Ten years ago, I took part in a series of debates on school choice opposite Paul Cillo of the Public Assets Institute and Bill Mathis of the National Education Policy Center and the Vermont State Board of Education. I was for school choice; they were opposed.

At the time, Mathis used the then-latest and second installment of the Stanford CREDO (Center for Research on Education Outcomes) study on charter schools, which he called “the gold standard,” to argue school choice options led to statistically insignificant differences in student outcomes, and so we should not adopt them.

I countered that what CREDO II (2013) showed is that independent charter schools do at least as good a job as their public school counterparts but for significantly less money. If nothing else, better ROI for taxpayers! But even then, there was something else. Though the 2013 study did show negligible differences in outcomes overall, it also showed that certain subsets of students – Black, Hispanic, low-income, and English language learners – performed better in charter schools than their peers in public schools.

Addressing such learning gaps long experienced by these categories of students in Vermont was, at the time, a primary problem we needed to focus on solving. (Unfortunately, it still is, though we have added more problems to the list.) Expanding school choice options would have been a solution benefiting these children without harming others.

But now that the 2023 CREDO III study is out, I can’t help but wonder if Bill Mathis is still touting it as “the gold standard” because ten years later, it shows conclusively that access to educational opportunities outside the traditional public schools (TPS) absolutely, undeniably lead to overall better student outcomes – especially for those afore-mentioned groups that have been traditionally underserved by the public school system.

Here are some highlights from the 160-page report:

 

The majority of charter schools provide better year-to-year outcomes for students compared to their traditional public-school options. Most of these schools perform better to such a degree that the difference is statistically significant. The results stand up to deeper investigation. Charter schools produce superior student gains despite enrolling a more challenging student population than their adjacent TPS. They move Black and Hispanic students and students in poverty ahead in their learning faster than if they enrolled in their local TPS. They are more successful than the local public school alternatives across most grade spans and community settings. These results show that charter schools use their flexibility to be responsive to the local needs of their communities. (p.13)

 

Moreover, the longer a student remained in a charter school, the better that student’s outcomes become. And, like the students, the longer a charter school exists the more it adapts and improves to provide better educational opportunities.

The research also eviscerates the false argument that independent charter schools either actively “cherry pick” or passively benefit from the self-selecting of more talented or better prepared students. As noted by CREDO, if the cherry-picking theory were correct, the students switching to charter schools would start out at a higher level of achievement than their TPS peers. “In multiple analyses, we do not see significant evidence of an undue advantage to charter schools. In fact, we find the opposite is true: charter schools enroll students who are disproportionately lower achieving than the students in their former TPS (p. 26).”

As for Black, Hispanic, low-income, and English language learners:

 

Perhaps the most revealing finding of our study is that more than 1,000 schools have eliminated learning disparities for their students and moved their achievement ahead of their respective state’s average performance. We refer to these schools as “gap-busting” charter schools. They provide strong empirical proof that high-quality, high-equality education is possible anywhere. (p.12)

 

This should be inspiring stuff!

But these gold-standard findings come at a time when the Democrats and Progressives in the Vermont legislature are going all out to eliminate such choice-based opportunities for our kids where they exist, rather than strengthen and expand them. Multiple bills this past session were introduced to curb or eliminate funding for Vermont’s tuitioning system, which allows families in districts with no public school to choose the best public or independent school that meets their child’s needs with money following the child.

Although Vermont doesn’t have charter schools, our approved independent schools perform a similar function. They are independently operated but receive public funding on a per-student basis. Like charter schools, they are more flexible in their abilities to define their mission, adopt and adapt curriculum, and hire and fire teachers. And because their students can withdraw – along with their money – if the school fails to perform, they are far more accountable to the customer for their results.

This combination of flexibility to adapt paired with incentives to perform is the dynamic behind the quick, vast improvement CREDO found in charter school outcomes over just the past decade. It is the dynamic we should be – needs to be — building more into our publicly funded education system.

Why? Because over this same past decade, Vermont’s traditional public schools have seen the opposite results: a steady decline in student outcomes with persistent and worsening learning gaps for low-income and minority students. Behavioral problems and mental health issues are on the rise, as is the cost of the system as a whole. The system isn’t broken. The system doesn’t work at least for a lot of students who deserve better.

So, the results are in. Giving students a variety of mission-driven options to meet their educational needs provides better outcomes and greater equity for less money. Are there more improvements that need to be made? Always! But, as the research shows, those improvements will come faster outside the traditional public school model. All we need now is a majority of state representatives and senators willing to put children and taxpayers before the special interests desperately trying to hold onto their lucrative status as a state-run monopoly.

 

Rob Roper is a freelance writer with 20 years of experience in Vermont politics including three years service as chair of the Vermont Republican Party and nine years as President of the Ethan Allen Institute, Vermont’s free market think tank

The post “Gold Standard” Study Shows Charter Schools Outperform Public Schools appeared first on Granite Grok.

After waves of racially charged protests and riots (2020), Democrats across the country issued calls to “defund the police.” They had political positions in many cities, allowing them control of budgets.

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

In several cities like Chicago, New York, Portland, and Washington, D.C., among others (many others) Democrat “leaders” caved to demands from leftist activists. They cut police funding in their jurisdictions. The predictable happened.

Crime rose to out-of-control levels in these Democratic-run cities. Things have gotten so bad that Democratic leaders want to “send in the troops” to assist their overstretched, demoralized police forces.

Crime has continued to rise to the point of being out of control in many jurisdictions. These Democrat-operated cities are becoming unsafe. Things are so bad as a result of the action of Democratic “leaders” that those currently in charge want “troops” sent to their jurisdictions.  They expect the rest of us who do not live there to pay for sending in troops to assist their overstretched, demoralized police forces.

They created the problem and they want us to solve it for them.

In the nation’s capital, Council member White called on the National Guard to stop the surging violence. He says the Southeast neighborhood he represents has become a “war zone” plagued by frequent gunfire and rising homicides.

In Chicago, crime is up 36% compared with last year; Illinois state representative Ford says sending in the National Guard “should not be off the table.”  And in California, Gov. Newsom deployed the National Guard to San Francisco in April to help address fentanyl trafficking in the city, which has become a haven for criminals.

Nationwide, Democrats are bad at stopping crime.

They are good at calling for prepositioning federal troops throughout the country, so is crime the excuse?

Do we want direct federal control of our cities with armed troops? What is the posse comitatus act?

The Posse Comitatus Act bars federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement except when expressly authorized by law. This 143-year-old law embodies an American tradition that sees military interference in civilian affairs as a threat to both democracy and personal liberty.

Sure, Democrats’ first emotion is to empathize with the victims, but they have carried their caring for the victim to the extreme. They are caring for the anti-social individuals in their jurisdictions to the detriment of the law-abiding citizens.

The result is most people who vote for Democrats do not feel safe in their own neighborhoods. Yet, those people could vote for different leadership… When will they?

Democrats are beginning to admit crime is a legitimate problem, but the question is, will they admit they enable the people who commit the crime they admit is a problem?

They are still denouncing their critics as racist, while some insist everything is fine. On its face, this suggests the situation on the ground is bad. It also suggests the situation will deteriorate more because there must be sufficient fear, pain, and death to motivate change.

We know antagonizing police officers, cutting their funding, reducing their numbers, attacking them personally, and tying their hands is an ineffective way to stop crime. But we do not need troops in our cities. We need good citizens to take back political control in their jurisdiction.

We need common sense to return to a society with law and order.

This is hard work that needs to be done locally. It costs society less, and those costs must be borne by those getting the improvements in their living conditions. The community will not improve unless and until it is willing to do the work to make it happen.

Just think about it.

 

The post Democrats Support Crime in Their Cities and Whine for “Help” from the Rest of Us appeared first on Granite Grok.

The PERP Act, sorry, I mean PREP, established immunity for the Public Health Industrial Complex from responsibility for treating COVID-19—a sort of secular ‘papal’ dispensation for sins to be committed. A man suing in Michigan has been granted an exception.

 

In a groundbreaking decision, a Michigan judge ruled on Aug. 8 that a drug manufacturer and hospital are not protected by the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act in the case of a man who experienced two strokes and a leg amputation after receiving the COVID-19 medication remdesivir that was contaminated with glass particles.

 

Willful misconduct is not protected by PERP (sorry, PREP), which ought to cast a wide net given how much the FDA, CDC, and others knew about risks associated with the alleged “treatments” and protocols (as evidenced in documents pried from their greedy hands). But that remains to be seen.

As for Dan Nowacki, his family’s fight has just begun, and the “misconduct” is more a matter of negligence and poor quality control.

 

According to the complaint (pdf) obtained by The Epoch Times, Mr. Nowacki, on Nov. 10, 2021, was admitted to St. Joseph Mercy Chelsea Hospital and diagnosed with COVID-19. During his stay, he received five doses of remdesivir. At least two doses belonged to contaminated lots.

Days later, Mr. Nowacki experienced his first massive stroke. On Nov. 24 Mr. Nowacki was released to a skilled nursing facility and began developing hematomas and swelling on his hands, face, and arms. He was readmitted to Henry Ford Hospital where his “symptoms remained a mystery to physicians.”

Mr. Nowacki experienced a second stroke on Dec. 16 that left him bedridden and in need of permanent round-the-clock care for the rest of his life.

 

The tragedy and loss can’t be measured, but if they win, a Jury must work that out. I’m wondering whether, in the course of the case, anyone will even bother to point out that Remdesivir doesn’t even work on COVID-19 and may make it worse. 

 

WHO has issued a conditional recommendation against the use of remdesivir in hospitalized patients, regardless of disease severity, as there is currently no evidence that remdesivir improves survival and other outcomes in these patients.

 

The WHOs down in Whoville didn’t get the gumption to make this admission until late 2022, but the evidence started piling up when it got the green light in May 2020. But it was so damn expensive that no one could bring themselves to stop the money train.

People died.

No one can sue for that, it seems, but Glass particles may have been present in as many as 55,000 doses recalled by the manufacturer (Gilead). What remains to be seen is whether a court or a jury will view accidental contamination as willful misconduct, assuming some other judge, upon appeal, doesn’t decide that Dan Nowacki does not have standing to sue.

 

 

HT | Epoch Times

The post It Isn’t Easy Being a Victim of Remdesivir appeared first on Granite Grok.

Today was a big win for every Nashua resident, and it also vindicated Laurie Ortolano as the Supreme Court ruled in the Ortolano case against the City of Nashua with a 5-0 win.

The Supreme Court stated:

Part I, Article 8 of the New Hampshire Constitution provides that:

“the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted.”

The Right-to-Know Law states that “ [e]very citizen … has the right to inspect all governmental records … except as otherwise prohibited by statute or RSA 91-A:5.” … The purpose of the Right-to-Know Law is to ensure both the greatest possible public access to the actions, discussions and records of all public bodies, and their accountability to the people. Although the statute does not provide for unrestricted access to public records, [the New Hampshire Supreme Court] resolve[s] questions regarding the Right-to-Know Law with a view to providing the utmost information in order to best effectuate these statutory and constitutional objectives. As a result, [it] broadly construe[s] provisions favoring disclosure and interpret[s] the exemptions restrictively. The party seeking nondisclosure has the burden of proof.

Ortolano v. Nashua, No. 2022-0237 (August 18, 2023 Opinion) (internal citations omitted).

This win hopefully will show the City of Nashua that residents are concerned and want to know how their government is being run. But more importantly, it states that residents have the right to inspect all governmental records.  

Three cheers for Laurie Ortolano!!

The decision:

Laura Colquhoun on Laurie Ortolano win – Supreme Court Order on 2022-0257 Back up tape emails

The post Laurie Ortolano Wins in State Supreme Court 5-0 vs City of Nashua appeared first on Granite Grok.

See tweet below from the editor of the Babylon Bee. The GOP-elites think GOP-voters are simpletons and/or cultists and that MAGA is a cult of personality. So wrong. While there are some cultists …. “he’s playing six-dimensional chess” … the vast majority of the GOP-voters supporting Trump know that he is human, imperfect, flawed. BUT YET THEY SUPPORT HIM. The question the GOP-elites should be asking is … WHY?

The tweet below posits an answer. Here is mine … BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE OTHER GOP CANDIDATES ARE GASLIGHTING THEM (in blunter terms … are full of sh*t). Christie, Haley, Pence, Scott, etc. are NOT going to secure the Southern border because the donor-class, the GOP-elites want an open border. Nor are they going to “stand up to China” because the donor-class, the GOP-elites make lots of money from America investment in China. Nor are they going to end the Ukraine-gravy-train because … again … the donor-class, GOP-elites makes lots of money from that gravy train.

GOP-voters gave the GOP the House in 2022. What have they accomplished? NOTHING. GOP-voters gave the GOP total control of the federal government in 2016. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell refused to fund a border wall and instead were complicit in “investigating” Russia-collusion in order to get rid of Trump or at least block/slow his agenda. GOP-voters gave the GOP the House in 2010 believing that the House would block Obamacare. Instead, GOP members of the House and Senate who actually tried to deliver on that promise were attacked by GOP “leadership” who kept telling the GOP-voters that they needed the Senate … and then the Senate wasn’t enough either they needed the the Presidency too. And then, as noted previously, when they got it all in 2016 … they REFUSED to repeal Obamacare.

And to add insult to injury under “Republican” Governor Sun-King Sununu, the NHGOP wrote Obamacare into State law.

To cut to the chase, GOP-voters are soundly rejecting the non-Trump GOP candidates because the Establishment-wing, Swamp-wing, whatever-you-want-to-call-it wing of the GOP has shown itself TIME AND TIME AGAIN to be FULL OF SH*T.

MAGA isn’t a cult of personality—many who voted for Trump find him personally distasteful. You don’t throw a hand grenade into the deep state, the media, and the corrupt regime because you’re in love with the hand grenade. You throw it because you want your target destroyed.

— Joel Berry (@JoelWBerry) August 11, 2023

The post What The GOP-Elites Do Not (And Likely Never Will) Understand About GOP-Voters appeared first on Granite Grok.

The continuing Trump indictments; will Trump attend the 1st debate? Who would it help or hurt for Trump to show up or not? Do debates change anything, even if only to cull the field? are Trump’s attacks getting old or just their indiscriminateness? Desantis firing his campaign manager; who decides who won a debate and based on what? was it wise for Desantis to say “of course, Trump lost the election”? Andy Ngo losing his civil suit against Antifa; comparisons to the 7-11 beatdown of the brazen thief?

The post The Conservatarian Exchange Podcast #166 appeared first on The Liberty Block.

George Orwells’ future projections on government from his book 1984 are collectively summed up in his quote, “Imagine a boot stamping on the human face forever.”

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

Unless H.R. 79, the “WHO Withdrawal Act,” becomes law, the WHO’s healthcare controls may soon resemble those “stomping boots.”  I urge the reader to diligently research H.R. 79, introduced by Andy Biggs (R. AZ), with now 50 co-sponsors. Not only will it preserve personal healthcare freedom, but it will also stop many other sovereignty-destroying problems from the UN, the parent organization of WHO.

WHO has partnered with the European Commission, the executive branch of the European Union, to implement around the world the EU’s digital health passports called WHO’s Global Digital Health Certification Network,” bringing tyrannical biomedical security to control people globally. Our best defense to stop this new Pandemic Treaty from unconstitutionally licensing future presidential edicts is citizen action to demand the Senate consider and defeat the treaty’s dangerous amendments to International Health Regulations that eliminate personal healthcare decisions.

As Tom Paine so eloquently said: “ These are times that try men’s souls.”  “Let us not be sunshine patriots and summer soldiers” failing to stop WHO’s attack on personal healthcare. Americans inherently have been blessed with the Constitution that protects the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—blessings of liberty other nations do not have to give away to socialism. The WHO’s totalitarian moves essentially only target American freedom in healthcare. Americans who think it cannot happen here are blinded from 20th-century reality:   the price in deaths that total over a hundred million victims of  Marxist tyranny murdering their own people.

Every American who values their liberty should consider the future potential of a world ruled by the global megalomaniacs above WHO: George Soros, Klaus Schwab, and Bill and Melinda Gates, all teammates seeking a New World Order fully supported by the Biden White House. If a lack of citizen response continues to go with this evil flow, then we will all suffer the consequences of a Digital Health ID, a foretaste of which we experienced with the vaccine passport to enter public spaces.

Jefferson did not challenge a world monopolized by despotic rulers with his Declaration of Independence that grew into the Bill of Rights so the Biden Administration could give our God-given personal rights of healthcare away to globalist power!

Patriots, it’s time for action. Gain valuable ammunition in this “war for liberty” at https://gojt.us/28es to view The UN Deep State Plan For World Government.

Also, go to https://gojt.us/6n2 to view “UN WHO Coming In For The Kill with Health Schemes.” Share this alarming news with family and friends. Email your Senators and Representatives in both the state and the Federal government and demand they support H.R. 79. This knowledge promoting withdrawal from WHO holds the power of truth. It will take your courage to help save your “pursuit of happiness that only good healthcare insures.

 

The post Stomping Boots From Who appeared first on Granite Grok.

The FDA continues to insist that it never intended to give the impression that doctors could not prescribe Ivermectin for COVID-19, that pharmacists could not fill those, or that it wasn’t made for people, probably because they were sued.

Related: Irony Alert: The FDA Issues a Warning about Misinformation on the Internet

They were just misunderstood “kids,” taken out of context.

 

Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, had said during recent oral arguments in a legal case that the FDA “explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID.”

 

It reminds me of Ray Buckley and the New Hampshire State Democrat Party. They’ve been sued for defamation, and while that’s a tough hill to climb (proving it was malice aforethought), the NH Dems did about as good of a job as you could to show they knew better and did it anyway or should have.

The FDA is in a similar boat, and part of its problem is that the media went wide with its “for animals horse-dewormer narrative,” and they never said stop. Don’t.

 

Ms. Honold said the FDA’s statements “don’t prohibit doctors from prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID or for any other purpose.” She said the agency advised people to consult their health care providers and that they could take medicine if the provider prescribed it.

 

But there was no equally massive response to correct the record. No new tweet saying exactly that. They let it be the truth.

Africa and India were showing excellent results with Ivermectin during the Pandemic but the FDA never even managed to notice or update the record.

The result – at least in the US – was the full-court press to suppress a safe, well-tolerated medicine with nearly one hundred more studies proving it works better on COVID-19, before or during an infection, than anything anyone tried to mandate.

The FDA still has not approved it for use for COVID. The best it can do is claim it never said doctors couldn’t prescribe it off-label, which, again, they could have shouted from purple mountains majesty but couldn’t be bothered. Why?

Follow the Money.

The FDA and its watchdogs appear to have been bought, bribed, or coerced to hide the truth and sell the lie.

They had to stifle ivermectin, or the cash for Jabs laundromat would never open.

The people tasked with protecting us from profiteering without regard to safety and efficacy profited from something that was neither safe nor effective while suppressing medications that were both.

Quoth The Raven has a brief historical rundown on their Substack, most of which you’ve read from us on these pages or from others who’ve had the same thoughts or reported the same issues. It wasn’t that hard to find the truth or see the truth.

 

• Pfizer, Moderna and Astra Zeneca wanted to sell their experimental vaccines in the absence of long-term safety data.
• They couldn’t do it under Emergency Use Authorization if ivermectin and other early treatments were found to have efficacy.
• Ergo, the media, sponsored by these same pharma companies launched a malicious misinformation campaign in the face of demonstrable proof of both efficacy and safety for ivermectin.
• This campaign knowingly mislabeled a drug with a decades-long history of success in humans as horse medicine.
• As this took place, additional “rigged” clinical studies, many of which with significant conflicts, tried to paint a picture of ivermectin not being efficacious through dishonest means (learn all about this here).
• From there, government worked with social media to stifle and censor anyone who raised critical questions or told the inconvenient truth in the midst of the pandemic.
• Finally, after all the damage was done and the vaccine grift ended, the FDA casually and cavalierly admitted that doctors “do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat Covid.”

The suppression of that truth was Sinister. Ivermectin may be a wonder drug that could also be good at helping Cancer patients, another multi-gazillion dollar industry that wants nothing to do with cheap medications that could shut down another Medical Industrial Complex ATM.

Mercedes and summer homes don’t just buy themselves.

 

 

The post A Necessary and Quick Reminder about The Sinister FDA appeared first on Granite Grok.

In all the media and regime frenzy over the Janaury 6 riots and the Pentagon Leaker in recent months, it is interesting to examine the contrast between how the regime treats “crimes” against its own interests and real crime committed against ordinary private citizens.

Witness, for example, how the Biden administration and corporate media have treated the January 6 riot as if it were some kind of military coup, demanding that draconian sentences be handed down even to small-time vandals and trespassers. Regime paranoia has led the Justice Department to ask for a 30-year sentence for Enrique Tarrio, a man who was convicted of the non-crime of “seditious conspiracy” even though he wasn’t even in Washington on January 6. In recent months, Jacob Chansley, the “QAnon Shaman,” received a sentence of three-and-a-half years, even though prosecutors admit he did nothing violent. Riley Williams was given three years for simply trespassing in Nancy Pelosi’s office. Members of the Capitol Police force have been lionized in the media as great protectors of “sacred” government buildings, and any threat to the property or persons of Washington politicians has been equated with an assault on “democracy.”

Yet, had these supposed insurrectionists inflicted these same actions against an ordinary private individual, there’s a good chance the perpetrators would not even be arrested, let alone given years of prison time. Consider, for example, the mobs that ransack private businesses in American cities, stealing tens of thousands of dollars of merchandise while police and prosecutors consider it all to be low priority.  Violent crime and property crime surge in many areas of the United States, with violent crime rising 30 percent in New York City in 2022. Unsolved murders in the US are at a record high. Meanwhile, progressives and social democrats are looking for ways to reduce criminal penalties against violent criminals. Police departments often devote only tiny portions of their budgets to homicide investigations, and if your property is stolen, odds are good you can forget about ever seeing it again.

The situation is quite different when it comes to protecting the state, its agents, and its property from any threat. During urban riots, such as those which occurred in Ferguson, Missouri and Minneapolis, Minnesota, the police went to great lengths to protect themselves and government property. If you were just a private shopkeeper or ordinary citizen, however, you were on your own. At the Uvalde School shooting in 2022, hundreds of law enforcement officers from all levels of government chose to protect themselves rather than the children who were being murdered inside. When Uvalde parents demanded the police act, the police attacked the parents.

We find similar phenomena at the federal level. There are, of course, special federal laws against violence perpetrated against federal employees. Ordinary taxpayers receive no such consideration. Note how federal agencies move to arm themselves to the teeth while also seeking to disarm the private-sector. Federal agents will spare no expense finding someone who put his feet up on Nancy Pelosi’s desk, but it’s another matter entirely when we’re talking about serious violent crime against regular people.  Federal agents, of course, allowed 9/11 to occur right under their noses, they refused to investigate known rapist Larry Nasser, and shrugged off reports about the man who would end up slaughtering children at a high school in Parkland, Florida. Contrast this with how long the federal government has been conniving to get revenge on Julian Assange for merely telling the truth about US war crimes.

Naturally, law enforcement officers rarely face any sanctions for their failures to bother themselves with private property, life, or limb. The federal courts have made it clear that law enforcement officers are not obligated to actually protect the public. In other words, the taxpayers must always pay taxes to hold up their end of the imagined “social contract” or face fines and imprisonment. But the other side of that “contract,” the state, has no legal obligation to make good on its end. This, of course, is not how real contracts work.

The state’s fastidious devotion to protecting itself, compared to its casual concern for the safety of mere taxpayers, illustrates an important principle of state behavior. In his essay The Anatomy of the State, Murray Rothbard notes 

We may test the hypothesis that the State is largely interested in protecting itself rather than its subjects by asking: which category of crimes does the State pursue and punish most intensely—those against private citizens or those against itself? The gravest crimes in the State’s lexicon are almost invariably not invasions of private person or property, but dangers to its own contentment, for example, treason, desertion of a soldier to the enemy, failure to register for the draft, subversion and subversive conspiracy, assassination of rulers and such economic crimes against the State as counterfeiting its money or evasion of its income tax. Or compare the degree of zeal devoted to pursuing the man who assaults a policeman, with the attention that the State pays to the assault of an ordinary citizen. Yet, curiously, the State’s openly assigned priority to its own defense against the public strikes few people as inconsistent with its presumed raison d’etre.

This double standard has been repeatedly on display in recent years as the regime has increasingly been consumed with paranoia over threats to itself—propagandistically termed “threats to democracy”—while attention given to real crime against private citizens is apparently not a priority at all.

 

Ryan McMaken | Mises Wire

 

Author: Ryan McMaken (@ryanmcmaken) is executive editor at the Mises Institute. Send him your article submissions for the Mises Wire and Power and Market, but read article guidelines first. Ryan has a bachelor’s degree in economics and a master’s degree in public policy and international relations from the University of Colorado. He was a housing economist for the State of Colorado. He is the author of Breaking Away: The Case of Secession, Radical Decentralization, and Smaller Polities and Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre. 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 Protects Itself While Crime against Ordinary People Surges appeared first on Granite Grok.

So I’m sure you know Faux News is holding the first GOP debate on August 23d, a scant four days from when I am typing this. But did you know a dark-money group is planning to use the Faux debate to prop up support among GOP voters … which is plummeting … for Blackrock/State Street/etc.’s war against Russia? Oh … it’s true; it’s true:

We will also examine this question:

Who gave Bill Kristol $2 million for a new fraudulent "Republicans for Ukraine" group designed to run ads during the Fox GOP debate to convince Republicans to cease turning against Biden's war policies in Ukraine? https://t.co/h1DqDqMf4J

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) August 18, 2023

The linked WaPo article is breathtaking in its bias and shameless promotion of the globalists’ war on Russia … which is being waged because Russia refuses to conform to the New World Order. For example, it quotes some “conservative” Republican bloviating about today’s Russia somehow being more of a threat than the Communist Soviet Union:

“They’re being attacked by what I view to be probably a machine that’s worse than the Soviet empire,” Graff said. “I’m just really disappointed with members of the Republican Party who are taking what, to me, is such a shortsighted view and a very politically aimed position.”

Well … perhaps to a faux Republian globalist like Graff a country that rejects globalism and embraces Orthodox Christianity is “worse than the Soviet empire.” The majority of GOP voters, however, do NOT see it that way. Rather, they see it for what it is … another money-grab by the military-industrial complex and more power and profits for the globalists.

And you can count on the Faux “debate” also promoting the globalists’ proxy-war against Russia. Expect “questions” like: “Are we doing enough to support Ukraine” … “Are you concerned about fatigue among GOP voters for supporting Ukraine”  … blah, blah, blah. Totally “fair and balanced” … ha, ha ha.

 

 

The post The Faux News “Debate” … Get Ready For Yet More Gaslighting Of Ukraine a/k/a The Globalists War Against Russia appeared first on Granite Grok.

Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa are the nations making up the BRICS block, and they are actively working to develop a new payment system. Their goal is to end reliance on the United States dollar for clearing international trade?

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

Do you know what that will mean for you?

The new payment system of the BRICS block uses local currencies for international transactions and mutual settlement among the organization’s members. At this point the group is probably not ready to form a new BRICS currency to challenge the U.S. dollar. But they are working on it.

We have known this was coming for a long while. The Saudis ended the petrodollar; for cause, and there are still challenges standing in the way of the BRICS nations immediately becoming independent of U.S. currency, but they are motivated and determined.

And it matters.

The BRICS nations comprise 40% of the world population and 26% of the global economy. Soon they will be able to use their new currency to trade with partner nations. They will still have to use the dollar to trade with the Western world, but the BRICS nations have over one-third of the world’s GDP, a total population of around 3 billion people, and a strong desire for more nations to join this evolving multipolar financial framework.

Forty-four nations have already expressed interest in joining BRICShe,r and there are 22 formal applications already in place from places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Argentina, Egypt, and the UAE.

Vladimir Putin confirmed rumors of a new currency the BRICS nations intend to begin working to create as an “international reserve currency.”

China has called on members to support its Belt Road Initiative and Global Development Initiative, an effort to topple the U.S. dollar. As part of its anti-U.S. activism.

The South African finance minister told Reuters the New Development Bank (NDB) set up by the BRICS needs to increase its local currency fundraising and lending.

China is the NDB’s most successful local currency market, issuing 13 billion Yuan ($1.8 billion) across three “panda bonds” last year, with more than half of its lending in Yuan.

But?

Last year the U.S. dollar was again dominant, as compared to only 4.5% for the Chinese Yuan, but change is in the wind. Western progressives have overplayed their economic strength. Their constant bullying and overuse of economic sanctions have motivated the coming competition.

 

The post What If the U.S. Dollar Isn’t the Dominant World Reserve Currency? appeared first on Granite Grok.

In response to the horrendous monetary inflation by the federal government, the geniuses in DC have caused another major issue without significantly addressing inflation. As The Liberty Block has reported numerous times, the vast majority of all dollars ever printed in history were created over the past three years. Each dollar created by the Federal Reserve dilutes the purchasing power of the dollars in your wallet, bank account, and investment funds. On a simple level, doubling the amount of dollars in circulation cuts the value of each of your dollars in half. 

The post Feds Increase Monthly Payments By Nearly $1,000 appeared first on The Liberty Block.

When people talk about Joe Biden’s ability or suitability to be President for another term, the focus is always on his age. There is always a debate about how old is too old for someone to sit in the Oval Office, but that is not necessarily a fair debate. Age is a number and does not tell the whole story. You can take two men or women born on the same day but have entirely different physical and cognitive levels. You must look at a broad spectrum of qualities to determine when someone cannot assume responsibility or do the job. In the case of Joe Biden, he is an example of an old 80-year-old with advanced stages of the aging process, both physically and mentally. But age is masking the more significant reasons that Joe Biden should not be President of the United States. Competence, Vision for the Country, Decision Making Ability, and Quality of Character are the characteristics of Joe Biden that Americans should be concerned with and which Democrats and the media are sheltering us from. That has to change, as the future of America hinges on the results of the 2024 Presidential Election.

I must preface my comments by confessing I do not believe Joe Biden is performing the duties of President. I do not profess to know who is pulling Biden’s strings, but he is clearly not in control of his faculties to make decisions. Joe Biden is the face of a more significant force, and he and his family are complicit in this effort to finish the job of transforming the country started by Barack Obama. The Bidens are performing their roles for the monetary gain their cooperation enables. It is a sad and dangerous situation with catastrophic possibilities for the country. Thirty-five to forty percent of Americans have no comprehension of the damage Joe Biden and his administration have done and its impact on our future. The ramifications are staggering, and our task is to illuminate the situation for those in the dark.

The Economy

Bidenomics is a farce and does not work for America. The out-of-control spending on programs like the Infrastructure and Inflation Reduction Act has put us into an inflationary period that harms every American, specifically low and middle-income families. Inflation is a false number that does not include the critical areas that impact all Americans, like energy and food. These two areas have the most significant impact on our spending ability and disproportionately affect lower-income people. Gas prices are rising quickly, and our options are limited now that we are again dependent on OPEC.

The Green Biden

Cars, air conditioners, washers/dryers, gas stoves, and any other appliance Biden can think of is a target for extinction as we know them. Americans are not ready for these expensive and inefficient alternatives in our lives. Biden now admits his Inflation Reduction Act was poorly named and is more accurately a green energy plan. He lied to America, but then we should have seen that coming. If America were ready to buy into the Climate Change crisis, the Government would not have to mandate or force these changes on us.

Biden Vision

Biden sees America as a more Progressive Socialistic country with Government making the decisions for us. America does not share this vision, so why do these Democrat politicians who do get re-elected.? Again, it goes to the ignorance of the American electorate.

Decision Making Ability

Look no further than the debacle in Afghanistan, his destruction of our Borders, ignoring Fentanyl and the American drug addiction epidemic, and the plight of the homeless to see the impacts of poor Biden decisions. He is on the wrong side of most issues that affect all Americans.

Quality of the Individual

Biden is a corrupt manipulator. He has managed to stay under the radar for fifty years and convince America that he has their best interest in mind. Joe does not. He has the Biden coffers in focus. He is using the arms of the Government against his challengers and adversaries. He is a proponent of our Education system indoctrinating our children and severing family ties to better control the youth.

Look past his age, and there is little that makes Joe Biden a good choice for President. Now we just have to convince Americans that our options are better. A tall task but one we must undertake.

The post It Is Not Just Biden’s Age appeared first on Granite Grok.

Recently, a Canadian professor, Katja Thieme, proclaimed, “Let. Little. Children. See. Penises. And. Vulvas. Of. Various. Ages. And. Sizes. In. A. Casual. Normalized. Totally. Safe. Way.” Professor Thieme proposes a simplistic form of exposure therapy to teach children about sexual themes, which is at best misguided and, at its worst, laying the foundation for children to be abused. Children in their early developmental stage are still learning to cope with the world around them and gradually try to make sense of their individual experiences. Early exposure to nudity can distort conceptions around sexuality, but more importantly intimacy. As a society, it is our duty to protect children and their psychological and social well-being.

There are certain topics that can potentially harm children. For example, ratings for television and movies are age restrictive. One of the main facets of an MA-17 movie rating is nudity. Even Hollywood agrees that young kids do not benefit from being exposed to nudity and sexual content, so why should we normalize such content to our children in day-to-day life? Children under 17 are not outright banned; they are allowed to see these films if accompanied by their parents. The responsibility to determine what children should be exposed to is on the parents, and parents have the right to make decisions for their children. However, parents who are comfortable with exposing their children to nudity and sexual material do not have a right to compel other parents to also expose their children.

 

 

Furthermore, with respect to childhood development, the introduction of sexual content, especially lacking proper context, can lead to cognitive distortions about body image, sexuality, and relationships. In my elementary school, when we first began puberty classes, they separated the boys and the girls. This was not an act of discrimination, but rather an effective way to only teach the children what they need to know. Young boys do not need to be educated on how to use pads and tampons or on how frequently females get their period and what getting a period means about your body. Additionally, exposure to sexual content in the presence of the opposite sex creates a discomforting environment where those potentially judging you sexually are present when you learn about sexual aspects of your own body. There are clear differences between young girls and young boys, and to this day I do not know what the boys were told, but I know it was specific to the male experience, something that will never be my reality.

Professor Thieme’s ideals also reflect a confused reality where adults and children are the same, a parallel to the misplaced view that men and women are interchangeable. Suggesting young girls should be exposed to naked males is traumatic. Puberty for young girls is a challenging and unique experience. We should empower them to learn about their changing bodies, not make them feel ashamed and vulnerable by exposing them to naked males. When you first start changing in public spaces, the first instinct is to cover up. This fear can prevent young girls from taking part in regular activities and impact social interactions. I know this firsthand from years of undressing in a locker room. It took me years to feel comfortable even to undress around other girls and to become comfortable with my body changes post-puberty.

Societal rules are in place to protect children from unsuitable content. This isn’t about sheltering, it is about preserving their innocence and ensuring that they develop into emotionally stable and socially mature adults. We must protect and guard the well-being of the next generation. Our responsibility is to ensure that children are exposed to content that nurtures rather than damages their growth.

Paula Scanlan | Daily Caller News Service

Paula Scanlan is a spokeswoman and advisor for Independent Women’s Forum (iwf.org) and a former swimmer at the University of Pennsylvania, where she was a teammate of Lia Thomas. 

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post The Left’s Latest Proposals Are Laying The Ground For Legalized Child Abuse appeared first on Granite Grok.

In the last election, some very powerful forces, whose sole goal was to seize power and bring about a new world order, defeated Donald Trump. (Kind of. I mean, maybe they stole it).

The central theme they used was simple: Trump is a very bad man; he is mean and nasty, and selfish. Never mind $2 dollar gas. Never mind, great jobs. Never mind, no wars. Never mind the biggest tax decrease in our history. Don’t look at his accomplishments-just focus on what bad things he said in his tweets.

Soooooo? How is that working out for you/us? I guess it is working so well that the same group thinks we/you are stupid enough to fall for the same pitch all over again.

Look at the Rino ads attacking Trump: they don’t talk about his policies, his accomplishments, his stand on the issue.

Nope. They follow the same in my mind tired- approach of calling him a bad man and saying to you, like you were three, “He is a very bad man. Don’t vote for a very bad man. (They show him saying that Sununu is “cookoo”…)
Here is a suggestion: why don’t we pick a president for what he can do for the country and not for what he says about the people he does not like? How about we treat the election like maybe we are smarter than they think and act the part by approaching this next election like I think we all know we should treat it like a “BUSINESS” and elect someone who can actually look after our interests and not the interests of those who want to destroy us.

In that vein, let’s take the subject of DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION and ask ourselves (utilizing an objective, rational, non-emotional businesslike approach) which is best for me; for us; for our children; for country; indeed, for our world:

 

 

1. A federal Government that is hell-bent on destroying us by replacing our Constitution and our country with what Klaus Schwab calls the Chinese template; by destroying our economy with the largest transfer of wealth and power from the middle class to a select few in the ruling aristocracy; by replacing American labor with illegal immigrant labor; by destroying our way of life and replacing it with pedophilia, child abuse, and mutilation; a federal government that is willing to gut our legal system to promote its Marxist ideology; or

2. A Federal Government that actually fulfills Lincoln’s resolve that Government should be “of the people, by the people, and for the people; a government that actually enforces our Constitution and the values it reflects; a federal Government that places prime value on the individual citizen and sees itself as protecting, promoting and defending the individual’s freedoms, rights and aspirations; a federal Government that actually believes in the sanctity of the Justice system and renders justice impartially and within the Bounds of the law.

To conduct such an analysis, let’s start at the beginning:

What is DEI?
1. DIVERSITY- just like BEST BUY, diversity means that if it’s white, erase it. White people are evil because they are white. The laws on discrimination don’t apply to them. Any amount of pain, suffering, or discrimination is ok against a person if they are white.

2. Equity: Equity means that society does not operate on skill or merit. It operates on racism: if you are white, you are by definition privileged; if you are not white, you are by definition not privileged. Society operates on the premise that everything the whites have is to be taken away, and everything the non-whites don’t have, they get to take from the whites. (or Asians if they are standing in the shoes of the whites).

3. Inclusion: Inclusion means the exclusion of whites, pure and simple. New Hampshire, for example, was declared (by the NEW YORK TIMES IN 2018) to be evil because it is too white. Answer-because it is too white, jobs that should go to anyone based on merit or skill must go to anyone who is non-white.

(“But we are not racist,” says the typical New Hampshire -ite. and “By the way, where are all these non-whites to replace us?” ‘No problem, “says the “I hate Donald” troop, “We are bringing them here from all over the world. (Multiple felony sex offenders, rapists, murderers, and an illegal alien arrested in RYE, NH two days ago). They will take your jobs because you are white and don’t deserve to live, much less work.”

DEI, as you may remember, was all the rage. Why? Because the “Donald is mean” group told you it was good. They also brought you CRT(Critical Race Theory), and they told you that was good too. CRT tells you that America as a country needs to be destroyed because it is based upon white racism of the KKK variety. The Constitution, they say, is simply the white racists imposing their eugenic attitudes on the blacks. Christianity is white racism as well and is used, just like Marx claimed, to drug the masses and pacify the blacks against their slave masters. As a result, all must be destroyed by any means necessary.

So, the question: which is best for me? For my family? For my world?

 

 

I say what is best for me Is the America envisioned by the folks who wrote our Constitution.

I say what is best for my family is a President who lives, breathes and fights for that Constitution like he said he would when he took the oath of office.

I say that what is best for my country is that it be free from the CRT/DEi agenda so that we can get back to our fundamental rights, liberties, and values.

I say what is best for my world is a free, strong, and Constitutional America that lives up to its heritage and its values and contributes those values toward making a better world that is at peace-not a world where America is no longer a nation but a zone in the United Nations that is subservient to the ruling world aristocracy and its authoritarian rule.

I prefer my God over Satan, my country over their authoritarian world; my Constitution over their child-grooming pedophile planet. And I choose love- the kind that Jesus taught us to believe in- for all mankind-black, white, brown, yellow, red -man, woman or child -over the hate mongers who love to kill everything I-we- cherish.

The question is then: who that is running for office can get me to the point where I can achieve all that I think best for me and the ones I love?

So, let’s do a little exercise:

Take a little inventory. While in office, Trump issued executive order after executive order banning DEI and CRT. His Dept of Education banished it from what teachers could teach. His administration vigorously attacked every effort that the “I hate Trump “people” undertook to gut America thru these Marxist concepts.

With Biden back in office, he has gutted everything Trump did and has pursued DEI/CRT with almost unlimited resources.

Just on this alone, I know my choice. But something far more important should be considered.

The man they said I should not vote for because he is a mean man and says bad things took one of the most far-reaching steps one could possibly imagine to restart the America that Joe Biden wants to kill; to restart the America I love: he appointed Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barret, and Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

 

 

In doing so, he appointed to the bench staunch supporters of our Constitution and our Judicial system. In what I think was a head-on battle in the cultural, political, philosophical, and spiritual war between the New World Order and the America I grew up in, these three justices-without any army, any tanks, any machine guns-with a simple stroke of the pen gutted everything DEI/CRT and struck a blow for 1776 like none has been heard in a great long while. In two companion cases (STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS V HARVARD; STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS V UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA), THE COURT MAJORITY-INCLUDING GORSUCH, BARRET, AND KAVANAUGH, HELD THAT MARXISM IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Specifically, the Court held that race, in any form, cannot be a basis nor even a factor in determining who can be admitted to college. You cannot favor a man because he is black. Nor can you disfavor a woman because she is white. The Constitution requires you to only consider the individuals’ personal achievements, values, attitudes, and qualities. You must judge a person by the quality of their character, not the color of their skin. You should judge an individual for who he or she is and not admit somebody to create equity( i. e. admit them without regard to their Individual abilities but their membership in a racial group).

This decision guts DEI. It guts CRT. It sends a clear message as well to all of society: Marxism ain’t right. It is unconstitutional. It’s illegal.

Simple thought: without Gorsuch, Barrett, and Kavanaugh, Marxism-the new world order- DEI/CRT would have been enshrined as the law of the land. And how do I know that? Simple-if Hilary had won, none of them would have been appointed. Who would have been appointed? Not hard to figure out since we know Biden appointed Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Remember, her-she could not define a woman nor explain the Equal rights provisions of the 14th amendment in her approval hearing).

 

 

It seems like my choice is clear. I don’t like DEI. I don’t like CRT. I think both are horrible-partly because they assume that a black man, an Asian man, or any nonwhite man by definition is somehow a lesser person than a white and can only succeed if DEI/CRT protects him. Mostly because they gut our Constitution and the values I believe in re competition and the right of every man, woman, and child to achieve whatever they and their God have decided they could and should achieve.

So for me-I ‘don’t ‘give a shit if he says bad things. If he saves my country-or, better yet, if he helps me and you and all like-minded citizens save our country, he can say anything he friggin well wants to say. And the never-Trumpers be damned with their stupid, idiotic campaign.

Let’s call out the truth:

“He is a mean man” means Vote for Biden.

 

 

THE “I HATE TRUMP” REPUBLICANS ARE MORE RESPONSIBLE FOR JOE BIDEN AND ALL THE DAMAGE TO AMERICA HE HAS DONE THAN ANY TEN DEMOCRATS. THEY GOT HIM ELECTED BY BAD-MOUTHING TRUMP. AND left us with Joe Biden’s” I hate America, DEI, and CRT” programs.

The businessman in me says, ” I am not falling for that silliness again. “

I can see the evil that has been done by listening to the mantra of “HE is a bad man.”

Not wanting to be mindlessly manipulated again is enough reason for me to vote for America and my own values. Seeing who the “Bad Man” appointed to the Supreme Court and the rulings they have made is a deal clincher!

 

 

 

The post Breaking News: Very Bad Man Just Destroyed DEI – Funeral To Be Announced appeared first on Granite Grok.

Rye, New Hampshire, is a seacoast town south of Portsmouth, with a population of just over 5500. 97% of its residents graduated high school, and over 62% graduated college. It is also 98% white and increasingly Liberal, and they just caught an illegal alien accused of mass murder.

 

Antonio Jose De Abreu Vidal Filho, a 29-year-old former Brazilian military police officer, was arrested and taken into custody on Monday in Rye, New Hampshire by immigration officers. Filho escaped to the US in 2019, and has been listed as a fugitive on the Interpol Red Notice, which is an international wanted notice that provides information about a suspect that has been charged or convicted of serious crimes, according to the Boston Herald.

 

The Left’s embrace of open borders has consequences. Obama’s borderless America lead to kids in cages and the beginning of the ‘Opiod-Epidemic.’ Thousands of people die annually across the country, thanks to the free flow of Chinese fentanyl out of Mexico.

Gangs, crime, human trafficking, and other human costs associated with the policy continue under Joe Biden, with Liberals labeling any effort to control entry as discrimination or xenophobia.

Does it matter that an illegal alien mass murderer on the run from Brazil was arrested in a sleepy coastal New England Town, 3,838 miles away as the crow flies?

 

Four teenagers under the age of 18, and three teens between the ages of 18 and 19, were among the victims that had been killed. According to El Globo, some of the victims killed had only been accused of minor crimes.

A resident in the city of Fortaleza recalled to the outlet that police officers went on a rampage which included invading homes, dragging people out into the street, and then killing them.

“They dragged him out of the house and shot him and another friend of his who was outside, already lying on the ground,” the resident said.

 

I doubt it. He didn’t kill anyone in Rye. I would not expect much change at the ballot box or the local party town meetings unless someone wants to point out that Antonio Jose De Abreu Vidal Filho was a “police officer.”

White guilt Rye might decide to take it out on law enforcement, mainly because they are allowed to do that and prohibited from grousing about open borders.

 

HT | Post Millenial

The post Illegal-Alien Accused of Mass Murder vs. Left-Wing Open-Borders Group-Think appeared first on Granite Grok.

Ah, sure thing. Yep, she said that.  A few years ago, to be sure – I doubt that she even remembers. But the Internet never forgets, and neither does GraniteGrok:

Jeanne warned us of these risks on her 2008 Senate campaign site, a quote you won’t find anymore because it has all been scrubbed…

REVERSE GLOBAL WARMING
Reversing global warming is an economic, environmental and health imperative for New Hampshire. If we don’t act to reverse global warming, New Hampshire’s snow season is projected to shrink by almost 50 percent by mid-century, severely impacting our skiing and snowmobile industries. Increasing temperatures also will negatively impact fall foliage tourism, the hunting and fishing industries, and maple sugar production.

If I remember right, last winter wasn’t too shabby, given that the projection was that a two-year-old could do the shoveling of it. But certain, just like her SB711 bill she put in as a state senator that destroyed the medical insurance marketplace here in NH. But years down the line, she’s quite wrong. From the NY Times, she gets a spankin’:

 Lastly, California’s last day of snow skiing this year was. . . yesterday, August 6.

The New York Times was not happy about this climate narrative confounding story:

It’s August. Californians Are Still Skiing. Don’t Ask.

Two of the biggest ski resorts on Lake Tahoe were still hopping on the Fourth of July, a time of year when the mountains are usually full of wildflowers. Mammoth Mountain, 140 miles south of the lake, got a positively Alaskan 75 or so feet of snow at its summit and is only now celebrating the final day of the season. . .

In mid-July, well after all the hot dogs and fireworks, I headed up to the Sierra and ran into so much lingering snow that the road through Yosemite National Park hadn’t yet opened for the season. . .

Remember how we were told a decade ago that snowfalls would soon become a thing of the past, and ski resorts were threatened with extinction?

And California has gone from severe drought to bountiful snow in just a year’s time. Things change and change all the time. Especially the weather AND the climate. See, I’m no denier – and millions of years of history have taught us all that lesson. The only deniers are those religious bigots that believe that mankind can change, with our current puny technology, that climate.

Jeanne Shaheen, however, is no religious bigot when it comes to climate change – she’s far less than that. Merely a political opportunist.

 

The post Jeanne Shaheen: “Snowfall Is A Thing of the Past” appeared first on Granite Grok.

The world was always a strange, weird, demented sort of place, punctuated by moments of sanity and civility, but those respited are becoming fewer and farther between—case in point. A trans-Muslim woman is suing her ex-boyfriend.

It’s actually a man pretending to be a woman and a Muslim who has filed suit in Michigan. Over what?

 

“Defendant retains possession of my surgically extracted testicles, preserved in [a] Mason jar, kept in [the] fridge next to the eggs. Demand immediate return of my human remains specimen and damages of $6,500,” 40-year-old Brianna Kingsley wrote in an affidavit against 37-year-old William Wojciechowski, according to a report by Reduxx.

 

Kingsly has a criminal record, not that it would surprise you. Bri is clearly not all there, with some bits being over there, in a mason jar, in the fridge (next to the eggs), to which she he is still attached, in a detached sort of way. It does, however, present opportunities.

You clearly have no balls here; borrow mine.

And as weird as all of that might seem, what’s up with thinking you are a woman and then claiming to be Muslim? Is this white male guilt in its highest form? I not only feel guilty about my race but my sex, so I choose to be a woman in a culture with a significant potential for being dehumanized as both a woman and a man pretending to be one.

As you proceed on this pilgrimage to recover your testicles, be sure to stay away from rooftops. Some of the more devout members of your “faith” have been known to throw people like yourself off of them.

 

HT | TGP

The post White Dude Who Identifies as a Muslim Woman Seeks Return of ‘Family Jewels’ If You Take my Meaning appeared first on Granite Grok.

URGENT, YOU MUST SEE THIS & SHARE!
The video below is from a Zoom meeting with Keene State BHII, NH DoE employees, and several employees working in NH schools. YOU NEED to listen to this discussion about parental consent and sharing PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE mental health data on students.

DO NOT MISS how some schools are adjusting the consent form at the 20-minute mark!

NOTE: Parental consent was not required when BHII acquired the mental health data on NH students.

Megan Phillips, Lead Evaluator at Keene State BHII, begins the Zoom meeting discussion.

Parents are NOT consenting when their child’s mental health data is shared with BHII.

This VIOLATES the NH Constitutional amendment recently passed protecting our privacy. 2-b. [Right of Privacy.] An individual’s right to live free from governmental intrusion in private or personal information is natural, essential, and inherent. [Art.]

This is UNETHICAL AND violates the school counselor’s code of ethics.
ASCA Ethical Standards

EVERYONE should contact Commissioner Frank Edelblut and ask him WHY this continues to happen year after year.
The NH DoE contracts with Keene State BHII to develop a report for the Feds on how mental health programs are working in the schools. Louis.F.Edelblut@doe.nh.gov

This is MENTAL HEALTH DATA MINING on children in NH schools WITHOUT parental knowledge or consent.
Where does this information GO?
Is this personally identifiable mental health data ever destroyed?
Are they building psychological profiles on students in NH without the knowledge or consent of students or parents?

VIDEO HERE:

 

It is appalling to watch “mental health” professionals debate and discuss whether consent should be provided when administering or sharing mental health personal information on students. No one mentioned the ethical aspects of releasing Mental Health PII to Keene State or team members within the district.

FEDERAL LAW does require parent consent under these circumstances:  Services and assessments REQUIRE CONSENT.

 

 

 

The post URGENT: Mental Health Data on Students Shared w/out Parental Knowledge or Consent: SHOCKING ADMISSIONS! appeared first on Granite Grok.

“The decision to charge an elected constitutional officer is not one that is made lightly,” said Formella into the WMUR mic. I certainly don’t remember our attorney general publicly weighing in on last spring’s arrest of Senator Murphy, another elected official.

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.

“In this state(NH), there will be equal justice under the law for every person, including public officials,” said Formella into the same WMUR mic.

So the question that the readers should be asking themselves is if Sheriff Brave will receive the same “equal justice” as Senator Murphy. They are certainly not receiving equal WMUR coverage. Is it because… I don’t think I have to say it, but after looking at both their pictures, you decide.

Another question worth asking is that once Sheriff Brave and Senator Murphy’s cases are processed through the system, will Senator Murphy have received the same “equal justice” as Sheriff Brave or the same “equal justice” as the nine executive council arrest victims? Remember that the latter was tormented with 20 months of lawfare until after His Excellency decided against a bid for the Oval Office.

And I leave you with a final thought. All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others—a proclamation by the pigs who control the government in the novel Animal Farm by George Orwell.

 

The post Some Thoughts on the Recent Arrest of Sheriff Brave appeared first on Granite Grok.