Sunday • January 12 • 2025
Vol.XVII • No.II
Manchester, N.H.
Donald Trump winning the Iowa Caucus is not a surprise – well, maybe to a few DeSantis and Haley staffers on Twitter – but that doesn’t mean no surprises are coming out of Iowa.
Trump’s winning was not in doubt. What was who came in second, and how close did they land to the winner?
AP, no fan of The Donald, doesn’t know that answer, but they called it for him at 8:30.
Donald Trump won the Iowa caucuses on Monday, seizing a crucial victory that reinforces the former president’s grip on his party at the outset of the GOP’s 2024 nomination fight even as he faces extraordinary legal challenges that could complicate his bid to return to the White House.
The magnitude of Trump’s success is still coming into focus and it was not immediately clear who would emerge as the second-place finisher, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis or former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley. Caucus voters endured life-threatening cold and dangerous driving conditions to participate in meetings that unfolded in hundreds of schools, churches and community centers across the state.
The winter weather was a test fidelity, which likely played a factor, but reliable primary and caucus voters tend to turn up no matter what. The difference will be who showed up in addition to that to cast a vote for their favorite.
The Trump Campaign did not wait to celebrate:
“The people of Iowa sent a clear message tonight: Donald Trump will be the next Republican nominee for President. It’s now time to make him the next President of the United States.
Early results had Trump with 75% of the vote. A more sober average brings that down closer to 60%. The actual total will take a while longer to work out, but the Dems aren’t running it (their “caucus” doesn’t even count), so we should know well before morning those final results.
We’ll have an update at 8 am, if you want to sleep in.
HT | Red State
The post AP: Donald Trump is the Projected Winner of the Iowa Caucus appeared first on Granite Grok.
I used to agree that teachers are not being paid enough, but not so much anymore. I do believe we should support students going to college for teaching degrees. It is the only group I would agree to help with paying college loans, no others.
First, Schools have no business teaching social issues in a manner to sway students instead of teaching them to learn for themselves. If students know a teacher’s belief in certain social issues, then the teacher is not teaching; they are preaching.
Second, schools have no business taking on the medical issues of students. School nurses were supposed to be there for emergencies only, then either call an ambulance or the parents. It is not the job of schools to diagnose children, offer medications, or give recommendations for medical care.
We want to thank Ken Goodall for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Steve@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.
Some schools have been giving covid tests without parental notifications, suggesting students have ADD or ADHD and recommending medications, sending students home with antidepressants, and lying to parents and not informing parents when a student suffers from gender issues. Some New Hampshire schools have a policy to omit the truth, which is lying to parents when it comes to gender issues.
One Maine school just recently was accused by a parent of sending a bag of medications home with the student, including Zoloft, a strong anti-depressant.
In Exeter, the school banned a student from a sporting event for being overheard, saying he would not use They or Them in conversation. A lawsuit is pending, and I hope Exeter loses big time.
Then, of course, what I believe to be smut in schools, which one teacher already told me they did not care how young children were to read about sex. That is fine as their opinion, but schools are not set up based on one person’s opinion. When books rated at 14 years of age are handed to an 11-year-old, as happened in a Maine school, this is unacceptable.
Now, as for the scores, I do not know about other state schools, but NH has some very poor proficiency scores on the state tests, even in the better southern schools like Exeter and Hampton. The state testing shows only around 75% of students are proficient in English, 65% are proficient in Math, and only 60% are proficient in science. These scores are from the State website based on Exeter, Hampton, Brentwood, and Portsmouth.
Until public schools improve the scores and stop forcing their social beliefs onto students, pay raises are not justified. There must be a way to connect teacher’s pay to the success of their teaching. I wish I had an answer, but I do not. The Educational System today is failing; something needs to be done.
The post Teachers Pay Should Be Relative to The Success of The School or The Class appeared first on Granite Grok.
The proper response, whenever someone tells you that Biden has “failed” on the border, is to laugh in his or her face because that person is either very stupid or thinks that you are very stupid. America’s open-borders are INTENTIONAL.
They are not a failure; they are a resounding success … because the goal of the Left is to transform America into a socialist-based-on woke state.
The estimates that I have seen are 10 million new illegals since the Biden-Regime took over. Do you really believe that these people want to assimilate? The Biden-Regime is creating new countries within this country. And the vast majority of the residents of these new countries (and their children after them) will vote Democrat and give the Left permanent control of government.
But just keep pretending that America’s open-borders are a failure and that somehow we can work with and find common ground with the people who opened the borders in order to replace us.
Well, he’s correct. It’s only a crisis for people who love the country. For people who want to burn down the country, the border is not in crisis. It’s a tremendous success.
Whether he gets a second term or not, Biden has been the most successful Dem president in our history. https://t.co/IJjTXSJmee
— Jesse Kelly (@JesseKellyDC) January 13, 2024
The post Face It Bitter-Clingers … Biden Has Been A Far, Far More Successful President Than Trump appeared first on Granite Grok.
I have one purpose in writing this article: as a former trial attorney, I believe that it is a fundamental right of every man, woman, and child to seek Justice in our courts for legally recognized wrongs that they feel have damaged them.
On Tuesday, January 16, 2024, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on SB304-FN. This bill guarantees to all citizens- including those who see themselves as transgender – the right to seek justice when they feel they have been improperly abused, mutilated, and castrated by their medical care team, including their treating physicians and surgeons.
The bill would extend the legally recognized protections afforded by the New Hampshire medical malpractice laws (RSA 507E) to Gender transformation treatment and surgery, thereby giving all citizens, including those who identify as “transgender” folks, the same rights to seek justice as everyone else.
I hope to enlist your support. Please consider the following:
Imagine now that you are a very accomplished, high-powered Trial attorney. You have a big office with a big desk and lots of well-paid attorneys working for you. You are in very good standing with the legal profession and the courts, and you have sworn to provide legal services of the highest quality to all those who have a need that you can help fulfill.
On one wall of your office, you have a painting of the founding fathers signing the U S Constitution that they had drafted. On another wall, you have a picture of Martin Luther King with the words “Do Justice.”
Next to you on your credenza is a picture of Mom with the look that says, “Don’t be a scum bag; help folks.”
You hear a knock on your door. The door opens, and your young paralegal ushers in your 2 o’clock appointment- a young lady who offers her name, Sandy. She is neatly dressed in a lady’s business suit; she wears minimal but appropriate earrings and a necklace. She has a small amount of make-up and appears quite lovely.
She sits in the chair directly opposite of you and opens the conversation by thanking you for agreeing to see her. You then ask her why she feels she needs a lawyer.
In response, she opens up one of two briefcases she brought and pulls out two packages of photos. She directs you to the first package. It contains on top, a picture of her at 15, standing at the beach with her mom and dad. She looks happy and healthy and very much a beautiful young girl.
The next picture shows the same 15-year-old, very naked, in a surgical center, just moments before breast removal surgery. To your eye, her breasts appear to be quite normal and very attractive.
The next photo revealed the same young lady three months after surgery. Instead of the breasts she had, she now has a very noticeable, very substantial scar that essentially went from one side of where her breasts were to the other.
You carefully put the photos back into the package and look at Sandy, who is now sobbing. She says nothing but asks you with a point of her finger to look at the second package.
The second package shows a photo- a very intimate photo- of what looks to be a very normal vagina. The next picture shows the same area only now, the picture is of a gaping surgically created “hole” where her vagina and uterus used to be. She has been laid completely raw, and you are looking at her muscle, her tendons, everything left once the skin and external female parts were removed.
The final picture, taken months later, shows the same area where her vagina had been. The open hole has been surgically stitched together, and in place of her vagina, there is an appendage extending from her body. The surgeons have taken the vaginal skin and attached it to her clitoris to form what vaguely looked like a penis.
Sandy waits for you to finish and then hands you two feet of medical records that she had in her second briefcase. As you thumb through them, what you see are medical records showing that she had taken hormones since she was thirteen, was still taking them, and was suffering serious side effects. The records also show that for about five years, she was constantly in need of surgical revisions to the original surgery to stop bleeding and to reform the disfigured areas that the surgeons created. Moreover, the records show that she had had surgery to transform her face with masculine lines, replacing her former female structures.
You turn then back to Sanday and ask her to somehow convey to you what you are seeing. ” I want to help you, Sandy. Please tell me what I am seeing and what you need from me.”
Sandy is now openly sobbing. She reaches again into her briefcase and pulls out more records. These are records from her various and numerous counselors and psychiatrists who saw her before and after her surgery. Before the surgeries, way before, when she was 13, these folks diagnosed her with “situational anxiety; bipolar depression; gender dysphoria.”
“Was this your visit when they diagnosed you?” you ask.
“Yes,” she replies. “After only twenty minutes. They told me that there was a real danger I would commit suicide unless I had immediate treatment. They recommended to me that I undergo hormone treatment to become a boy and that after the hormone treatment succeded, I should have the transgender surgery. They told me it would make me healthy. And happy. “
“Did they tell you anything else?” you ask.
“Yes, they told me to listen to these podcasts of other transgenders so that I could learn all about how to be happy. I listened to only one but I listened every day.”
“Did you then have the “top” surgery where they removed your breasts?” you ask.
Yes, I did. Two years after the hormone treatment and two years of hiding my breasts with binding, I did what they recommended. They told me to use their surgeon as he is the best.”
“How did you feel before the surgery, and then how did you feel after?”
Before, I felt worried and hopeful. They assured me I would be “fixed” by the surgery. They told me that I was trapped in a woman’s body and that until I became a man, I would never have any chance to be normal. After the surgery, I was horrified. When the bandages came off and I saw the scar, I realized what I had not really understood – I no longer had breasts. I cut off my female body parts. I cried for weeks. My parents insisted I go back and see the counselors. I did, and I told them how unhappy and desperate I was. I told them I wanted my breasts back. For the next two years, they “counseled “me. They showed me all kinds of studies from universities like Yale that showed how great the surgery was. They told me that after I transitioned to being a man, I would lead a new life as the man I was supposed to be. They constantly told me to trust them and that I would become who I was meant to be.
After two years of this “counseling,” I had the second surgery. When all the bandages came off and I saw my new male appendage dangling off where my vagina should have been, I was overwhelmed by a feeling of horror, I remember the surgeon telling me in the exam room how proud he was to see the new “penis” he had fashioned for me.
“Penis?” I screamed. “This is not a penis. It does nothing. It has no erection. It has no sperm. I cannot make love with it. It’s just a cartoon version of a penis, a piece of garbage that just tells me the crime you committed on me!”
Sandy then paused. She then sobbed uncontrollably.
She then said, ” I am a woman. They lied to me. They told me that I am a man inside a woman’s body… after talking to me for 15 minutes. I was only 15 years old.
They told me I would be better off mentally and spiritually without my breasts. They told me they had done this breast removal to hundreds of young girls, and all of them were very pleased and had a new sense of freedom. I have since learned that many of these girls who had the surgery hated it, regretted it, and regretted the lifelong scar they now had. Each one of them said they wanted to have their breasts back. “
Sandy sobbed again.” I will never know what my breasts will feel like when the husband I will never have touches them. I will never be able to breastfeed my children, which I now will never have. They lied to me.
They should have told me about all the girls who reacted as I did. If they had let me talk to them, let me see the scars they got, I would never have agreed to do this to myself.”
Sandy again paused but then continued, more angry than before.
“I told them I did not want the bottom surgery. I told them to stop all the transitioning hormones. I told them I wanted to remain a woman, have babies, a husband, and a home with children. They refused to listen. I was just 15. They told me I was going to commit suicide if I stopped. They arranged a Zoom call with a TikTok transgender, and he convinced me to trust the Doctors. So I did. And when I saw myself after the surgery, I realized really for the first time, I just let them butcher my womanhood -I let them cut me into a freak of nature with no hope ever to be the woman or the mom I know I now want to be. I stormed into their offices and yelled at them with all I had to yell with. They called security and told me to leave. They sent in a prescription for all kinds of drugs to calm me down. And then told me to get another Doctor.
I tried to commit suicide three times. I was committed to a 72-hour observation many more times. I don’t want to live inside the male body they surgically carved into me. The only thing that keeps me going is that I don’t want them to get away with this. I don’t want them to do this to anyone else. I want Justice.”
Question: if Sandy presented herself to you, and presented her story to you, and asked you to help her get “JUSTICE,” what would you do? Does she have a right to be heard.?Does she have a right to tell her story to a judge and a jury and ask them to render a fair and impartial verdict?
SB 304 fn says she does have that right.
NOTE: It does say she wins. It only says she has a right to be heard, a right to present her case to the jury and ask them to do justice.
The transgender lobby-well funded, well-heeled, well trained- says Sandy has no such right. They say that SB 304 fn should not be passed because people like Sandy should just SHUT THE HELL UP, STOP WHINING, TAKE THEIR NAROTIC DRUGS AND GO AWAY. Why? Because they say, “We are special. You cannot sue us. We are immune from being sued. Now go away.”
On Tuesday, whether or not Sandy and anyone like her has a right to seek Justice in the courts will be set down for hearing. If you want Sandy to have her day in court, it is up to you to stand up for her. Make your view known. Attend the hearing and speak your piece. I guarantee you the transgender folks will. God bless them, but I hope they fail.
It’s up to you in more ways than you know.
The post A Bill To Protect Citizen’s Sexuality From Abuse and Negligence by Their Doctors appeared first on Granite Grok.
“Trump is Hitler.” “Trump is a dictator.” The Regime-Media, Big-Tech, and all the other usual suspects – most of whom couldn’t even define dictator because Joe Biden has been the most dictatorial President in history – have made this their mantra. Because?
Because what wouldn’t you do to stop the next Hitler? Answer: Nothing. Nothing is off the table to stop the next Hitler. NBC “News” has an article on today’s (1/15) RCP normalizing the idea of a military coup against Trump should Trump somehow get elected despite the rigging of the election:
Now, bracing for Trump’s potential return, a loose-knit network of public interest groups and lawmakers is quietly devising plans to try to foil any efforts to expand presidential power, which could include pressuring the military to cater to his political needs.
What NBC “News” is promoting is an insurrection or a coup. A military that answers to “a loose-knit network of public interest groups and lawmakers” and not the commander-in-chief is an insurrection or coup.
The deranged Democrat-media-industrial complex has added military coup prep to assassination prep in its quiver of weapons it will use against the country if Democrats lose the 2024 elections. They’re clearly worried they won’t be able to rig this election like they did in 2020. https://t.co/lUP0hfRw6W
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 15, 2024
Never forget this tweet for the rest of your life. This is an admitted plan, in advance, for the military to no longer observe the military chain of command. This is military-run government. This is a plan to end civilian-run government. https://t.co/7SRcM7JHDG
— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) January 14, 2024
Openly admitting that they are planning a military coup if Americans re-elect Donald Trump.
All to protect democracy of course. https://t.co/65JFH8DeJy
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) January 14, 2024
The post NBC “News” Already Normalizing A Military Coup Against Trump appeared first on Granite Grok.
And yet another week starts with… mockery, ridicule, and occasional insights.
Take heart – there will be both a Wednesday and Friday Edition. Last week’s Friday Edition.
Remember, ridicule and mockery are effective weapons:
Now, let the mockery and mayhem begin.
*** Warning, a few possibly off-color ones, in case tender eyes are about ***
See the concept of the Thought Splinter again.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
This quote applies:
“NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE HUMAN MIND TO BELIEVE WHAT IT WANTS TO BELIEVE, NO MATTER THE CONFLICTING EVIDENCE.”
― BRIAN HERBERT, HOUSE HARKONNEN
Learn what you can while you can. I just ordered another book on foraging. And speaking about learning:
How to Learn Something New—And Make It Stick (duolingo.com)
Is there a precedent for this? Any lawyers want to chime in? I can’t imagine how it’s Constitutional – not that the Left gives a carp about that – to forbid the accused from speaking on their own behalf.
Comedian Evan Sayet – after his “waking up” (see this seminal essay) had this to say:
He Fights (townhall.com)
Hey, I know… let’s invite them in by the metric f*ckton.
Remember, in 2017 (!) what Fauci said:
This was one of the critical data points in my growing skepticism. Working in my field, one learns to NEVER say things definitively – sometimes to the point where it’s so ingrained it bugs my wife. The fact that he was so definitive, so sure, really rang my alarm bells. Especially when, IIRC in 2022, he said some statement that was full of weasel words like should, and is likely to, etc. The contrast really sticks out to me.
I don’t mean to be cruel, but… if you haven’t figured it out by now, make sure to take choline supplements for 30 days prior to your Jab.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA
The Grok does a good job of highlighting upcoming legislation; recently I made several posts about such in the NH Patriot Gab group based on their alerts. But if you live in NH I also urge you to at least get on the mailing list of RebuildNH.
RebuildNH – Liberty for New Hampshire
As long as we still – at least in theory – have free speech and the right to petition our government, let’s use them. Also don’t forget Jury Nullification. Because IMHO we’re approaching the point where the fourth box is being increasingly seen by many as the only possible option… and if it starts – as I believe it will, alas? I want my conscience to know and believe I tried everything else first.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Land grab, pure and simple.
Only one box? I’ve targeted by new acquisition based on a conversation I had today. Just to diversify my ammo use potential. And, of course, at least 1000 rounds to go with it.
#TEXIT
It’s not incompetence. They made it up as a test to see who would obey. And there are multiple videos out there of people screaming at people for not staying six feet apart, or being harassed out of stores for not wearing a mask.
Fear. Fear, pure and simple.
Good point! I remember when our kids were bottle-age, I’d mix a bit of peanut butter into their formula bottles.
What I want to know is – who still has faith in the government?
Basically, they don’t work.
Emotional decision-making is what drives the fear porn. To wit, be afraid of climate doom:
Don’t forget to eat your bugs to save the planet!
When dealing with Democrats there’s always a caveat.
And I still vote to add dipping your finger in indelible ink to avoid people going from polling place to polling place in states that have same-day registration.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Pick of the post:
At this point there’s no substantial difference between the two-faces of the same uniparty.
“Legal” For Illegals To Vote In Presidential Election In Arizona … – Granite Grok
As I understand it, not truly legal, but there’s no means to stop it. And in general:
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Palate Cleansers:
—
—
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Come back Wednesday for another edition. Same Meme Time. Same Meme channel.
Please do consider buying me a coffee.
Buy Me a Coffee
>>>>>=====<<<<<
The post MONDAY MEMES appeared first on Granite Grok.
To us dinosaurs, life used to be a system of meritocracy. You worked and studied hard to get ahead at school, work, and life. You planned well and surrounded yourself with positive mentors. You were proud of your accomplishments, but not to the point of being brash. The action that disrupted the equilibrium was nepotism.
Because of this system, we continued to build a country on the excellence of its people. A few decades ago, things changed, and the system was turned upside down. Meritocracy was replaced with parity. It became the social norm to replace winners and losers with participants. Everyone played the game, and leaders in all facets of life were now chosen based on their grades on the DEI scale and not on the ABCs. Competency and excellence that once were colorblind are directly measured on one’s shade of the rainbow. This new scale does not improve society.
The sports and news worlds focused on Foxboro this week as the end of an era in New England Patriots history was marked by the departure of Coach Bill Belichick. The book is closed on a quarter century of excellence that was the envy of most and the target of hate and jealousy by some. There will always be questions about whether Brady or Belichick deserved the credit for the dynasty that brought six Lombardi trophies to Gillette Stadium and New England. I will yield to the sports folk to debate coach versus quarterback. I will tackle Kraft.
If not for Robert Kraft, pundits would not be debating the person responsible for the dynasty, for there would not be one. Like the rest of us, Kraft was a frustrated fan who cheered for a team that suffered from mediocrity for forty years. Everything changed with the team, town, and even New England when Kraft stepped up and bought the Patriots in 1994, preventing the team from moving to St. Louis and setting the stage for the most successful twenty years in a football franchise.
Kraft established a level of excellence that should be a model to learn from and emulate, but instead, some want to tear it down or watch it crumble. Excellence is no longer something to strive for but to avoid. Parity is the new norm. The demise of the Patriots since the departure of Tom Brady is not Bill Belichick’s or Robert Kraft’s fault. The Patriots are doing exactly what the league is designed to do: return to the pack. Free agency, the salary cap, and even the requirements for staff hiring are intended to prevent dynasties. Kraft is a dinosaur, like us, and will fight the norm, and my money is on him to succeed.
Many of us still remember the hapless Patriots. I saw my first game in 1964 at Fenway Park, one of the many homes of the Pats until Kraft built them a permanent residence. Knowing the past made us appreciate what Kraft, Belichick, and Brady gave us for twenty years. Fortunately for YouTube, we can relive those thrills with the click of a remote. But for our younger fans who know nothing but championships and duck boat parades, this period of rebuilding for the Patriots is a new and uncomfortable experience.
It is made more difficult because we were blessed with too much success, and damn, it was a great run. In this WOKE era, we should ensure our kids understand the how and why of the Patriots story. Maybe they will focus on propping up merit and success and reject those who want to suppress them with Woke. If this happens, this week will end an era, but WOKE and DEI, not excellence, will end.
The post Can There Be Too Much Success appeared first on Granite Grok.
I remember way back in the early 2000s when I was exploring my politics. After 9/11, I wanted to know how that might happen and realized years of disinterest left me unprepared to discuss it. Politics. Some might argue I still am. But I tried to learn. I started with the Founding documents and kept going.
Lurking on websites was vital. I could read news and opinions and then skim through comments to see what others felt and why. The first time I dared to add, my voice was likely precarious, but it didn’t end badly. I think Early Red State (2005-2006), and I was nervous, but ideas must be laid out, explored, and tested right or wrong. A few years later, the pile of questions and ideas needed a better outlet, so I started a free WordPress blog. I still have it.
Many articles, connections, and years later, I’ve written on at least a dozen platforms, some for pay and others to get the questions, challenges, thoughts, and observations out of my head. I’m still doing this after fifteen-plus years and probably 25,000 pieces of content later, you probably want me to shut up and tell you who this week’s Commenter of Week is.
I will, but I said all that because we have a lot of folks who aren’t shy about sharing, and at least a few do it as themselves. That’s not a dig on those who don’t or can’t. You have your reasons, and I’m good with that, but at some point, any one of you might want to take the next step as I did, and we’re here for you even if you don’t want to use your actual name. We need to know who you are, but no one else does.
So, congrats to NHnative. You are this week’s winner for this. It wasn’t just a comment but an excellent idea.
One of the most significant plagues rotting NH is our court system… reading this article, I don’t have to tell you how bad it is.
I’d like to know why this is okay with the residents of NH, first of all.
Second, I’d like everyone to know that it’s not that hard today to find yourself IN this corrupt court/legal system.. it’s only then will most people understand what a crisis we’ve got here that just rolls on with seemingly no real efforts to fix anything.
So yes, this does really impact us all.It’s not really IF you’ll have a turn, it’s when.
The majority of folks in NH don’t have the extra money to hire attorneys and take this on like Laurie did.. and this is precisely how this system is designed to work.
Laurie, what I’d love to see you do is start a non-profit, build a team, and help citizens learn what they need to know to represent themselves pro-se to go to court.
NH has a shortage of attorneys, and it’s become more clear that We, The People out here, need somewhere we can go to learn the ropes of taking more and more on ourselves in court.
NHnative, if you’d be so kind as to email me an address I can ship to, I’ll send you your “prize.”
To everyone else, again, damn difficult decision. We’ve got more commenters and comments this week, and again, I can only afford to reward one a week at the moment, but I can still give you a shout-out because there was plenty of great stuff. David Ss, Mike Remski, Bowana, Josue Lugo, Neil Johnson, Dan Batten, Gary Davis, Old Vet, Rick O’Shea, Bryan W, Steve Earle, LunarDog made me laugh (was not a finalist for that), Asperous for “Stop referring to “Lia Thomas” as she/her,” NITZAKHON, gramps, Jay Eshelman, Tombstone Gabby, and more.
As a reminder, if you see a comment you think should be considered, email it to me. In the first two weeks, I received one of those, and I’d like a few more each week if possible.
Thanks for reading and commenting!
The post Our Next Comment of the Week Winner Is…? appeared first on Granite Grok.
We were a few months into the COVID chaos – well past the two weeks or fifteen days or whatever the narrative had shifted to to flatten the curve. Masks were not just a mandate but a political statement, and social distancing dots had appeared on floors across the land—six feet, they said, which made no sense.
We went looking and uncovered a source on all things social distancing.
No one can prove it works or does not. There are no clinical trials. In fact, the basis for the theory comes from a 14-years old’s high school science project back in 2006. A computer model developed with the help of her dad, who has no medical training or experience.
Much like medical or cloth masks and quarantining healthy people, none of which had any basis in science, the Machine Media took up the call. Fearmongering pied pipers spread the message across the land, stealing the lives of children in their wake as schools stayed locked down and those that opened months later mandated masks and, yes …distancing.
Last week, one of the founding fathers of COVID-era medical fraud, Tony ‘Little Shoes’ Fauci, admitted under oath that “guidelines to keep six feet of separation — ostensibly to limit the spread of COVID-19 — “sort of just appeared” without scientific input.”
Did someone make it up? They did. It started with then-14-year-old Laura M. Glass, who has long since distanced herself from her “work.” But back then,
Laura, with some guidance from her dad, devised a computer simulation that showed how people – family members, co-workers, students in schools, people in social situations – interact. What she discovered was that school kids come in contact with about 140 people a day, more than any other group. Based on that finding, her program showed that in a hypothetical town of 10,000 people, 5,000 would be infected during a pandemic if no measures were taken, but only 500 would be infected if the schools were closed.
That experiment later became the basis for a paper by Laura’s dad, Robert, “a complex-systems analyst with Sandia National Laboratories. He had no medical training, much less an expertise in immunology or epidemiology.” Robert was the lead author of Targeted Social Distancing Designs for Pandemic Influenza (his daughters also get credit), and, again – he had zero medical training or public health experience, which invited a scathing refutation by some actual medical professionals.
There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza. … It is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half-century when large-scale quarantine has been effectively used in the control of any disease. The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme (forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations; difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone) that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration…
One of the authors of that refutation was D.A. Henderson, who is credited with eradicating smallpox, so when the time came to ask whether lockdowns and distancing were sound, the “experts” chose the paper by the systems analyst and his teenage daughter and not the world of a real scientist with practical global experience.
Three years later, Fauci forgets the backstory and goes with, yeah, we don’t know, and no one checked. So, drunken-brainstorming at the CDC or NIH. That would explain a lot about how the situation was mishandled and one of the legitimate digs on the Trump presidency. He let Fauci run the show for too long, and while he openly commented on things with which he disagreed – death percentages were too high, defending the efficacy of HCQ and Ivermectin, it wasn’t enough to protect us from Fauci and his microphone-addicted, attention whores whose guidance on more than just distancing just appeared and – in some cases – contradicted existing scientific input.
“It is clear that dissenting opinions were often not considered or suppressed completely. Should a future pandemic arise, America’s response must be guided by scientific facts and conclusive data.”
That sounds like a mea culpa, but he is also reported to have said: “that the policies and mandates he promoted may, unfortunately, increase vaccine hesitancy for years to come.”
I’m guessing Facui still has a vested financial interest in vaccine uptake, so that statement, to my mind, is less about public health and more about Fauci’s financial legacy.
The post Distancing Themselves From Social Distancing appeared first on Granite Grok.
Custom keyrings are multipurpose items with many advantages for businesses. These advantages include creating a memorable brand presence, marketing that is affordable, customised branding, increased client loyalty, and word-of-mouth advertising.
Furthermore, they function as useful and practical advertising items that are exceptionally effective. Businesses must place a high priority on having a superior keyring design if they want to take advantage of all these benefits. In this article, we will explore effective design tips for custom keyrings that guarantee the fullest possible utilisation of their advantages and create a lasting impact on everyone who sees them.
Effective Custom Keyrings: Design Tips for Optimal ImpactTo get the maximum benefits of custom keyrings for businesses, these useful design tips must be included in every design strategy.
Integrate your brand storyA brand story is a narrative that conveys the core principles, goals, and distinctive character of a brand. To fully reap the benefits of these indispensable promotional objects, you must incorporate your business’s story into the design of your custom keyrings as a fundamental practice. Your brand’s mission and values, logo and visual identity, unique selling proposition, personality, cultural influences, interactive elements, and future vision are all components of your brand story. These strategies improve customer engagement, word-of-mouth marketing, memorability, differentiation, brand consistency, and long-lasting impression. They also foster an emotional connection between your brand and the consumer.
Maintain a minimal design for effective custom keyringsFor promotional items to advance clarity of message, timeless appeal, versatility, improved brand recognition, ease of integration of promotional tactics, lower production costs, ease of use, and user-friendliness, their design must be minimalistic. Practices like simplifying shapes, incorporating a simple colour scheme, concentrating on essential components of your brand or message, incorporating clean topography, utilising whitespace, adhering to a consistent design language, maximising scale and proportion, emphasising a single focal point in the design, and streamlining logo elements are some ways to keep the custom keyrings’ design simple.
Consider your target audience when creating custom keyringsHow your brand’s audience will feel about the custom keyrings will have a major impact on their success as marketing tools. Cultural sensitivity, perceived exclusivity, usefulness and practicality, brand connection, relevance and appeal, aesthetic preferences, perceived quality, and word-of-mouth impact should all be evaluated. This is necessary to create custom keyrings that fulfil their intended purpose and leave a lasting impression. Because of this, take your target demographic into consideration when you design the keyrings. Give top priority to elements like user interaction, trends and fashion, colour psychology, cultural sensitivity, functional demands, lifestyle, preferences, and demography. Ensure you perform due diligence when considering your target audience in order to get accurate information about them.
ConclusionWe have discussed three proactive custom keyring design tips that ought to be included in your design plans. Any business may fully realise the benefits of custom keyrings and get a competitive edge by implementing the tips covered in this article.
The post How to Make Custom Keyrings That Stand Out: An Actionable Guide to Design Strategies appeared first on Granite Grok.
In the category of you can’t make this stuff up. Maine … you know the State where some unelected, unaccountable former ACLU lunatic recently threw Trump off the ballot … is building luxury apartments for illegals. But just keep pretending that the Great Replacement is a “right-wing, conspiracy theory,” as you are being replaced in front of your very eyes.
Maine is now an apartheid state. Illegals have more privileges and rights than actual citizens. Maine, like New Hampshire, is a lost cause. Real Republicans should get the hell out of Maine (and New Hampshire) as fast as possible, and migrate to a State that is not “transforming” America into a socialism-based-on-woke hell-hole.
5 new luxury buildings are going up in Brunswick, Maine to host illegals.
2 years of rent will be paid off by the taxpayers for jobless illegals.
Maine is also supplying them with $100k for legal support to help them with asylum and work authorization.
Woke residents gathered… pic.twitter.com/qGs4PATOdb
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 13, 2024
Maine taxpayers are footing the bill for new apartments built specifically for illegal immigrants. They have *two years worth of rent paid for by state taxpayers.
pic.twitter.com/IAPkCK3uoF— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) January 12, 2024
The post Your Government Despises You … Maine Building Luxury Apartments For Illegals appeared first on Granite Grok.
Our bill to end town mask mandates forever has made a surprising reappearance in the Senate thanks to Rep. Juliet Harvey-Bolia and Senator James Gray. The vote will be on the 18th, and we need everyone to call Senator Ricciardi and Senator Avard and urge them to support the floor amendment to SB63.
Let’s kindly persuade them.
Tuesday, January 16th, N.H. Senate
9:00 a.m. – OPPOSE –SB343
Currently contracted, school-based health care clinics do occur, yet apparently there is no current legal authority for this, only for school nurses and physicians to perform various procedures and exams. Parental consent is already required via law. This bill seeks to give legal authority for contracted school health care clinics using money from a federal grant, accepted by the Executive Council. This is part of a larger agenda to create government dependency from cradle to grave, is potentially harmful (2 children last year were vaccinated “accidentally” in schools), and provides no further protections for parental consent.
Schools are for learning reading, writing, and arithmetic and are not meant to become mini health clinics.
Click here to register your disposition.
Email the committee:
Ruth.Ward@leg.state.nh.us
Carrie.Gendreau@leg.state.nh.us
Timothy.Lang@leg.state.nh.us
Donovan.Fenton@leg.state.nh.us Suzanne.Prentiss@leg.state.nh.us
Please Submit Group communications or Press Releases to steve@granitegrok.com.
Submission is not a guarantee of publication – Publication is not an endorsement.
1:00 p.m. – SUPPORT – HB1677
This bill makes Education Freedom Accounts available for all students in failing districts (less than 49% proficiency)
Click here to register your disposition.
Email the committee
Thursday, January 18th, N.H. House
10:00 a.m. – SUPPORT – HB1012
This bill would ensure parents cannot be found guilty of child endangerment for making a parenting decision that is not otherwise illegal and presents no more than a hypothetical risk of harm. Protect parents’ rights and the ability of children to grow into independence.
Click here to register your disposition.
Email the committee
The views and opinions expressed by contributors are those of the author and may not reflect the opinion or position of Grok Media, GraniteGrok.com, its authors, advertisers, donors, or sponsors.
The post Legislative Update Week of Jan. 15, 2024 – END TOWN MASK MANDATES Plus Other Public Hearings appeared first on Granite Grok.
As a courtesy to the folks who don’t feel like jogging digitally to our home page ten times a day, we share content on a handful of platforms throughout the day. Minds, Telegram, MeWe, Gettr, Truth Social, and X. I am pleased to announce that we have added a few more.
I’ve dropped the occasional ‘Grok post on my LinkedIn feed for a few weeks. If you’d like to connect with me on that platform, you can do that here, and then the joy of joys, watch the ‘Grok news, opinion, and the odd bit of bombastic twig-snapping and snowflake-melting outrage present itself for your consideration. There is no team building or marketing, just “professional outreach” from a stable of authors and op-ed writers “regarding” local, national, and global politics.
The ‘Grok has also started adding content to our Signal channel. We’ve had it for years but never utilized it—new plan. I’ve invited the folks I was already connected to, but that list was short because I was not very active there. Now that I am using it for other aspects of my new business model, ‘Grok content will appear 8-10 times daily on Signal.
We’ve also got a very active Telegram chat you can join here.
I aim to reach more readers and make it easier for readers to reach the ‘Grok. We want to increase engagement through debate and hope you’ll find us on those platforms and click through at least a few times daily.
One more. While I can’t share everything, and the censorious bastards are still choking our reach, we are (again) sharing content on the ‘Grok Facebook page. We’d welcome you there as well, though – admittedly – a less inviting and tolerant space than any others. Don’t expect Facebook to feed it to you, however. As I said, we’re still mired in their ideological mud, and they’ve no inclination to let us out.
GmailGoogle Mail blocks ‘Grok’s newsletter. We sent that from our server, so we asked the vendor about what Google had suggested, and they sent us some code. We’re just waiting for the Webmistress to add it as directed. It has been alleged that within 72 hours after the update, there is a chance Gmail users will begin getting our newsletter again, as would other readers using other mail providers who’ve indicated a similar issue.
We will update you when that is done and the grace period has passed.
The post Night Cap: You Can Now Get ‘Grokked on Linkedin and Signal + Newsletter/Gmail Issue Update! appeared first on Granite Grok.
According to the two bookends who provided testimony to legislators about the best juridical interests of state judges this week, the legislators can just kick back and skip a resolution to return to Constitutionally defined voting processes in state elections.
Go home and take a pass was the message.
Is it time to abandon judicial political policy-making as court-favored witnesses testified? Should the legislature take a break from their duty, role, and work of establishing public policy and instead allow judges to handle election challenges that define voting process in state elections? De facto, that advice establishes judges as the best determiners of public policy.
Legislators, give yourselves a break. You should let go & go home because the judges got this, was the smiling message delivered with a wink and nod to House Committee members.
Yesterday, two high-level politicos bookended the house hearing and advised legislators to ignore House Resolution No. 25 – designed to thwart the new voting practice allowing anyone to show up on election day to cast a vote without identification, preregistration, or proof of any kind.
This ‘alternative’ to Constitutionally mandated procedures that pre-qualify voters to avoid election fraud is one of many questionable political expansion maneuvers that have been challenged in state and national courts over the last four years. Cynical voters have watched with dismay at the variety of slanted political alterations to states’ voting process and then they sued election officials. (Largely (57 cases nationally) they then lose and are tossed out of court for lack of standing. In New Hampshire, in response to election officials’ alterations of the voting process, a legislative resolution was filed calling for a return to the rules specifically printed in the state constitution. Ergo, this legislative hearing followed on adopting that resolution as a formal statement of public policy as a matter of legislative law/process. (2nd Branch rule.)
Two political advisors (the bookends) argued that legislators (2nd Branch) should skip all the work and disregard voting on a public policy statement. Just let the judges (3rd Branch) handle election voting issues. After all, they said, there are multiple state and federal cases in court concerning election law reform
So why bother yourselves with establishing a public policy resolution that has no clout? No teeth? said first speaker (the Parliamentarian) waving around his old outdated Mason’s Manual as defining authority. Skip it, he advised. Take a pass, he told the resolution committee.
Committee legislators then heard a citizen explanation of a recent U.S. Supreme Court case of Moore v. Harper, (June 2023) which reversed and clarified State duties and clearly defined the duty of states to act and not reject outright claims and complaints of Constitutional fundamental rights regarding election voting rights. The Moore case, taken together with a pair
of earlier Supreme Court 2nd Amendment rights cases, explained Daniel Richard, a Constitutional scholar, to the committee; it establishes a state duty to protect citizens’ fundamental constitutional rights including fundamental election and voter rights to a fair election process The state neglected that duty regarding constitutional questions, he said, and this resolution would recognize it.
The 2nd bookend testimony to the committee was private attorney Bryan Gould, who argued that the courts were the place to handle public policy of this sort (not the legislature) and that Richard’s opinions about the 2nd Amendment cases was “too aggressive” in interpretation — and Richard’s “opinion about a Constitutional duty to protect fundamental rights was in error.” He called the U.S. decision about 2nd Amendment cases “inconsequential” to the election-rights resolution, because the newly clarified Moore v. Harper duty-to-protect was applicable only to 2nd Amendment cases, and not to all fundamental Constitutional challenge cases (1st, 2nd,.5th).
Here, the resolution is about government manipulation of the voting process in violation of the Constitution. It falls into the Heller & Bruen case rulings that STATES bear the burden of proof at trial (not citizens) so an election-process resolution would also be protected by the umbrella of similar Constitutional rights. Gould was wrong when he advised the Committee that “[Richard’s] his opinion is in error” because unlike constitutionally protected gun rights, voting and fair election rights are not required to be fundamentally protected by state law, he said.
With a broad wink, Attorney Gould launched into the narrative of his earlier experiences as the state political fix-it guy for election law cases, bemoaning a federal court LOSS of an earlier voting case on residency and domicile. Gould told the committee that “the greatest legal minds in the state” had “carefully crafted the legislation (of SB 3)” attempting to clarify voter qualifications. (And circumvent the constitution.) They proposed a fancy-schmancy state legislative act to instill a different process for qualifying voters than that process provided in the state constitution. And the federal court struck it down.
What he did not say however was that Mr. Political Fix-It-Man (for the SOS, the State AG, and the State GOP) lost that case that attempted to redefine who was qualified to vote in New Hampshire. [All the while billing the state for valuable attorney time.]
I was so disappointed we lost, he moaned to the committee. [Note: Lesson missed. Try again. More billable hours.]
“Too aggressive,” he said, referring to the prior speaker’s explanation that this resolution fit the Heller & Bruen legal criteria and therefore should be adopted as a statement of public policy. Instead, his message was: ‘State voters seeking fundamental fairness in the election-vote process should leave the issue to the courts, not pass a toothless public policy resolution in the legislature.’ That message was delivered to legislators with a smile, followed by a wink.
Hours before the legislative hearing on Resolution 25, a federal judge tossed out the Testerman election process case. Her challenge of alterations to the GOP political voter registration process
avoided the Constitutional election process. That Constitutional process is a due process mandate.
The judge wrote that Testerman and others had no standing to sue. In other words, the NH SOS can unilaterally extend primary election dates (although specific dates are explicit in the State Constitution) in a way that enables non-party voting (against Trump in 2024) in the GOP primary. [This is a quiet tactical voting scheme of the NH SOS and GOP Party chairman designed and implemented to disrupt 2024 election results.]
Gould was wrong about the law that he advised to the committee — not once, but repeatedly. But he is not stupid. He simply is a tool of a top-tier political agenda, urging and confusing the Committee to leave public policy to the Courts to handle. With flawed case interpretation and his earlier election cases already lost (flawed thinking), this advice to committee members was offered to protect the political “schema” that averts qualified votes into a barrel of monkey results. (The quiet plan was to alter registration deadlines, attached to a campaign for a significant number of Democrats to change to undeclared party status, then to use/ask for a Republican ballot on Primary Day to keep Donald Trump’s name off the fall election ballot. Then to use their undeclared status to vote in the general election, where they are not prevented from voting.
The tactical voting scheme goes much deeper than that. It is also a challenge of power about which branch of government should decide public policy – the legislature or court?
The process of extending and encouraging non-party voting in a party primary is called “a tactile voting process interruption.”
By design, it renders election-day voting a politically manipulated outcome. It violates State Constitutional mandates for election registration and process. It is also alleged to be an act of RICO.
The area of Election Day voting abuse by public officials has been drastically reshaped by court decisions across the country –designed in law theory and practice to deny injured parties “standing to sue” with no other relief available. Injury without relief. Judges have callously advanced a no-recourse solution as ‘take your problem to the voters’ because judges systematically disallow (reject) election challenge lawsuits. This is not the first time in our nation’s history that the court has expanded political power to take over the role of the legislature.
Can courts convert state election policy and constitutionally mandated voting practices by avoiding hearing these cases? What if the effect is –to politically “expand voting rights to anyone” by using court rulings (or denial of standing) for all election-challenge cases? Can they control the outcome of the election?
This take-over of function encroaches on the legislature’s role in creating public policy, and it circumvents the American Constitutional system. The result is to neuter or ‘amend’ the Constitution by judges’ practices, but not by operation of law. 1925 to 1930 saw multiple jurists and legal scholars work to reinterpret the Constitution using “a crude version of Marxism to reinterpret the Court’s decisions…” (see Gustavus Myers’ book, History of the Supreme Court of the United States, and James Smith’s book, The Growth and Decadence of Constitutional Government).
Court-packing and judicial activism are considered blatant political aggressions viewed through the different lense of political scientists. The difference is political scientists are more likely to regard judicial activism as “a perversion of the democratic process” and not a legal operation under the Constitution and rule of law. [See Wallace Mendelson’s book, Justice Black and Frankfurter: Conflict on the Court.]
By systematically avoiding legal challenges and as in the present situation–by politically encouraging legislators to skip the bother of a frivolous election-rights resolution [because judges have election challenge cases in hand]—it sidesteps the underlying agenda to defeat democratic rule. ‘
The judges have got this, you don’t have to’ is the message. It’s the same “Trust us” message Clerk of Court Howard Zibel told legislators mere days before the NH House Subcommittee voted for a full impeachment investigation about decades-old court cronyism and corruption. You can trust the judges. This historic refrain echoed yet again in the state legislative committee room this week.
Submitted by Caroline Douglas, J.D.
Former New Hampshire legislative bill drafter
Former NH attorney
Legal Analyst and Author of The Dark Side, a law treatise on judging National whistleblower and skeptic
Contact: nssri@pm.me
The post NH House Resolution No. 25: Is it Time to Question Judicial Policymaking appeared first on Granite Grok.
Check out the recent clips of Joe Biden “campaigning.” Biden, OBVIOUSLY, cannot even dress himself. Yet the people who control the information continue the charade that Biden is running the executive branch of the federal government.
THIS is why “they” … the system, the UniParty, whatever you want to call it … HATE Elon Musk and X so much. Essentially, Musk and X allow those who are interested in and willing to see it to see the Matrix that our “democracy” actually is.
But count on “traditional Republicans” to keep telling us that the most important issues we face are cutting business taxes, billionaire taxes, and eviscerating local zoning laws. “Traditional Republicans” … Nikki Haley, Chris Sununu, Mitch McConnell … are every bit as invested in perpetuating the Matrix as their frenemies on the Left.
NEW: Bike store owner talks to President Joe Biden like a nursing home patient and has to put his hand in front of him to stop him from walking.
Meanwhile, Democrats think this man has another 5 years in the tank.
During the same outing, Biden told a group of people that he… pic.twitter.com/bFqssb2fgd
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 12, 2024
A lost and confused Grandpa Joe has to be spoken to like a five-year-old.
This is the same person making unilateral decisions to wage war.pic.twitter.com/wNrCeSvAoo
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) January 12, 2024
WATCH: Joe Biden makes teenage girl visibly uncomfortable as she squirms away from him when he starts creepily whispering in her ear pic.twitter.com/WZ3840WDUP
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) January 12, 2024
Joe Biden visits a coffee shop and doesn't remember where he is or that he's the President.
"My name's Joe Biden. I work for the government in the Senate."
This is terrifying. pic.twitter.com/nCNqx83ww3
— Grand Old Patriots (@GrandOlPatriots) January 12, 2024
Media: Joe Biden does not make children physically uncomfortable
Joe Biden: pic.twitter.com/arqET32ayP
— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) January 12, 2024
The post When The Amphetamines Wear Off appeared first on Granite Grok.
You’ve heard these words many times in the past year — the 2024 presidential race is “the most important election in our lifetime.” Is it really? Yes! Here’s one way to describe the environment surrounding this year’s election:
Ronald Reagan has been famously quoted saying:
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream, it must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same….”
People, WE are that “one generation!”You might ask what happened to our country such that today we find ourselves up against a “woke” Democrat-Socialist “army” that has “captured” each and every major institution. Seemingly overnight?
Actually, “overnight” took over a hundred years — starting in the Progressive era of the late 19th and early 20th centuries continuing all the way up to Whoever is Running the Biden Administration today in the 21st.
We want to thank Ted Lloyd for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Steve@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.
Like so many changes, the takeover was slow at first and then quite rapid.
And we allowed it to happen!According to documentary producer and Palladium Pictures CEO Michael Pack appearing on Newt Gingrich’s podcast, it’s like two armies were at war:
We are only now beginning to realize that the consequences of this war are serious. To win it, we’ve got to get serious!
As Kevin Roberts of The Heritage Foundation says, “To save America, we MUST GO ON OFFENSE!”
If we don’t, starting now, our fate will likely be as Reagan described in the rest of his famous quote: “(… or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in a United States where men were free.”
The primary season starts in January, but it is only the beginning.The Democrat “army” is ready for battle! Are YOU? Republicans will not win without each and every one of you.
We all need to support our favorite candidate in your primary — Door knocking, phone banking, letters to the editor, talking to neighbors, and of course, VOTING.
The Republican Convention is July 15-18 in Milwaukee, at which the Republican nominee for President will be confirmed.
Then, we need to do it again, all of it, all of us, ACTIVELY supporting that candidate against whoever the Democrats throw up against us (and it may well not be Biden).
And don’t expect that they will fight fairly — remember, they are the “win at all costs” army.
But only by getting serious will we have a chance to begin slowing down the forces of darkness. Only by continuing to be serious in turning back the takeover by the left will our Republic be sustained.
The views and opinions expressed by contributors are those of the author and may not reflect the opinion or position of Grok Media, GraniteGrok.com, its authors, advertisers, donors, or sponsors.
The post The Most Important Election in our Lifetime? appeared first on Granite Grok.
I recently posted about illegals being able to vote in Arizona. Turns out that the “law” that allows illegals to vote in Arizona allows illegals to vote everywhere. Stephen Miller explains on X.
But just keep pretending that we have a democracy … as our votes are negated by people who have no right to be in America, never mind vote in American elections. And count on “traditional Republicans,” to borrow Grifter-Mikey Graham’s euphemism for the GOP grifter-class, to keep telling us that there is no evidence … none whatsoever … that our elections are RIGGED.
Surely you cannot be this obtuse. I hope your ignorance is feigned and not sincere.
In all 50 states in America — as a result of preposterous judicial rulings — illegal aliens and millions of other ineligible noncitizens — can register to vote merely by checking a box on a…
— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) January 12, 2024
The post Actually … Illegals Can Vote In All States appeared first on Granite Grok.
The annual Ruling Class Klan Bake is upon us with its jet-setting cadre of elites gathering in Davos, Switzerland, to decide what to do about the peasants. But this year’s theme will be a bit different. A growing number of peasants don’t trust them.
Against this backdrop and to instil a measure of collective agency, it is necessary to start restoring trust at three fundamental levels: into the future, within societies and among nations. Therefore, the 54th Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum will convene under the theme Rebuilding Trust to provide the crucial space to step back and focus on the fundamental principles driving trust, including transparency, consistency and accountability.
I’m sure they’ll discuss all sorts of solutions, including the one they’d like to pursue above all others. If they can concretize the global censorship apparatus -especially among those pesky Americans and the damn First Amendment, they could silence dissent. When no one is allowed to question their words, rulings, and edicts (summarized in one word: lies) they, they can say and do whatever they please and not have to worry about public relations or marketing to restore trust.
It would save a good deal of time, and it’s something they have to have, but is it too late for that?
Who can forget World Economic Forum gems like “You’ll own nothing and be happy”, WEF promotion of Greta Thunberg, back when she was politically useful, and of course the many PR blunders of members of their board of trustees like Al Gore and Lagarde? … A global tax cartel, coordinating spending on the green agenda, and taking inspiration from the Covid-19 response, presumably including Covid-19 era threats to the livelihoods of anyone who didn’t comply with government diktats, and brutal treatment of those who outright refused to comply.
It looks like a challenge ahead for the Davos crew. Perhaps they should focus on pissing off farmers, creating food and energy scarcity during the next pandemic. We know that’s what they are after. Or, are they increasingly afraid that the global insurrection they have been trying to foment will look more like a planet-wide French Revolution? An end to the Davos Klan Bake as the majority of its participants have been relieved of their lives and livelihood.
I’m not suggesting it or even condoning it, but these same elites who think we are too stupid to know how to run our own lives or what is best for us and our families must know what this same level of consciousness is capable of when pushed into a corner.
If they make things go sideways again, the odds are not in their favor.
The post Globalists Gather in Davos to Reset Their Deteriorating Image appeared first on Granite Grok.
Democrats in the Vermont House voted on Wednesday to spend $2 million to set up a pilot program establishing “safe injection sites” for addicts (H.72) – a misnomer, as it turns out as floor testimony revealed there are multiple ways users ingest their drugs at these facilities.
One lawmaker asked, “People are snorting fentanyl and smoking it, and I’m just wondering if that will be allowed at the centers, and also something like smoking methamphetamine.” The answer from lead bill sponsor Rep. Taylor Small (P-Winooski) was, “Yes! The people who would be using such facilities would be able to use pre-obtained drugs in a variety of ways.” Sounds safe, so much for protecting the workers in these places from secondhand meth and fentanyl smoke. Needless to say, these sites are controversial. But they are on the radical leftist Santa-letter wish list, so of course, Vermont needs to be the first kid on the block to have one…. Or two, as this initial case may be.
Supporters argue that giving addicts a safe place to get high under the supervision of healthcare professionals who can intervene in the event of an overdose saves lives, facilitates a path to treatment, keeps this sort of activity off the streets, and saves the public money by reducing emergency ambulance calls. In an ideal world, maybe.
Opponents’ concerns are more practical than ideological.
First of all, these sites are illegal under federal law. A small detail. While H.72 protects users and workers at these facilities from state prosecution, it doesn’t and can’t protect them from federal prosecution. Wouldn’t it make more sense to invest this $2 million, which comes from a legal settlement with five drug makers, in some other program that is not a federal crime to implement? That might even create some synergy with a federal program to get better results. Apparently not.
Moreover, the example of successful, safe sites cited by supporters are in New York City and have fully functioning ancillary support systems in place. For example, the benefit of an addict using a safe site as a springboard for getting treatment only works if treatment services outside the site are available. In Vermont, they are not. Without such support in place, these sites are little more than legally sanctioned drug dens. So, would it not make more practical sense to invest this $2 million into expanding the availability of treatment services – those with a proven track record of effectiveness — to better meet existing demand? Apparently not.
Similarly, asked about legal liabilities when addicts drive to and from these sites, potentially under the influence of something, Rep. Small stated that the overwhelming majority of addicts who use these sites live within a walkable ten-block radius of the site. That’s in New York City. Where the population density is, shall we say, a little bit more concentrated than it is anywhere in the Green Mountain State? According to Patti McCoy (R-Poultney), the 10 or 20-block area in Manhattan where these sites are contain twice the entire population of our state.
Where in Vermont are there enough addicts who would be willing to go to a safe site to get high within walking distance of their home to make such a facility cost-effective? We are talking about two locations serving 0.05 square miles within the 9916 square miles of Vermont. Even if this experiment sees some success in the pilot phase, is it possible or practical to scale the program up to equitably serve our whole population? From a funding and staffing perspective, no. So again, is the best use of this $2 million to help solve our opioid crisis? It is not.
Another significant concern is that these sites will become magnets for crime and drug dealers. The sites themselves do not provide drugs to the users. It’s BYOD! So, users will have to obtain their illegal substances before entering the site. From whom? A drug dealer nearby is probably taking advantage of the site as a marketing tool. And where will users get the money for their drugs? In many cases from theft, probably from someplace nearby. So, who wants one of these in their neighborhood? Bueller…. Bueller….
The counterargument to this concern is that police will be able to focus their attention on the areas surrounding the sites. But if they do, who’s going to go to them in the first place? It would defeat the ostensible purpose of having the things.
The Democrats and Progressives who supported this bill (not a single Republican voted for it) are going to do their best to spin opposition as some sort of callous disregard for the lives of addicts and a turning of backs on the very real opioid overdose crisis our state is facing. Our biased capitol press corps will probably do the same. This is bull. Don’t fall for it.
Those who voted no on H.72 overwhelmingly demonstrated sympathy for those suffering from addiction, their families, and our communities at large. Many shared their own experiences with family members or friends. This is, however, a question of how best to invest $2 million in settlement money in order to have the most positive impact on helping people in crisis.
As one opponent of H.72 explained, “At this time, the state of Vermont does not have an adequate substance abuse continuum of care infrastructure required to support an overdose prevention consumption site. We need to make investments in prevention, education, recovery, and treatment. These are the evidence-based, trauma-informed practices that save lives and bring our loved ones home to us safe, stable, and healthy. For this reason, I will be voting no on H.72 and urge this body to do the same.” And, I’ll add, the benefit of not being a federal crime. This is rational, common sense, investment-oriented policy making.
To paraphrase Majority Whip Mike McCarthy’s (D-St. Albans) response to this argument, “Who cares? I want an Oompa Loompa NOWWWWW!”
Unfortunately, H.72 is yet another example of how the Democrats and Progressives who control our legislature govern from a philosophical foundation of rainbows and unicorn farts and the belief that if we all just clap hard enough and truly believe (and throw enough money), Tinkerbell will come back to life — when the real solution is to pick her up and get her to a hospital as fast as possible.
Here’s a link to the roll call vote if you want to see how your Rep(s) voted.
Rob Roper is a freelance writer with 20 years of experience in Vermont politics, including three years of service as chair of the Vermont Republican Party and nine years as President of the Ethan Allen Institute, Vermont’s free-market think tank. He is also a regular contributor to VermontGrok.
The post House Democrats Pass BYOD State Supported Drug Dens appeared first on Granite Grok.
Hello, Friends of Freedom!
Happy New Year to you all as we enter a season of unprecedented change in our great country! We have all heard the phrase, “This election of our Presidency will be the most important election of our lifetime.”
I never embraced that phrase completely, but with deep reflection on what has transpired in the last administration in this country, it is apparent that it may ring true for us and our nation’s future generations!
I want to continue my series on the Separation of Church and State, but I want to remind everyone reading this article that elections have consequences! And the consequences for our country have never been more dangerous than they are now. The rise of “wokeness” destroying our free speech rights in the name of tolerance, the open border, the imposing debt, and the involvement in corrupt regimes in other countries has us doing a balancing act that we cannot help but topple over soon unless we see real change. Not just change in an election but change in governance and laws that are destroying us now from within.
Let us pray and put legs to our prayers with action in the arena of voting and running for office. Let those who love our country serve her in public office—ok, enough said!
We left off with learning that the Founding Fathers were keenly aware of NOT creating a state-sanctioned church. However, they were not ever expecting the principles of faith not to be lived out in society and given preference for educational purposes.
We want to thank Pastor Allen Cook for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Steve@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.
To quote George Washington in his Farewell Address, “Of all dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, the firmest props of the duties of men and citizens? The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.”
Note that in this portion of the speech he associates patriotism with the embracing of religion and morality in public life and policy. His speech also warns Americans to reject the idea that morality could be preserved apart from religious teaching. Again, he says, “Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education, reason, and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” He understood that religious beliefs were the basis of morality, and that a secure and free government was hinged upon religion, he asked the question. Let it be simply asked, where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are instruments of investigation in courts and justice? The answer to this question of course, was if public institutions were separated from religious principles, people would no longer have a secure basis for their future as laid out in the Constitution.
Another great quote by a preeminent Founding Father was by John Adams in regard to the Constitution, where he states, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Noah Webster, a great educator and orator, bears the title of “Schoolmaster to America” and was a Founding Father as well. He was the first to call for a Constitutional Convention. He states in a textbook he authored for public schools, “All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery, and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.” It is clear in his mind there was no need to separate religious instruction from children in public schools.
Another well-known Founding Father was Fisher Ames. He was an advocate of sound education in America’s founding. He was observing the proliferation of children’s books for the purpose of teaching moral values, character, and knowledge. He did not oppose any of them but was quoted as saying, “Why then if these books for children must be retained as they will be, should not the Bible again be the place it once held as a school book?” He was concerned for the place of faith and values to be continued in the educational process of America’s youngest citizens.
So, of course, there are many other Fathers who shared their perspectives on religious places (specifically the Bible, in the culture at large. I share this week’s article to reiterate the importance of the role of religious knowledge and education in creating the kind of country our Founding Fathers had in mind. Next week, we will actually deal head-on with the phrase Separation of church and State. I will show you its direct origin and its original intention.
Have a great week!
Until Next Time…
Allen
The post Faith and the Founding; Not “Established,” But Essential appeared first on Granite Grok.