysphoria if their identities aren’t affirmed.

They try to coerce physicians with The Trevor Project’s trans-or-die myth. “When youth are not affirmed, there is a significant increase in depression, anxiety, risky behaviors, and suicide.”

Lim-Liberty and Smith seem to be ignorant of developments in European nations, where national health services and medical associations have restricted access to puberty blockers or issued stark warnings.  They make no mention of the July 14 letter to the Wall Street Journal, “The Evidence of Gender Transition for Youth,” in which 21 clinicians and researchers from nine countries, including Finland’s leading expert, Riittakerttu Kaltiala, challenged Endocrine Society President Stephen Hammes’ claim that gender-affirming care improves well-being and reduces suicide.

Related: Experts: Child Transing Doesn’t Reduce Suicide

These international experts emphasized that “There is no reliable evidence to suggest that hormonal transition is an effective suicide prevention measure.” They implore US medical societies “to align their recommendations with the best evidence, rather than exaggerating the benefits and minimizing the risks.” These risks “are significant and include sterility, lifelong dependence on medication, and the anguish of regret.”

Anyone who’s set foot in a high school knows that transgenderism is a craze. Physician and researcher Lisa Littman hypothesized that transgenderism spread among teens as a social contagion. She coined the phrase Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD) to describe girls who suddenly identified after being influenced by peers and social media stars.

But Lim-Liberty and Smith dismiss ROGD in language better suited to an advocacy group’s newsletter than a medical journal: “fictitious phenomenon,” “distinctly biased,” “anti-trans agenda,” “talking points,” “insidiously undermine.” They seem unaware that concerns  about ROGD led to the closure of Tavistock in England, the world’s largest children’s gender clinic, as documented in BBC Journalist Hannah Barnes’ book “Time to Think.”  In 10 years the number of girls seeking sex-trait modification at that clinic had increased by a mind-boggling  5,337%.

The Dartmouth staff’s article serves as a warning about how deeply Dartmouth Health is invested in an ideology that teaches that boys and girls are born with gender identities, and if these identities don’t match their bodies, they need to be turned into life-long medical patients.  

The post Dartmouth Health Staff Accuse Pediatricians Concerned About Sterilizing Children of Transphobia appeared first on Granite Grok.

Did you know that the four totally bogus indictments of President Trump are actually part of a Democrat plan to make him the GOP nominee? Of course, you did NOT. At least not until Mikey Graham over at NH-NeverTrump Journal told you. You see … GOP voters are dumb … really, really, really dumb … because they stopped marching in lockstep with their “leaders” in 2016. Or at least that’s Mikey’s take.

According to Mikey, ANY Republican, except Trump, would beat Biden. The Democrats, as long as the GOP voters do NOT choose Trump as the nominee, would stop ballot-harvesting. Zuckerberg and his ilk would stop their takeover of local election offices (to use them as Democrat GOTV operations). Big-Tech and the Regime-media would stop censoring and whitewashing all the Biden malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance. The Deep State would stop interfering in elections.

If only you stupid, ignorant, really, really, really dumb voters would listen to Mikey and the other high-intellect GOP-“leaders” it would be morning in America again:

Here’s the irony: Democrats want Trump on the ballot. If there were a real chance Republicans would abandon him for an unindicted, non-Trump alternative, they would be the first to panic. There is only one Republican in the field that Joe Biden can beat. And based on the latest polls, Biden could even lose to Trump, too.

Here’s the REAL IRONY: If you believe a word off Mikey’s propaganda/conspiracy-theory masquerading as “analysis” then you are as really, really, really dumb as Mikey believes most GOP voters are.

The post NH-NeverTrump Journal … The Big Lie appeared first on Granite Grok.

The NH Supreme Court has taken my election law case for review. I just filed my Sur-reply to the State’s Brief. Oral arguments are next. The new SCOTUS decision from June 27, 2023, in Moore v. Harper (N.C. redistricting case) will now be tested in NH Highest Court. See attached copy of my Sur-reply why I believe this new case law will affect my case and ensure a positive outcome.

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT

No. 2023-0097

Daniel Richard

v.

Christopher Sununu, et al.

______________________________________________________________________________

PLAINTIFF’S SURREPLY TO THE

DEFENDANTS BREIF

________________________________________________________________________

This is a case of first impression. This involves new national standards of review under recent U.S. Supreme Court case rulings regarding Constitutional standards applied to state legislative statutes including the June 2023, Moore v. Harper, 600 U.S.___ (decided June 27, 2023) [hereinafter, “Moore”] and New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc., et al. v. Bruen [hereinafter, “Bruen”] No. 20-843 (U.S. Supreme Court, June 23, 2022) These rulings are applicable precedent and call for the reversal in this case.

1. Now comes, Appellant Daniel Richard, pro se, submitting this Sur-reply in response to the state Appellees’ Answering Brief.
2. The Appellant claims that his right to remedy of certain voting right violations was summarily and improperly denied without hearing on the merits in this case where he seeks both remedy and redress for violations of his State and Federal voting rights, under the Constitution of New Hampshire [hereinafter “Const. N.H.”] and the Constitution of the United States. Article 1. Section 2 and the 17th Amendment, [hereinafter U.S. Const. & 17th Am.”].
3. The Attorney General has intentionally mis-represented constitutionally relevant facts presented by Appellant and ignored case law in its response to illegitimately support flawed arguments in opposition. Further, it filed no response regarding the new national controlling case law on this topic. This gaslighting of the public and the Appellant has created a deceptive factually and procedurally faux-excuse to overlook and ignore state officials’ illegitimate behaviors to enact material alteration of the constitutional voting process in a manner that is otherwise unable to be corrected. The harm is significant, irreparable, and ongoing.
4. For example, state absentee voting for the election years 2014, 2016, 2018, averaged 4%. But for the 2020 election, absentee voting under new election voting expansion practices–without oversight and improperly and inconsistently applied at a local level–improperly expanded non-constitutional absentee voting to 32%. 260,217 illegal absentee ballots (wrongly printed, distributed, and processed) were counted using ‘Vote Counting Devices’. This Expansion of an unconstitutional voting process in violation of the State Constitution represents a hidden political manipulation of process to avoid the safeguards of the State Constitution to wrongfully expand a create new unauthorized classes of unverified and ineligible voters not qualified by Constitutional standards.
5. Un-Constitutional Ballot Counting Devices Appellant states in his amended complaint on pg. 16, Items 58 and 59 that the moderator (and/or asst. moderator) failed to perform their mandatory duty, required by the Const. N.H. Part II, art. 32. This violation is a substantive due process violation as the moderator is constitutionally mandated (“shall”) to “sort,” verify signatures and affidavits, and count the absentee ballots – as well as other ballots now having been cast by a significant number of non-constitutional voters. Appellees sanctioned the unlawful discretionary use of Ballot Counting Devices and enhanced absentee balloting at the local level, perversely employing and distorting NH RSA 656:40, [which allows some towns, cities, or other political subdivisions of the State to use Ballot Counting Devices or not] in a political process/system which circumvents to violate the State Constitution, thereby depriving the Appellant of a fair, equal and uniform voting process throughout the State. These illegitimate state-actor practices are ongoing, and officials flaunt their abuse of power, while distorting the facts and moving to dismiss any review, and public trial of the issue. The “manner” in which this complex and multi-tiered “statutory-scheme” of improper vote-generating activity was instigated and enacted by various state officials acting under color of law – is unconstitutional and unlawful for the reasons re-stated herein.
6. These state practices are an infringement of Appellant’s Equal Protection Rights

(a). NH RSA 656:40 impermissibly infringes on the Appellant’s State equal protection rights (Const. N.H. Part I, art. 11.);

(b). NH RSA 656:40 also impermissibly infringes on the Appellant’s equal protection rights under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Const [hereinafter 14th Am;]

(c). Meanwhile, NH RSA 656:40 impermissibly shifts the state burden of proof for review onto the Appellant to prove that he is harmed by the Appellees’ statutory scheme to “amend” the constitutional duties of the moderator, (i.e., the manner in which votes were not verified yet were counted, and by the initiation and use of Ballot Counting Devices); (d). Appellees failed to show a historical analogue burdening the right of the Appellant to the equal application of the law in State and Federal elections;

(e). NH RSA 656:40 impermissibly infringes on the constitutional manner (Const. N.H. Part II, art. 32) where the moderator is required to “sort,” verify, and count the votes; this constitutional mandate was improperly and illegally altered by (removed) statute and practice. The inhabitants of this State are deprived of the exercise of their informed consent (Const. N.H. Part I, art. 1.) by the changes to amend the Const. N.H. secretly through legislative sophistry, in direct violation of the due process clause of the Const. N.H. Part II, art. 100. This thereby deprived the inhabitants of this State (which the Appellant is one of) of fundamental right to due process required by Const. N.H. Part II, art. 100 – which requires an open voter amendment process to alter any terms of the Const. N.H. This also violates the due process protection of the Const. N.H. Part I, art. 1, art. 15 and the due process clause of the 14th Am. to the U.S. Const. as recently decided in Moore. The legislative scheme is ongoing harm against lawful voters.

7.The Un-constitutional Expansion of Absentee Voting by State Officials (a) NH RSA Chapter 657 impermissibly infringes on the Const. N.H. Part I, art. 11 (The Qualified Absentee Voter Clause), and The Voter Qualification Clause of the U.S. Const. Article 1, Section 2 and the 17th Am;

(b) Further, NH RSA Chapter 657 has impermissibly shifted the burden of proof onto Appellant to prove that he was harmed by Appellees statutory scheme (progressively implemented) to impermissibly alter the constitutional language in order to surreptitiously expand absentee voting “rights” (thereby increasing illegitimate ballots cast and counted) without the consent of the voters and outside of the Constitutional safeguards and requirements provided in the Const. N.H.;

(c) NH RSA Chapter 657 violates the Const. N.H. (The Qualified Absentee Voter Clause), and The U.S. Voter Qualification Clause. The Const. N.H. Part I, art. 11, only authorizes those –

“…who are absent from the city or town of which they are inhabitants, or

who by reason of physical disability are unable to vote in person;”

(d) The Appellant was disenfranchised by this scheme and his vote diluted, as his State and federal voting rights, are violated by depriving the Appellant of the fair and equal election process established by each Constitution. The illegitimate government alteration of the constitutional election process by sophistry and sleight-of-hand alterations in various legislative (i.e., political) manipulations of the constitutional language – in order to artificially create more votes, without submitting their “scheme” to significantly alter the constitutional “manner” to create an exponential number of new-sub-par votes – is both an abrogation of the valid constitutional amendment process and overall integrity of the vote casting process reasonably expected by citizens, including Appellant. The unfair increase in constitutional voting by the additional tabulation of various non-constitutional absentee, legislative and political manipulations is largely hidden from common and public observation, and represents voter fraud of the worst kind, the dilution of proper votes cast using bogus unconstitutional votes new politically manufactured and processed as valid votes under color of law. It alters the entire landscape of bona fide voting process – by creating and allowing a calculated and artificial dilution of votes using expanded and unverified “absentee” and other processes that lacks constitutional validity. (e) The inhabitants of this State are deprived informed consent (Const. N.H.) by what is an illegal expansion of “new” votes that avoid the mandatory process required to amend the Const. N.H. This scheme deprives will continue to deprive the inhabitants of this State of the fundamental due process required and essential for voting under Const. N.H. Part II, art. 100. It also violates the due process protection of the Const. N.H. Part I, art. 1, art. 15, and the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Const., Moore.

As established by Moore, state officials may not duck and or ignore its responsibility to review the state’s impermissible voter-interference practices(In Moore that state practice to substantively alter election outcomes was gerrymandering.)In this case, officials similarly claim that ballot counting devices and absentee ballot processing are non-justiciable issues for this Appellant in this case. Here, absentee balloting is the new gerrymandering.

8. Legislature improperly passed an unconstitutional statute permitting so- called Resident Aliens the Right to Vote without a Constitutional Amendment

(a) “N.H. Const. pt. I, art. 11. By the article’s plain language, an individual must be an inhabitant of this State,” Fisher. (a). NH RSA 21:6, RSA 21:6 (a) impermissibly infringes on the Const. N.H. Part I, art. 11 (Voter Qualification Clause) and The Voter Qualification Clause of the U.S. Const. Article 1. Section 2. and the 17th Am;

(b) NH RSA 21:6 impermissibly shifts the burden of proof onto this Appellant for him to prove that he is harmed by this statutory scheme to amend the Constitutional definition of a qualified voter without following Constitutional Amendment requirements, which specifically require the consent of “the inhabitants” of N.H; (c). NH RSA 21:6 is a state statute that allows resident aliens the right to vote in N.H. in direct violation of both State and Federal Constitutional requirements.

(d). Under state and federal Constitutions, the Appellant was disenfranchised, and his vote diluted by this non-constitutional statutory scheme practiced by state election officials. The depravation and harm to a constitutionally fair and equal election process will continue.

(e). The inhabitants of this State have been deprived informed consent (Const. N.H.) about the illegitimate statutory process that alters constitutional voting using a series of legislative changes that expand voting to include ‘new’ unqualified votes and voters. This expansion of new voter classes is not allowed by definition in the State Constitution. These back-door alterations of the State Constitution occurred by the implementation of new ‘laws’ promoted by government officials over a period of time – each which circumvents the definition of those permitted to vote defined in the Constitution, thereby depriving the inhabitants of this State the due process required before amendment. Const. N.H. Part I, art. 1, art. 15 and Part II, art. 100 and Federal due process, 14th Am. Moore.

9. Bruen (2022) – A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Bruen further articulated a two-step analysis for determining whether a law or regulation of constitutionally protected conduct is unconstitutional (as is claimed in this case). First, courts must determine whether any enumerated right (plain text) covers an individual’s conduct. Bruen.
10. If so, then the “Constitution presumptively protects that conduct,” and the Government must justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition regulating the right in question. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the enumerated right’s unqualified command.
11. In the instant case, the plain text of the State Constitution uses the specific word “inhabitant” 25 times, which underlies the Appellant’s claims because he is an inhabitant of N.H. Therefore, the burden falls on the Appellees to justify the law showing that it is consistent with State and Federal constitutions and election laws written pursuant thereof. Here, the plain text word “inhabitant” has been dropped, and new words substituted to expand the classes of who-is eligible-to vote. By altering the plain text meaning to now include whole new groups and classes of voters not included in the original language, the legislature improperly impinged on the Constitutional authority. New groups of voters include out-of-state students, and out-of-state residents, and a plethora of others who, under expanded and redefined words, do not qualify to vote under the plain text language meaning of the State Constitution.
12. Appellees cited no relevant authority to amend the Const. N.H. without the consent of her inhabitants as mandated by the state constitution (Part I, art. 1). Appellees needed to and failed to show some historical analogue relating to: (a). Discretionary Ballot Counting Devices; (b). Statutory expansion of absentee voting; (c). Legislative or other legitimate authority for sua sponte, granting resident aliens voting rights, notwithstanding the Constitution; (d). and must point to some “historical precedent from before, during, and even after the founding [that] evince a comparable tradition of regulation.” Bruen.
13. The Lynch Pin is the depravation of due process by state actors who altered the State Constitution by using new legislative terms and “voting processes” to improperly expand the number of new voters (and ballots counted) without first properly submitting the proposed changes to the inhabitants for approval or disapproval, as required under state and federal law. Legislative fiat was used to promote and enact the constitutional requirements necessary for these and other voter-enhancement changes to occur.
14. All of the new specific statutory voting schemes (including widespread absentee balloting manipulations and the extensive use of Ballot Counting Devices) complained of in this case are novel issues to the court, but each is a type of bureaucratic manipulation to improperly and illegitimately expand the votes counted.
15. Appellees rely on their materially flawed argument of the 1976 Amendment, Question 8 (b). This political tactic was declared by this Court to be unconstitutional in Fischer v Governor 145 N.H. 28, 37 (2002). Resurrecting a political variation of the void argument and trying to apply it flawed reasoning represents legal misconduct.
16. Earlier decisive precedent/rulings at law, such as Fisher, were ignored by Appellees and the Court when dismissing the Appellant’s claims under Moore. The 1976 Question 8 amendment show the state has violated the Appellants substantive and procedural due process rights under both State and Federal Constitutions.
17. The lower Court and Appellees further evaded the historical facts and controlling 2000 state Court precedent of Fisher, which previously declared the 1976 Amendment Question 8 (b) – The Domicile Question – to be unconstitutional:

“It is clear, however, that the removal of the “proper qualifications” language from the voting provision did not conform to the scope of the amendment intended by the constitutional convention. Specifically, it did not relate to the four intended substantive changes regarding age, domicile, duties of the secretary of state, and absentee voting, and far exceeded the convention’s remaining intent to “simplify” the wording of Article 11. Indeed, as noted by the State, the ballot questionnaire submitted to the citizens for ratification of the 1974 amendment failed to alert the voters to any substantive change to the legislature’s authority to generally determine voter qualifications.” (Emphasis added) id.

18. This issue was pled as precedent in the Appellant’s lower court claim, which Judge Ruoff avoided, so is raised again for appeal.
19. Appellees’ “statements of facts and law” regarding discussion of Question 8 (re: the 1974 amendment) lack legitimacy, as Gerber v. King 107 N.H. 495, 225 A.2d 620 (1967) [hereinafter “Gerber”] forbids the comingling of five separate and distinct yes or no questions for one yes or no answer, as was done in the instant case on absentee ballots. The issue was resolved more than two decades ago by this court.
20. It is disingenuous now for Appellees (who represent the state’s highest elected political and legal officers) to claim in 2023, that the reason the 1976 Question 8 (a) was presented to voters was to reduce the voting age from 21 to 18. This and other “question-8-arguments” have already been briefed, but Appellee’s present response is intentionally obfuscation and misleading because the age-18-ballot question was moot long before the time it showed up on the ballot in question in 1976.
21. The voting age reduction/vote had already been completed and enrolled as law in 1974 – two years before it was placed on the 1976 ballot. The issue was void, although referenced by Appellees’ counsel as important “precedent” to dismiss this case. The earlier 1974 age-vote stemmed from a CACR proposed by the legislature to voters, who on November 5, 1974, voted 147,484 to 57,756 to reduce voter age. (See Exhibit E, New Hampshire Manual, cited at page 17, Appellant’s Brief).
22. It is disingenuous now for Appellees to aver that 1976 Question 8 (e) ballot somehow represents binding precedent allowing the use (in 2020, 2022, and thereafter) expanded multi-part legislative scheme to unconstitutionally expand voting to new classes, but without a constitutional amendment, since this court previously disallowed such tactics as void as far back as 1967 in Gerber.
23. The responses in opposition are stubbornly disingenuous, applying misstatements of fact and law, while omitting contemporary precedent, including Moore and Bruen. Gerber for example, upholds the common law, and prohibits comingling of multiple unrelated questions to voters with one yes or no choice; Gerber pointedly disallowed the voter to vote yes to part of one specific question and no to another part of the same question. The plain text of the last sentence of the 1784 Const. N.H. Part II, Art. 99, in 1792 states:

“Provided that no alteration shall be made in this constitution before the same shall be laid before the towns and unincorporated places, and approved by two thirds of the qualified voters present, and voting upon the “question.”” (Emphasis added) “[N]o alteration”, and “question” are singular terms, not plural.

24. In addition to other causes of action and complaints in the Appellant’s Brief, these and other fundamental voter-integrity issues, require review and reversal in 2023, under Moore and Bruen.
25. The Court is requested to schedule a review hearing with oral arguments on this matter at the earliest opportunity, as the issues raised are a matter of re occurring public harm through the improper dilution of each citizen’s vote in the 2020, 2022 and upcoming elections.
26. Following the hearing, this Honorable Court is requested to grant remedial, prospective, and other relief as appropriate.

August 29, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

 

/s/ Daniel Richard

Daniel Richard

xxxxx

xxxxxx

1danielrichard@protonmail.com

Certificate of service

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was served through the Court’s e-filing system to all parties of record.

August 29, 2023 /s/ Daniel Richard

Daniel Richard

The post THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT: Daniel Richard v. Sununu … appeared first on Granite Grok.