Julie Smith wrote on Sunday a retrospective on Jeb Bradley’s career in the New Hampshire Senate — essentially, a place where “good House bills go to die.” It’s also a place where legislators go to retire. (So too Digital Equipment Corporation in its latter years.) Boston’s Howie Carr often quips that anyone who has been in a State House for six years has proven his uselessness.

These accumulate in the Senate. What Senators actually prove is that they have self-selected for acting as a herd versus speaking bluntly or analyzing the likely effects of a bill that the herd favors — or supporting a bill that the herd opposes. For evidence of this, peruse the annual rankings of roll calls by the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance. While every Republican is rated higher than any Democrat, the Republicans bunch up around the C+ grade, essentially a coin flip on questions of individual liberty.

The Democrats have flaming Marxists, but the Republicans have no brilliant Constitutionalists, emphatically including Jeb.

Well, what shall we do about that?

New Hampshire’s founders patterned our General Court after the federal Congress that arose after the Connecticut Compromise. The lower house was apportioned by population; the Senate was apportioned roughly by land area. As with Congress and the Electoral College, the explicit point was thereby to inhibit government action unless it was acceptable to both urban and rural Granite Staters. There is nothing wrong with that.

The Supreme Court broke that in 1964 with Reynolds v. Sims, which ruled that both houses of state legislatures had to be proportional to population. Earl Warren wrote that “legislators represent people, not trees or acres.” Of course, rural and urban interests are different. This was a pioneering decision of Substantive Due Process; that is, someone is being denied Due Process unless my opinion prevails.

The Warren Court was wrong. Legislators representing numerical majorities don’t need the power to enact law; they need the power to block enactments — which they have if either house is proportional to population. (No Supreme Court has taken Reynolds to its logical conclusion — that the Constitution contradicts itself, and the only “just” solution is 100 interstate U.S. Senate districts, each with an equal population. But the Democratic Party is moving in this direction on several fronts apart from its dream of court-packing.)

But, fine. We’re stuck with Reynolds. That doesn’t mean the Senate has to be a miniature carbon copy of the House, with a membership that is older and drained of spark. The Senate should either be gotten rid of (as Nebraska has) or constituted differently from the House.

One method, which is still proportional to population, is Party List voting, as is used in several other countries, including partly in Mexico’s lower house. People vote for a political party, and based on the result, the party executives pick some number of Senators. (I acknowledge the risk of having any political party’s executives make any important decision.)

My town has one State Rep, plus a “floterial” Rep for a group of three adjacent towns. They defend any unique needs we might have based on our location in the state. In the other house, why don’t we vote by ideology rather than again by geography? Assuming they invite the adults back in, I would vote Libertarian for Senate — the name of the Senator not on the ballot. We might only get one Senator appointed by the State Committee, but joining with 55,000 Granite Staters based on philosophy beats joining with 55,000 residents based on living nearby, which we already do in the House. And the Senate would instantly have more diversity of thought.

No, this idea is not going anywhere. You don’t get major reform without a groundswell. Moreover, this certainly requires amending the state constitution, which takes a supermajority of voters, and Granite Staters are far too suspicious of their government even to repeal the office of Register of Probate, even after all its functions have been repealed. A far more pressing amendment is to repeal the first half of Part 2, Article 83 (on the attitude of future legislators) — the platitude our mischievous Judiciary has used for decades to dictate that we are constitutionally required to throw ever more loot at the welfare schools.

So, I’ll leave the idea of Senate by Party List here to perhaps plant a small seed.

The post Senate by Party List appeared first on Granite Grok.

We are still accepting votes for comment of the week until 8 pm ET tonight. Please take a moment to review the “comments” from last week and vote for a winner.

You can jump to the post and pole by clicking here!

 

The post Reminder: Vote for Comment of the Week appeared first on Granite Grok.

I lack confidence that very many legislators will even read, let alone heed, this legal opinion as to why Proposal 4 is a complete waste of taxpayer resources, and so I am writing this opinion directly to Vermonters. This Proposal, which purports to expand existing constitutional rights to a list of novel protected classes, is not about enhancing the Rule of Law but dismantling it.

I am not engaging in an ideological social justice battle here – our progressive legislators are. Using the Legislature and our State Constitution as political footballs has become common sport for the Progressives – such antics don’t actually DO anything, as Vermonters see. But it does do one thing very clearly – it reveals that those making our laws don’t understand, or else seek to undermine, the integrity of established laws. This has gone beyond virtue-signaling: it is a breach of fiduciary duty and public trust.

Vermont seeks to increase property taxes 20 percent, as well as income taxes, and Progs want to institute a new tax on unrealized gains. These are children playing clubhouse, but they don’t know the rules.

While Vermont’s economy plummets, and the standard of living drops while its retirees become homeless, “Progressives” are out to save Vermont from evil “rights violations.” But here’s the rub – no advocate for Proposal 4 has actually furthered a need for the legislative change aside from a feel-good virtue-signal. Not one example of what this law change would do to improve a single person’s life or counter the dreaded “white supremacy” used to legitimize it has been offered. Proposal 4, then, is simply a platitude. (Similarly, Proposal 2, which pretended to end indentured servitude in Vermont, had no real purpose – no on in Vermont is being enslaved, are they?).

But hidden within this farcical game of Nero fiddling while Vermontistan burns, are hints of the real threat to Vermonters from the very people weaponizing our constitution for their personal protection. Jay Greene, a transgender carpetbagger who recently moved here to get paid to condemn Vermonters for not being sufficiently woke, gave this very revealing testimony:

Greene stated (@59:45): “Repairing historical harm sometimes requires equitable treatment, not equal treatment, and equity sometimes means targeting programs to populations based on need rather than absolute equal treatment,” that religion is protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and according to his personal opinion, not necessarily the opinion of the Vermont Human Rights Commission, “I have concerns with some people using ‘freedom of religion’ as an excuse to deny the human rights of people like myself, transgender people and other people of the protected classes that are listed in Proposal 4.”

So Proposal 4 is being enacted because newly-arrived Jay Greene “has concerns” about people using “freedom of religion” as “an excuse to deny the human rights of people like myself, transgender people and other people of the protected classes that are listed in Proposal 4.” I am not aware that a single legislator followed up on this to ask what that hinted evil consists of – what is it about a person’s faith that “deprives another of human rights”? The hazy allegation was made, but not even a hypothetical example was employed. Is that because Lyons, Greene and the others know exactly who it is they are out to protect, and who they seek to attack, and that they HAVE NO evidence or foundation to offer for this initiative?

Reverend Mark Hughes, Executive Director of Vermont Racial Justice Alliance, offered a similar clarity @47:30: “We need to double-down to include the protection of every vulnerable category – Mr. Chair – respectfully, that’s everybody that’s not a white cis man.” This is a patently, overtly racist statement, but race-hustler Hughes has not even offered a single hypothetical instance of why this new legislation is necessary.

Creating separate classes of people for government benefits, treatment, or protection is facially unconstitutional. It violates, for instance, the Equal Protection Clause. If I allege Jay Greene is a woman (because she is biologically female, feigning to be male), have I “denied human rights”, or do I have a human right to my own opinion? Does the scriptural statement “He made them male and female” become hate speech under Proposal 4? Funny, the Vermont legislature seems unable to even discuss the most obvious questions raised by this bill – is that intentional, or just incompetent?

Jay is an advocate but lacks a law degree. Blatant prejudicial statements on the legislative record only substantiate my claim that this Proposal is unconstitutional on its face, and also unconstitutionally vague. Vermont’s Legislature solicited Professor Peter Teachout and the Office of Legislative Counsel to affirm the bill, but these witnesses have not raised any concerns that 1) there is no actual stated, factual purpose for this change – it won’t actually DO anything; 2) creating disparate treatment for people because of their gender delusions or sexual desires will violate existing federal laws.

Proposal 4 will thus accomplish nothing except expose the state to more lawsuits. Vermont’s politically compromised Attorney General will spend Vermonters’ money defending no matter how unconstitutional the law was ab initio – right from the beginning. As Senator Lyons testified (@ 6:25):

“This doesn’t grant any additional rights to any group or individual. It simply allows for a contemporary look of who we are as a society, and guarantees the rights of those groups that have emerged over time and have demonstrated a need for equal treatment.”

Have any groups in Vermont demonstrated that they have not been treated equally, and thus that they need protection? This conclusion is repeatedly assumed but never established in even the most rudimentary way. If a Vermont baker refuses to bake a transgender cake, will existing law serve all equally? Why or why not? Vermonters are never told, because there is nothing to tell.

The proposal claims it grants no new rights but just issues a “reaffirmation,” we are told. So according to its own proponents, the law either does nothing or does something illegal (allocate wealth or privileges to certain classes). This platitudinal waste of taxpayer resources while Vermonters struggle is evidenced by Lyons’ declaration of the purpose of her petty law (a product of this nouveau social justice attack on American liberties and constitutional foundations):

“It seems rational to change the constitution and put a baseline in place to demonstrate equal treatment. Article 7 does say equal treatment but it was written at a time when we didn’t’ have some of the social groups in our country, or racial and ethnic discrimination we see at our time.

“We know how quickly the culture can change: 2016 – 2020 we saw a radical change in expressions of beliefs around individuals in our country and groups within the country.”

Here we go again. What is she talking about? What is our Progressive legislator saying when she talks of “2016-2020 we saw a radical change in expressions of belief….”? Those of us standing by ironclad constitutional precepts designed and interpreted to guarantee justice and equality are apparently being labeled here as the source of the need to undermine and weaken those protections. Again not a lawyer, Lyons is too ignorant of what leaves her mouth to see Marie Antoinette in the mirror. She and the progressives she serves are the Americans who have forced radical changes in expressions of beliefs” on the majority.

Where are the lawyers? You know – the real ones, who have litigated cases, not the bureaucrats who never have to defend their puffery. Legislative Counsel Eric Fitzpatrick comically claimed

“…the fact that it is in the Vermont Constitution makes this the final say as to how that language is interpreted, would be by the Vermont supreme court, the federal court I mean the United States Supreme Court don’t have any jurisdiction to interpret state constitutional law. So, I think that including language that expands upon, provides more detail on the protections of the Vermont constitution and therefore would be interpreted by the Vermont supreme court having the last word, by more aligned with what we want to see in Vermont as opposed to deferring to the federal courts of the united states constitution because those interpretations will depend on the makeup of the united states supreme court and the composition of the justices on that court. Put it in the Vermont constitution and you can rely on the fact that the last words of the state will be by the court in this state. (@ 14:08).

This is an attorney paid a lot of money by Vermonters to advise the legislature “impartially” on Constitutional matters. Echoing Lyons, Fitzpatrick is clearly seeking to position the state to counter perceived intrusions of conservatives at the federal level. This is quite laughable from an attorney – giving a political opinion veiled as a legal one. But more, Vermonters do not need a law degree to witness how absurd this statement is. OF COURSE federal law trumps state laws that violate the federal Bill of Rights. Allocating state benefits or rights to people based on their sexual desires or delusions of gender identity runs afoul of federal constitutional protections that apply to all fifty states – it is called federal preemption. Fitzpatrick talks as if Vermont can act with complete impunity. (Law Professor Peter Teachout does correctly state the law at p. 5 of his testimony: “Since federal law is supreme, all such programs would be vulnerable to challenge under the federal Equal Protection Clause on grounds they constitute impermissible discrimination on the basis of race.”

Professor Teachout also claims that Vermont must change its laws to protect itself from a federal government overtaken by conservatives: “We live in a world where we can no longer count on the U.S. Supreme Court or the federal government to provide adequate protection against discrimination.” I’m very curious how such a claim can be credibly made – does Professor Teachout refer to Roe v Wade, which Ruth Ginsberg saw as a horrible law? What on earth is he talking about?

This pattern of bypassing basic constitutional liberties of Vermonters on the taxpayer tab is getting old – and much too common. Current attacks on our Fish and Wildlife Department seek to undermine and bypass decades of excellent wildlife stewardship, initiated by extremist activists allowed too much power in Vermont. In 2022, Vermonters watched the liberal dog-and-pony show about amending the state constitution to “protect women’s rights,” which were already fully protected legally. The true purpose of that Alinskian subterfuge was always to advance a sanctuary state status for transgender children to flock to Vermont and hide from their parents to get life-destroying mutilations and drugs at taxpayer expense. Using the public body to further extremist political initiatives was done under the ruse of women’s rights. Vermonters will see how challenges to that legal sleight of hand pan out. In the interim, Proposal 4 seeks to add another scandalously idiotic amendment while the economy tanks.

Progressive legislators have not yet figured out that if they pass unenforceable, unconstitutional laws over and over, citizens will one day just ignore their “Ginny Cried Wolf again” histrionics. A legislature that exceeds its authority loses all authority. But more dangerously, since the Constitution apparently has no hold on our legislators, why on earth would any American follow laws made by criminals? Many of the progressives in this legislature are a disgrace to the Rule of Law, have no regard for the Constitution or established precedent (and actually regard our state and federal Constitutions as white supremacist and seek to undermine both), and display contempt for many of the Vermonters they were elected to serve. This is both malfeasance and nonfeasance, on full naked emperor display.

The further Vermonters look, the more they will see a lack of substance. In one statement, non-attorney Jay Greene claims:

“Our office supports Proposal 4 because it creates an explicit commitment in the state constitution to the work of dismantling systemic racism,” said Greene who urged legislators to consider protections “based on equitable treatment and not just equal treatment.”

Greene shared an example of a program giving free bicycles to everyone who shows up. But if it only offers adult-sized, foot-powered bicycles, it leaves out, and consequently discriminates against, children and wheelchair users. “So equity is when you give people (the kind of) bicycles they need,” Greene said, noting that this may cost more or take more effort.

The question for the legislature is: is there a factual finding of “systemic racism”? That bogeyman is tossed about constantly but has zero teeth – it is just assumed and never proven. The visible problem that is apparently invisible to social justice ideologues is that the Constitution already guarantees EQUALITY and that most initiatives to reallocate wealth or rights based on “equity” by definition are unequal; unjust; and unconstitutional. It is telling that the absurd example of children’s bicycles is used: no real-life example – or even hypothetical – could be proffered.

And that’s what I want Vermonters to see and learn through this farcical charade: what the Constitution says, and how Ginny’s dreams and Jay’s absurdities seek to dismantle it. The evidence is here, jurisprudentially: to be constitutional, every law must at least serve a legitimate government purpose. The advocates for this bill, and the shills recruited to endorse it, cannot collectively provide a single factual justification for the bill, while explicitly proposing it would be used to transfer benefits to “protected” classes. This is just an ideological proclamation with nothing but a symbolic purpose – abusing legal process, the laws, and taxpayer funds for a personal moral display.

I do not oppose fairness, or advocate for discrimination against any group. However, Vermont’s progressive uni-party is already doing so – against the people of faith deliberately omitted from the language of Proposal 4. How about the persecution of a Christian school for forfeiting a basketball game due to a male “identifying” as a girl? How about the Randolph girls being sexually ogled by a trans-boy in their locker room? Vermont has already demonstrated an inability to equitably balance competing beliefs – now it reveals its plans to tighten the noose against people of faith, whom it has already failed completely.

Vermonters can see the marginalization in their midst, by emperors with no clothes, no facts, and no law. This is why I don’t bother writing to a deaf, destructive Progressive legislature determined to undermine and dismantle our laws and economy but directly to voters.

Vermonters, you are being governed by law-breaking ideologues. Proposition 4 is a political stunt with no substantive purpose, which may also run afoul of federal law. Get ready for world depression and local food shortages: your Legislature is out to lunch and will only pour gas on those fires.

Note: I am an attorney admitted to the Connecticut Bar in good standing since 1989. I am not admitted in Vermont. 

John Klar is an Attorney, farmer, and author. Mostly farmer… And Regular Contributor to GraniteGrok and VermontGrok.

The post Inventing Human Rights To Erase Religious Freedom appeared first on Granite Grok.

As I said in part I, “When policies are at the forefront of an election, we win big.” I mentioned the huge win nationwide in 2010 but did not specifically mention our big wins here in NH. I suspect we all remember winning the House 298-102 and the Senate 19-5.

We may never again see such a huge landslide.

As one of the winning Reps, I can say that it was only because I had an R after my name, not because I had great name recognition or a long history of service to the town. That is what can happen when policy drives an election – not just an election but all elections statewide and even nationwide.

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

This year, let’s try to make the elections at all levels more about policy and less about personality.

Conventional wisdom says that it is difficult to persuade voters to make their decisions on the basis of policy, but the rewards are worth the effort:

• We get bigger wins, which can give us a mandate to pass our agenda.
• There is great synergy among our candidates when they all contrast Republican policies vs Democrat policies rather than person Fred vs. person Sue, etc.
• Because we don’t need to know the names of the Democrat opponents, only their policies (which we know will be practically the same), we can campaign against them from the beginning instead of waiting for the September primary.
• We may finally defeat the Congress critters who have great name ID, but vote for terrible policies.
• The message accumulates from year to year. If each year we get just a few more voters to choose on the basis of policy, that will add up to large numbers.
• Everyone, not just candidates or activists, can help spread the message to vote for policies, not personalities. They don’t have to know the policies or the candidates to spread that idea.

This year it will be easier than usual to persuade voters that policy matters much more than personality. That is because millions of people have learned on their own that, no matter what they thought of Trump or Biden as persons, Trump’s policies made their lives better, Biden’s policies have made their lives worse.

Polls have shown that many blocs that voted strongly for Biden in 2020, have moved toward Trump. They include blacks, Latinos, young people, etc. The economy, inflation, immigration, and crime are policies that have moved voters.

One story I particularly like is about a “Long-time Dem billionaire does an about-face on Trump, admits the left has been blinded by TDS.”

“Silicon Valley venture capital investor Chamath Palihapitiya, who voted for Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, admits that he now “appreciates” what former President Donald Trump was able to accomplish during his time in the White House.

“The work on the border wall, we didn’t like the messenger, so we killed the message. Turned out it was right,” Palihapitiya noted. “Issuing long-term debt to refinance when rates were at zero. We didn’t like the messenger, so we killed the message. A structural peace deal in the Middle East. We didn’t like the messenger, so we killed the message. When are we going to stop shooting ourselves in the foot? When are we going to actually take the time to look past who was saying things and actually listen to them word for word?”

Let’s spread the word. Let’s encourage everyone to vote for policy, not personality. Elections should not be popularity contests, nor should they be rewards for past service to a community. The job of a representative is to vote. The most important question ought to be how well they will do that job – not their personalities. The best way to determine how they will vote is to compare and contrast the candidates’ policies and vote for the one with the better policies.

The post GOP campaign strategy – part II appeared first on Granite Grok.

Joa and I have filed a Motion For Continuance due to not being finished collecting evidence for his defense.

Interestingly, these are a sample of the “Advance Notice Forms” that were approved by the Goffstown District Court where Joa signed things other than his name.  He was approved each time to film anonymously…  but the Hillsborough District Court ordered him to leave and had him arrested for filming doing the same thing.

Our defense lies in a theory called “Entrapment By Estoppel” and RSA 626:3 II.

The New Hampshire Courts should not have a disparity in how they authorize people to film court proceedings.  In having one, it creates situations like this.

The original trial date of 5/21/24 at 1:00PM will hopefully be rescheduled to July sometime.

From the “I finally got to it” pile, Colonel Douglas Macgregor gave an hour of his time to chat with Russell Brand last week. As with most of Brand’s content, it was a great conversation. One portion in particular stood out to me as something we could dig into.

Russell often asks long, complex, multi-faceted questions. They’ve got lots of layers and lots of questions. In this case, the question is no different and includes allusions to national elites, revolution, and the military being asked to suppress any uprising at home or possibly participating in a revolution against the government (question begins at 14:40 is you’d like to hear it in total).

Col. Macgregor provides an instructive response, equally layered, with bits of input on everything from why the US military isn’t ever likely to fight its own government or in that government’s name against its own people to recruitment issues, US provocation, forever wars, Border Security, Child and drug trafficking, and China’s Military problems (it’s not a threat).

It was an interesting response with a lot of launch pads for discussion.

 

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

Rumble("play", {"video":"v4r1f6t","div":"rumble_v4r1f6t"});

The post Col. Douglas Macgregor On Military Recruitment, Revolution, Rule of Law, Forever Wars, Woke Garbage … appeared first on Granite Grok.

The screenshot below speaks for itself. But because I love to hear myself talk … Packard and his ilk are controlled opposition grifters. The “real enemy” to this crowd is NOT the Democrats; it is those who point out how the “Republicans” in the NH House do NOT represent Republican voters.

But just keep pretending it’s R vs. D … and that voting for this crowd is “the New Hampshire Advantage,” even as your once picturesque single-family-zoned neighborhoods are turned into shanty-towns and open-air-drug-markets via ADUs, and public schools teach students that they should see and treat each other NOT as individuals, but according to skin-color and gender.

The post The Proverbial Picture Worth A Thousand Words appeared first on Granite Grok.

Mobile gaming has become increasingly popular in recent years, with smartphones revolutionising the way players access and enjoy online slot games. As mobile technology continues to advance, more players are turning to their smartphones to experience the thrill of spinning the reels anytime, anywhere. In this article, we’ll explore how smartphones have transformed online slot play, the benefits of mobile gaming, and key considerations for players looking to dive into the world of mobile slots.

Evolution of Mobile Gaming

The emergence of smartphones has ushered in a new era of gaming, providing players with unprecedented access to a wide range of gaming experiences on the go. Mobile gaming has evolved from simple, casual games to immersive and visually stunning experiences, including online slots. With the proliferation of high-speed internet and powerful mobile devices, players can now enjoy seamless gameplay and immersive graphics right from the palm of their hand.

Accessibility and Convenience

One of the key advantages of mobile gaming is its accessibility and convenience. Players no longer need to be tethered to a desktop computer or gaming console to enjoy their favourite slot gacor games. With smartphones, players can access their favourite online casinos and slot games with just a few taps on their screen, allowing for gaming sessions on the bus, during lunch breaks, or while waiting in line. The ability to play anytime, anywhere adds a new level of convenience and flexibility to the gaming experience.

Enhanced Graphics and Gameplay

Mobile technology has advanced significantly in recent years, enabling developers to create visually stunning and immersive gaming experiences on smartphones. Modern smartphones boast high-resolution displays, powerful processors, and advanced graphics capabilities, allowing for smooth animations, vibrant visuals, and engaging gameplay. Players can enjoy the same level of quality and immersion on their mobile devices as they would on a desktop or console, enhancing the overall gaming experience.

Social Connectivity

Mobile gaming also offers social connectivity features that allow players to interact with friends, compete against rivals, and share their gaming experiences with others. Many mobile slot games integrate social features such as leaderboards, challenges, and multiplayer modes, allowing players to connect with fellow enthusiasts and share their achievements. Social gaming adds a new dimension to the gaming experience, fostering a sense of community and camaraderie among players.

Benefits of Mobile Slot Play

The transition to mobile gaming has brought about numerous benefits for players, particularly in the realm of online slot play. Let’s explore some of the key advantages of playing slots on mobile devices.

Convenience and Flexibility

One of the primary benefits of mobile slot play is the convenience and flexibility it offers to players. With mobile devices, players can enjoy their favourite slot games anytime, anywhere, without being tied to a desktop computer or physical casino. Whether commuting to work, relaxing at home, or travelling, players can easily access their preferred roulette online slot games with just a few taps on their smartphone screen, making gaming more accessible and convenient than ever before.

Variety and Choice

Mobile gaming platforms boast a vast selection of slot games, offering players a wide variety of themes, styles, and features to choose from. Whether you prefer classic fruit machines, action-packed video slots, or immersive 3D animations, there’s a slot game to suit every taste and preference. Mobile casinos regularly update their game libraries with new releases and exclusive titles, ensuring that players always have fresh and exciting options to explore. The abundance of choice available on mobile devices allows players to discover new favourites and tailor their gaming experience to suit their preferences.

Considerations for Mobile Slot Players

While mobile slot play offers numerous benefits, there are some important considerations for players to keep in mind when gaming on their smartphones.

Internet Connection

A stable and reliable internet connection is essential for uninterrupted gameplay on mobile devices. Players should ensure they have access to a Wi-Fi connection or a reliable mobile data plan to avoid disconnections or lag during gameplay. Poor internet connectivity can disrupt gaming sessions and affect the overall experience, so it’s important to play in areas with strong signal strength or reliable Wi-Fi coverage.

Battery Life

Mobile gaming can be demanding on a device’s battery life, particularly for graphics-intensive games like hoki22 slots. Players should be mindful of their device’s battery level and consider playing with a fully charged battery or connecting to a power source to avoid interruptions. Additionally, adjusting screen brightness, closing background apps, and using power-saving modes can help conserve battery life and prolong gaming sessions on mobile devices.

Conclusion

The rise of mobile gaming has revolutionised online slot play, offering players unprecedented access, convenience, and flexibility to enjoy their favourite games anytime, anywhere. With advances in mobile technology and the proliferation of mobile casinos, players can experience the thrill of spinning the reels on their smartphones with stunning graphics, immersive gameplay, and generous bonuses. By understanding the benefits of mobile slot play, considering important factors such as internet connection, battery life, screen size, and data usage, players can maximise their enjoyment and make the most of their gaming experience on mobile devices. As mobile gaming continues to evolve, the future looks bright for players looking to embark on their slot-playing journey from the palm of their hand.

 

The post The Rise of Mobile Gaming: How Smartphones Have Revolutionized Online Slot Play appeared first on Granite Grok.

(white) goldstandard-05-09-24-H.pdf
(gold) goldstandard-05-09-24-H-y.pdf

The post House Gold Standard – May 09, 2024 appeared first on NH Liberty Alliance.

This sermon is made in honor of the holy sacrament of 4/20. In the Torah, God said in the context of creating the world for man, “See, I give you every seed-bearing plant that is upon all the earth, and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit; they shall be yours for food.” Genesis 1:29. When God created this holy proclamation to humanity, he was, of course, aware that he had given humanity cannabis, psilocybin, opiates, alcohol, and other plants or plant-derived substances that would change the human consciousness from its default state.

The post Zephan’s Bitcoin Sermon – April appeared first on The Liberty Block.

Noem’s shooting-her-dog story; is this just another ghost-written book and it doesn’t matter what the book says; who should Trump pick for VP? Noem has no backbone after capitulating to the NCAA on women’s sports; for what reason did Trump meet with Desantis? Did he think he needs help from Desantis? Should Trump select his son, Don, for VP? Tulsi Gabbard? The protest on college campus supporting Hamas; is it all funded ultimately by the CCP? Is it unusual to have this chaos when a republican is in office?

The post The Conservatarian Exchange Podcast #204 appeared first on The Liberty Block.

A judge in New York may have slipped up when he repudiated the US Constitution on the record during a trial. Essentially supporting secession from the federal government, judge Abena Darkeh proclaimed that the federal constitution did not exist in his courtroom. This decision absolutely violated the federal constitution and the US Supreme Court. 

The post NY Judge Says Quiet Part Out Loud; Endorses Secession? appeared first on The Liberty Block.

It's Passover, so Steven was unavailable; Alu seizes the opportunity for a hostile takeover of the podcast and begins throwing AnCap bombs from the first moment! The crew gets into a heated debate about whether the government should ever interfere with private contracts and whether discrimination should ever be outlawed; four different opinions emerge, and many brilliant points are made; the Eds seem to argue that the government is necessarily a party to all contracts.

The post The Conservatarian Exchange Podcast #203 appeared first on The Liberty Block.

In January 2024, there was a meeting of the New Hampshire House State-Federal Relations and Veteran Affairs committee. The committee heard two separate bills on secession.

The first one, CACR 20, would be a constitutional amendment that would see the people of NH vote to amend the constitution to say that if the federal government’s national debt reaches $40 trillion, New Hampshire shall peacefully secede from the union.
The second one, HB1130 would form a commission to study everything we would need to know about secession, such as economic impact.

This is video of the full public hearing for both bills and the people’s testimonies.

On Wednesday morning, NHexit.US announced that local liberty activists in New Hampshire have hired a chartered airplane pilot to fly a pro-independence banner over the three largest cities in the state. Over the past few years, the calls for serious discussions on peaceful separation of New Hampshire from DC and the union have grown dramatically. New Hampshire is already home to the most influential liberty movement in the world.

Notable events since 2021 include:

• legislation to place an independence referendum on the ballot which was sponsored by nine lawmakers in the New Hampshire House
• a poll by SurveyUSA finding that almost 100% of NH residents strongly resent the federal government and 29% are ready to secede immediately
• increasing demands by lawmakers and the centrist governor telling the DC tyrants to back off 
• An abundance of pro-independence sentiment, including flags for the Granite Republic, hats, T-shirts, books, articles, and podcasts, and even a national anthem

This Saturday, an airplane banner could be added to that list. The tentative plan is for the banner to fly over Nashua, Manchester, and Concord. If you look up while in one of these cities, you just might be able to snap a photo or record a video of the banner. We encourage our readers to post their photos to social media with the tags #NHexit, #secession, and #NHpolitics. 

Additionally, the question of secession will be asked by another highly reputable pollster. The University of New Hampshire is currently conducting a political survey that includes multiple questions related to New Hampshire independence. The results could be published within days or a few weeks. 

 

 

The post Secession Airplane Banner Flying Over Merrimack Valley Saturday appeared first on Foundation for New Hampshire Independence.

A recent poll conducted by SurveyUSA on behalf of the Foundation for New Hampshire Independence (FNHI) shows that while the peaceful separation of New Hampshire from the federal government has low support among politicians, it has significant support among registered voters.

According to an overwhelming number of respondents, the people of the United States are getting more and more divided over important issues like LGBT rights, guns, abortion, election integrity, race relations, involvement in foreign wars, climate change, immigration, and so on (91%).  Nearly as many fear that if this trend continues, it will lead to increases in political violence (89%).

Large majorities of respondents agreed that the federal government doesn’t have their best interests in mind (67%); that it violates their rights more than it protects those rights (65%); that it produces laws, regulations, and court rulings that are incompatible with New Hampshire’s culture of freedom (63%); and that its financial decisions and economic regulations hurt our livelihoods, and could lead to inflation and bankruptcy (77%).

In short, 63% of respondents feel that their state can be trusted more than the federal government.

One possible way forward would be for New Hampshire to begin ignoring federal laws and regulations regarding matters reserved to the States by the 10th Amendment. Fewer than half of respondents believe that the federal government should be able to force New Hampshire to follow federal mandates and laws regarding cannabis (27%), medicine (37%), public health (42%), education (41%), welfare (42%, firearms (42%), businesses (38%), and abortion (33%).

This approach, also referred to as ‘nullification’ is common, currently being utilized by dozens of states, and is consistent with the recent enactment of New Hampshire HB 1178, ‘prohibiting the state from enforcing any federal statute, regulation, or Presidential Executive Order that restricts or regulates the right of the people to keep and bear arms’. 

However, a more comprehensive way forward would be for New Hampshire to reclaim its sovereignty, peacefully separating from the federal government to govern itself as an independent country, an idea that was supported by 29% of respondents and 52% of Republicans. Only 58% of respondents do not support immediate and full secession from the federal government today. More than 2/5 of respondents agreed that the state should be able to do this without securing permission from the federal government (43%). And only 3% of respondents would support the use of military force by the federal government to interfere with such a separation.

Again, while politicians declined to put the question to the people, more than 2/5 of respondents support the idea of placing independence on the ballot (42%) while only 47% currently oppose it.

History is filled with proposals that seemed at first to be politically impossible, but after serious discussion and evolving circumstances, proved to be politically inevitable. To take just one example, shall-issue laws for concealed carry licenses, once viewed as extreme, are now the law in nearly every state. As the results of this poll show, peaceful separation already has more support now than shall-issue laws had in 1990. Today, not only is shall-issue the norm, but 25 states allow their residents to carry concealed guns without even requiring a permit. If New Hampshire independence follows a similar path, it may only be a few short years away from broad adoption. 

The survey also found strong support for independence and extreme discontent with DC politicians among all 8 states polled. In Texas, 90% of Republicans recently endorsed putting secession on the ballot, officially placing the position in their platform. California progressives have a strong independence movement of their own, and surveys show that around half of Californians support or are open to independence from the union. Progressives in Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington also support independence. States like South Carolina, Florida, and many other states have new independence movements that are rapidly growing, as well. 

The post New Hampshire Survey Shows Disdain For DC, Support For Independence appeared first on Foundation for New Hampshire Independence.

Over the past few weeks, a group of pro-freedom activists in New Hampshire has been holding informal meetings to brainstorm how to best promote independence in the next legislative session. Predictably, progressive authoritarians have already begun to attack the concepts of independence and liberty. A few conservatives cling to hope that they can fix DC and all 50 states, convince all Democrats to embrace conservative liberty values, and ‘save America’. 

 

I have written dozens of articles, published three books, and produced hundreds of videos making the case for a national divorce from the authoritarians. Here are just 100 reasons why every New Hampshire citizen who supports freedom should support a bill and a ballot referendum on independence from DC. 

 

1. Without the federal income tax, we’d each save around $25,000/year right off the bat.
2. The IRS is corrupt, tyrannical, and about to grow by 80,000 employees and billions of dollars. Years ago, they were caught targeting conservatives. Now, they are surely much more polarized and hateful against us. I could live without them.
3. The ATF is extremely anti-gun. They have been one of the biggest reasons that federal gun control laws have grown increasingly strict. The ATF passes laws and bypasses Congress. Once the murderous criminal, Dave Chipman is confirmed as the new ATF director, things will get much worse. I could live without the ATF. Once we divorce DC by declaring independence from the union, the ATF will no longer have jurisdiction over us. 
4. The CDC is out of control, and the agency will only ever grow more tyrannical. This was before corona-fascism made the CDC into the most harmful agency to liberty of all 400 illegal executive agencies. By the way, did you know that the CDC took legal ownership over every rental property in the united states?
5. I don’t trust Joe Biden to run my life or to do anything that could impact me. I have around 28 trillion reasons for distrusting that corrupt, evil, demented sociopath. 
6. I don’t trust Congress to run my life. They have proven time and again that they support authoritarian socialism. Even with majorities in the House and the Senate and even with Trump in the White House, Congress did nearly nothing to expand liberty. But they did pass many laws that violated my natural rights. 
7. The federal government benefits from terribly untrustworthy elections, such as the one in 2020. Once HR1 passes into law, all elections in the united states will be required to abide by the same insane rules that caused us all to doubt the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
8. Once HR51 passes into law, DC will be a state, complete with two more hardcore socialist Senators. The Democrats will control the Senate forever.
9. If you aren’t a big fan of sobriety checkpoints, you’ll be happy to learn that they are federally funded. Once we divorce the feds, it’s unlikely that any local police dept. will spend the money on the checkpoints. 
10. If you aren’t a big fan of immigration checkpoints, you’ll be happy to learn that they are federally funded and/or conducted. Once we divorce the feds, it’s unlikely that any local police dept. will spend the money on the checkpoints. 
11.  Local cops only use tanks, drones, BEARcats, and other aggressive military gear against us because the feds give them those toys. Once we cut ties with DC, our local cops will return to their proper role as peace officers instead of acting as soldiers against us.
12. One of the reasons that Dictator Sununu locked us down and derailed our economy involved pressure and money from DC encouraging him to do so. 
13. If you don’t like being forced to pay for the DC politicians to wage futile endless wars in dozens of countries all over the world while veterans, women, and babies in our own communities starve on the streets, it means you want to separate from DC. 
14. If you are ready to give up on the war on drugs and stop sending cops to homes to punish people for consuming a plant, separating from DC is the first step you must take. DC politicians STILL consider cannabis a schedule one top-tier dangerous substance that is 100% illegal to possess. 
15. Do you love it when cops steal your property (car, house, money, guns, etc.) without convicting you of a crime? Well, federal law allows law enforcement to seize any property that could be involved in a past, present, or even future crime. And the feds have ‘extended’ that authority to state and local cops. Once we sever ties with DC, cops in NH lose the power of civil asset forfeiture.
16. If you ever wondered why bad cops almost never receive any punishment, you should know that ‘qualified immunity’ is a federal doctrine. Without DC, local cops become much more accountable to their neighbors.
17. The millions of federal regulations cost businesses over 2 trillion dollars each year in lost productivity. Once we divorce DC, our businesses will truly be able to unleash their creativity, making New Hampshire more prosperous than we could ever imagine.
18. Who should decide whether NH accepts illegal aliens or Afghan refugees? Biden and Pelosi or our governor and legislature?
19. Are you tired of being ruled by nine lawyers in long black robes who live in DC and have the power of Gods? If five out of the nine rule a certain way, that becomes the law for all 330,000,000 people in the united states.  
20. The federal reserve and DC politicians have overseen a decline in 99% of the US dollar’s purchasing power over the past century.
21. DC politicians have run up a debt of 28 trillion dollars and counting. And they claim that you and I are responsible for it. 
22. Nearly every politician has ambitions and eventually wishes to be sent to DC. This affects nearly every decision they make. Once DC is no longer in their minds, they will focus on what is most important: you.
23. Federal law enforcement (including the FBI) have shown themselves to be thoroughly corrupt. Even conservative commentators like Dan Bongino have called for their abolition. A few months ago, the FBI and other federal cops came to New Hampshire and violently kidnapped six of my friends. They are charging them with crimes that could result in them spending the remainder of their lives in federal prison. Their excuse? That my friends committed some victimless crimes by using and selling cryptocurrency. Once we leave DC, that will never happen again. 
24. Want a suppressor so that you can save your hearing? They are only illegal because the feds prohibit them. Without the feds, NH would be totally free, and you could put a suppressor on your SBR without any worries. 
25. Are you worried about increasingly strict EPA restrictions on vehicles, houses, and everything else? Once we divorce DC, they will have no jurisdiction over us.
26. Are you sick of random federal judges issuing injunctions that overrule actual laws passed by Congress or state legislatures? An independent NH would not have to worry one bit about federal judges.
27. The DC politicians are destroying the once-mighty American military. Their current secretary of defense and commander-in-chief continually insist that the #1 priority for their military is pleasing LGBT individuals. An independent New Hampshire could have a military with a top priority of defending us against hostile militaries. As it should be.
28. Have you accumulated a respectable net worth? Soon, the federal government will tax your net worth each year in addition to all of the other taxes. 
29. The US Congress literally does not represent you or me.
30. The federal government hates you. Especially if you are white. 
31. Multiple federal court rulings have declared that the first amendment does not protect any speech that is insulting, especially towards a government agent. 
32. Right now, even policies that you think are set by state lawmakers are really controlled by the feds via extortion. 
33. If the thought of Pelosi’s Capitol Police Force growing worries you …. You might support NH independence from DC. 
34. If you would rather have your highway taxes spent on highways … You might be a NHexiter.
35. Do you think that Facebook and Twitter are too powerful and too damaging to liberty? Federal law grants them effective immunity from lawsuits while also granting them the power to manipulate content. They get to act as both a publisher and a platform, whichever suits them at the moment. 
36. If you support sound, free-market money like gold and silver (and crypto) ….You already support NHexit. It’s only a matter of time before the feds ban them.
37. If you are afraid that Donald Trump might become President again …. You just might be a NHexiter.
38. If you are afraid that Kamala Harris might become President…. You just might be a NHexiter.
39. If you think that Title IX is a major reason that free speech and due process in colleges were destroyed, you support NHexit.
40. If you believe that boys should not have a free pass to the girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers, you support NH independence. 
41. If you can’t count the billions of federal laws….you might support independence.
42. The FDA hurts and kills patients by stifling innovation and preventing people from using medications until the FDA spends decades of time and billions of dollars approving them.
43. Cutting ties with DC would immediately and drastically cut prices and improve the availability of drugs like epinephrine, insulin, loperamide, and many others. 
44. DC politicians use the federal department of education to brainwash your children to hate freedom. Once we are independent, that goes away.
45. The federal government believes that showing online ads to specific cohorts is a crime.
46. If you are not comfortable with the REAL ID becoming a dystopian federal identification card, you might be an NHexit supporter.  
47. Support in Congress for a magazine ban is getting very close to a majority. In a few years, your magazines will be federally illegal. 
48. Once HR127 passes Congress, every firearm will be effectively illegal. Hope you’re ready to turn in your guns to the feds! You are a patriot and not a criminal, so you’d never violate federal law, right? 
49. It is very likely that Congress (or federal regulators) ban armor plates for all civilians very soon. Hope you’re ready to turn in your plates!
50. Even the best ‘conservatives’ in DC are working with Bloomberg to take away your guns.
51. Technically speaking…the federal government should not exist anymore. 
52. Federal judges have ruled that police have no legal obligation to protect you. 
53. The federal government thinks it can take your property by force, as long as it plans to use the property for anything that could benefit the government, including giving your property to companies like Pfizer. Without DC, states and localities have no power of eminent domain (AKA theft of property).
54. Federal politicians from Biden to McConnell and everyone in between consistently sell us out to oligarchs like Putin and Xi to enrich themselves. 
55. We can’t take power back from Congress, even with a Convention of States.
56. The DC politicians incentivize single motherhood and discourage employment. 
57. If you don’t believe that global warming is the biggest threat to our lives, you should not be in the same union as DC, the federal government, and the other states. 
58. If you don’t appreciate being spied on by the NSA and other creepy DC agents and politicians, you should consider divorcing them. 
59. If you don’t want to support the Taliban by providing them with money and military weapons and helicopters, you should leave the union and stop paying federal taxes. 
60. The federal government considers people guilty until proven innocent – the opposite of how it was supposed to be. Peaceful protesters have been receiving punishments in prison for months despite never being convicted. If you support due process, you support NHexit.
61. The federal TSA regularly violates our natural rights, despite literally missing 95% of actual threats. 
62. DC politicians maintain a horrifically managed ‘no-fly list’, which mistakenly puts many people (including babies) onto the list, preventing them from flying. It’s also nearly impossible to get off of the list. 
63. Conservatives from Candace Owens to Matt Walsh have spoken in support of state independence from DC. 
64. Federal government leaders believe that if you don’t wear all the masks they recommend and if you don’t get all of the vaccines they recommend, you are just like the Taliban suicide bombers. 
65. DC politicians prohibit beneficial pipelines that would have been amazing for our national security and economy while simultaneously supporting pipelines for nations that are hostile to us. 
66. Who is arming the violent Mexican drug cartels? Federal agents from DC!
67. The federal government has kidnapped innocent Japanese people and put them in concentration camps. New Hampshire has never done that. And they couldn’t ever do that. Because we all have lots of guns. 
68. The US government banned firearms and ammunition from Russia. New Hampshire would never do that.
69. The US government puts many kids in cages at the border. New Hampshire would handle immigration in a much more sensible and humane way. 
70. Things will literally never change for the better. Even with Trump in the White House and Republicans controlling Congress and the SCOTUS, freedom only diminished and tyranny continued to grow.
71. New Hampshire citizens are the hardest workers and earn the most money, which is demonstrated by our continent-leading median household income. We don’t need DC politicians to be wealthy.
72. New Hampshire is the freest state. Nearly all of our issues are caused by federal laws. Once we are independent, we will be almost 100% free to live as we please!
73. New Hampshire is the safest state. We don’t need DC or other states bringing violence to our peaceful paradise. 
74. Half of the people in the united states believe that Biden was legitimately elected and that Republicans are all traitors, while the other half believes that Biden lost the election and progressives are traitors. How could one country be united if its people hate each other so much? 
75. The DC politicians now feel so entitled to infinite power that they essentially ban medications that could help treat COVID, such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. 
76. DC politicians are so arrogant that they no longer feel the need to pass legislation in Congress; they now use executive orders to pass new laws, including the most recent one forcing all private companies in the united states with over 100 employees to vaccinate their employees or test them for COVID weekly. This will affect 80 million employees. If you don’t want DC sociopaths coming between you and your employer (or you and your doctor), you support independence. 
77. When conservative states began having success treating COVID with monoclonal antibodies Biden and DC politicians began to BLOCK the life-saving treatments from getting to pro-freedom anti-Biden states like Alabama and Florida, potentially causing people to die.
78. DC politicians have made it clear that they will continue to prioritize foreign nationals and illegal immigrants over American citizens like you and me.
79. On the other hand, DC politicians have made it very clear that Cuban immigrants are not welcome here (because they tend to vote for freedom and against communism). 
80. The Biden IRS is now going to monitor every bank account with over $600 in it so that they can tax all people who make any money in any way. Those who receive more than $600 in PayPal transactions in a year will also be subject to taxation, according to experts. Peaceful separation solves this IRS issue because the IRS would no longer have any jurisdiction over us. 
81. When NH adopted federal food laws, it made selling mushrooms illegal, among many other prohibitions. Now, the only way to make it legal for anyone in NH to sell mushrooms is to create more regulation requiring ‘licenses’, which is somewhat counterproductive. The only other way to make mushrooms legal in NH would be to sever ties with DC. 
82. Dictator Biden nominated an actual Soviet communist to be the comptroller of the currency. If you don’t want your country’s financial system to be run by an avowed communist, you support separation from DC.  
83. On 10/8/21, the preliminary deal on a GLOBAL tax on businesses was officially agreed to. A total of 136 countries have signed onto the measure, guaranteeing that they will work together to stomp out businesses seeking to evade taxes by implementing at least a 15% tax on them, no matter where they come from. Once New Hampshire becomes a self-governing state, its low (or absent) tax on business could attract so much business to the state that it could cause the biggest economic boom in world history. 
84. Dictator Biden’s OSHA implemented a vaccine mandate for nearly every worker in the united states. It is extremely unlikely that an individual could beat this in federal courts or via federal legislation. Separating from the union is actually the more practical way to nullify this mandate. 
85. A federal law to require all new cars to have passive drunk-driving monitoring technology is about to go into effect, making all cars in the united states more expensive and much more intrusive. The law does not specify, but the new technology may be tantamount to perpetual breathalyzers and/or eye monitoring in every car. 
86. The medical system and all medical institutions in the united states are becoming increasingly racist towards whites, and it all starts with DC politicians. 
87. The Supreme Court is composed of 9 judges. The SCOTUS is perhaps the most powerful entity in the united states now. These nine judges are either evil or mentally retarded. They certainly do not believe in freedom. Is that who you want to be ruled by?
88. The US House of Representatives passed legislation that would take over control of elections, taking the power that always resided with the states and granting it to DC politicians. Among the many measures in the legislative package was a law that prohibited any election in the united states from requiring ID in order to vote. New Hampshire citizens who would like to retain their voter ID law must either support secession or give up voter ID forever once this federal law passes. 
89. DC politicians just passed a law mandating that all vehicles made after 2026 be equipped with perpetual monitoring systems to detect ‘impaired driving’. The vehicles must also have ‘kill switches’ that allow cops to turn them off at any moment. If you don’t like this policy, secession is the only solution. 
90. In the summer of 2022, federal government will begin to require facial recognition/uploading pictures of your face in order to access tax/ documents on the IRS website.
91. The President announced that the next US Supreme Court Judge he nominates will be a black woman. Upon joining the court, she will likely hear a massively important case involving ‘affirmative action’.
92. DC politicians are literally stealing our organs. In 2021, a policy change at UNOS essentially caused nearly all organs from donors in New Hampshire to be sent to NYC, CT, and MA, harming New Hampshire’s patients who desperately need organs to live. DC is viciously fighting NH legislation that would allow Granite Staters to state their preference that their neighbors be granted priority over foreigners if they pass away with viable organs. 
93. The brilliant experts in DC are using $30,000,000 in taxpayer funds to give out drug paraphernalia, including crack pipes, to drug users. The statement from the DC politicians specifically mentioned that they are being distributed primarily to minorities and that they are to be used for illegal drugs. 
94. Our Lords in DC believe that they must force New Hampshire to build more housing projects so that our state could look more like the Bronx.  
95. Our brilliant Lords in DC are destroying our savings and devaluing our salaries by printing so much money that annual inflation is now at a frightening 9.1% annual rate.
96. DC politicians have been forcing you and me to pay for dangerous bioweapons labs in Ukraine for years. 
97. Your federal tax dollars are being used to pay Tik Tok influencers to create and promote propaganda approved by Dictator Biden. If you don’t want to be forced to fund such endeavors, you may want to consider secession. 
98. If you don’t enjoy paying $6 billion for the annual NIAID budget doled out by Anthony Fauci to fund foreign bioweapons labs and development and approval of ludicrously expensive patented pharmaceuticals and suppress use of cheap off-patent drug, you should consider supporting a vote of NH residents to leave the union.
99. The federal government violates free speech in numerous ways. Leaving their jurisdiction solves these issues and restores freedom of speech, expression, press, association, and worship. 
100. The federal government is increasingly racist. Most recently, Dictator Biden nominated a black woman to be a judge on the highest court because of her gender and skin color. Ironically, she will likely soon be ruling on an affirmative action case. 

 

The post Top 100 Reasons New Hampshire Should Be Independent appeared first on Foundation for New Hampshire Independence.