Hope everyone that celebrates it had a good Christmas!

Take heart – there will be a Friday Edition.  Last week’s Friday Edition.

Remember, ridicule and mockery are effective weapons:

1. Ridicule cannot easily be fought
2. Ridicule makes the enemy angry, and angry people make mistakes
3. For those in the “squishy middle” a Thought Splinter (and Part II and Part III and Part IV) can often be hidden inside humor.

 

Now, let the mockery and mayhem begin.

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

Assuming this is California, I see a full body cavity tax audit coming soon…

 

 

I am not a “religious fanatic” trying to keep women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.  But there is value in having a woman at home raising your children your way.

 

 

Related:

 

 

In about one year more had cardiac arrests and died than in the 50 years prior.  I wonder what changed…

 

 

 

 

Except, likely not true.

Claims of a pregnant Ken doll originated on satirical website | Reuters

Now, it wouldn’t surprise me if they wanted to do this.  But this just proves that we must vet information, especially information that we want to be true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If this is “genocide”… then the Israelis really suck at it.

 

 

HA HA HA HA HA HA!

 

 

 

 

Things Fall Apart… With A New Cartoon “Getting Ready for the Spicy” – Granite Grok

Things Fall Apart 2 – Granite Grok

IMHO, alas, it’s only a matter of time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But… but… but we’ve been assured by our intellectual and moral superiors that there is no war on white men.

 

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

 

PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA

 

 

Start paying attention to the ingredients label, folks.

Cochineal: What is it and where is it used? (drugs.com)

And my understanding of the kosher rules is that insects are a no-no.  I wonder if this stuff is kosher-certified… will look the next time I’m at the store.  If it is, and it has this extract, I’ll write the certifying agency.

 

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

 

 

 

So many quotes exist regarding the destruction of a people by destroying its memory and its monuments to its past.

 

 

A rising population of Muslims in Gaza… but calamitously-large falls in Jewish populations in Arab countries.  So, tell me, just who is “ethnically cleansing”?

 

 

Better put out a statement, stat, that she’s neither depressed nor suicidal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Give it up, GOP.  The Potato could have deep fried a living infant and then the still-hot body on video and the enemedia would give him a pass.

 

 

 

Excellent book:

No More Wacos: What’s Wrong With Federal Law Enforcement and How to Fix It

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

By definition, since the original strain was man-made, all of them are.  But this seems to indicate that each and every one – individually – was made.

Czech Microbiologist #SonaPekova has claimed that the #coronavirus strain which caused the 2nd and 3rd wave was artificially engineered.

Related:

COVID Vaccines Integrate Into Human DNA, Study Finds (vigilantnews.com)

Boy do I hate being right all the time.

 

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

 

 

 

 

Very subtle.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laughing in volcano…

 

 

 

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

 

Pick of the post:

 

 

There are people who, for legitimate reasons, don’t like Trump.  That’s fair.  But let’s not pile falsehoods on the guy.

 

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

 

Palate Cleansers:

 

—

—

 

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

 

Come back Friday for another edition.  Same Meme Time.  Same Meme channel.

Please do consider buying me a coffee.

Buy Me a Coffee

 

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

 

The post Monday Memes on Wednesday appeared first on Granite Grok.

First question: Why do we even have a Climate Council at this point? Why have we ever had one? All these twenty-three (twenty-two, really, because the corrupt Speaker of the House has refused for over a year to appoint a representative from the Fuel Dealers as required by law) unelected, self-important bloviators do is sit in a circle and spew “woke” jargon at one another for a few hours each month in pointless exercises of mental masturbation. At, I should point out, considerable taxpayer expense.

Just a reminder of what the Climate Council is supposed to do per the Global Warming Solutions Act: “On or before December 1, 2021, adopt the Vermont Climate Action Plan…. The Plan shall set forth the specific initiatives, programs, and strategies that the State shall pursue to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; achieve the State’s reduction requirements…[emphasis added].” They never actually did this.

The “Plan” they produced in December 2021 was not a list of specific recommendations or strategies that, if enacted, would achieve the state’s greenhouse gas reduction requirements. It was/is an a la carte menu of pretty much every climate-related boondoggle policy they could think of dropped into an Excel file with no cost analysis, timeline for implementation of programs, etc. Not a plan. It’s like if you hired a team of nutritionists to create a diet for you that would specifically help you lose twenty pounds and lower your cholesterol and your blood sugar levels by the end of the year, and they delivered you a copy of the Joy of Cooking. They are unwilling and/or incapable of making a decision.

This gets us to the latest farcical chapter in this bureaucratic clown car’s history.

The “Plan” delivered in 2021, for all its 200-plus pages, did not include any viable option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. A rather big omission, given that cars and trucks, are the source of about one-third of all greenhouse gas emissions in the state. The Council blames the official implosion of the Transportation Climate Initiative in November 2021 for their failure, but anybody with eyes attached to a functioning brain could have told them that TCI was never a truly viable plan. (See my own op-ed from January 2020, nearly two years before the Climate Action Plan was published, heralding the inevitable death of TCI, With TCI Imploding, a Worse Bill Is on the Horizon).

Nevertheless, since December 2021, the Climate Council has had another two full years to come up with an alternative to TCI. And for two full years they had come up with zip, zero, nada recommendations. Lots of jabber. Endless clips of Liz Miller rolling her eyes and lamenting the evaporation of TCI, but no plan. So, big decision, they created a Transportation Task Force to finally tackle the issue, and that task force recently released its long-awaited decision. Drumroll, please … Blast of trumpets…

…. The Transportation Task Force of the Vermont Climate Council’s recommendation regarding a policy plan to replace TCI for the transportation sector of the Climate Action Plan is… to hire an independent consulting firm to come up with a recommendation to replace TCI for the transportation sector of the Climate Action Plan.

Seriously, you can’t make this stuff up. But you will, taxpayers, have to pay for it.

This gets back to my original question. Why does this useless committee, the government equivalent of an inflamed appendix, exist? If we’re going to hire an independent consultant to make the recommendations the Council is paid to make, why can’t the Agency of Natural Resources just do that? Or one of the legislative committees of jurisdiction? Maybe, lawmakers, it’s time — past time — to scrap the Climate Council.

Better yet, just scrap the whole Global Warming Solutions Act because Vermonters don’t want and can’t afford ANY plan to levy a carbon tax on gasoline and diesel fuels anyway, which is what any recommendation in this area comes down to.

In fact, what the Climate Council specifically wants this independent consultant to do is look at whether or not Vermont should join New York Cap & Invest, a program that does not yet exist and is probably about as viable as TCI or The Western Climate Initiative, a non-profit organization that handles the logistics of auctioning off “carbon credits” (aka carbon taxes) for the states of California and Washington as well as a couple of Canadian provinces. It is essentially a West Coast TCI. And, like TCI, most of the original “observer” states willing to consider the concept ultimately declined to participate. The difference being that California, unlike Massachusetts, was big enough to go it alone.

And here’s what Vermonters should be concerned about regarding potential participation in WCI. According to AAA, the state with the most expensive gasoline in the country is Hawaii because it is way out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. The next two most expensive states after that? California and Washington. The two WCI states. By a lot. California’s average gas price today is $4.60 a gallon. Compared to its neighboring states, that’s 69 cents higher than Nevada, 75 cents higher than Oregon, $1.41 higher than Arizona, and $1.52 above the national average. Do Vermonters really want to sign up for that?

If the recent Campaign for Vermont poll is remotely accurate, the answer is not just no, but HELL NO! 71 percent of Vermonters oppose any carbon tax/fee/surcharge on gasoline and diesel, and 59 percent strongly oppose it. So, lawmakers, how about you listen to your constituents for a change? Save the taxpayers several hundred thousand dollars and forget about paying extra to study a policy nobody wants, save several million dollars by scrapping the Vermont Climate Council that doesn’t do anything, and save us hundreds of millions by abandoning any thoughts of putting a carbon tax on our motor fuels that we can’t afford.

Just a suggestion.

 

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 Climate Council Can’t Decide Which Tax It Likes Best appeared first on Granite Grok.

On the 2020 Presidential campaign trail – what of it there was – Joe Biden promised to end fossil fuels. True to form, Whoever is Running the Biden Administration has – since day one – acted toward that end. Joe’s administration has been US history’s most hostile to affordable energy.

COP28, which ended a few weeks ago, was focused on getting other nations to join them in this madness. Led by John “Lurch” Kerry, the private-jet-setting US Ambassador to mass delusion, America got promises from many but then did this.

 

Barely a week after its representatives committed the United States to a COP28 agreement pledging to “transition away” from fossil fuels – oil, natural gas and coal – the Biden government held its first significant auction of offshore leases in the Gulf of Mexico Wednesday. It was not just any old lease sale, mind you, but the most massive one since 2015 with more than 72 million acres up for lease.

 

That sounds hypocritical, and I Was quick to judge, but not so fast.” Without Congressional intervention, this is the final lease sale until at least 2025.” There are no more plans for this presidency. The next president will decide the question moving forward, and if that president is a Democrat, the keep-it-in-the-ground coalition will likely get its way.

We can’t afford that.

Energy prices are unstable, and while motor fuel has dipped a bit in price, it is significantly more expensive than when Obiden was anointed. Nikki, Ron, or Donald would open up our mineral deposits on Day One for different reasons. DeSantis and Trump to unshackle the economy and take price pressure off everyday Americans, Nikki ‘cuz her war machine buddies need it, though, regardless of who is the CIC, the US Military will need fossil fuels to do anything.

So does most of America.

Public transportation, infrastructure, buildings, roads – heck, you can’t even make any of the garbage labeled “green energy” without coal, gas, and oil. There is no future without it, but here we are. They are promising to end our existence as a functioning modern economy to feed the lie of climate socialism.

Name one socialist nation that isn’t burning everything in sight to fuel itself. They are all major “global” polluters alongside every other second or third-world tyrant and despot.

If you give them what they want, the ruling class led by Democrats, or you let them take it without any resistance, that regime will inevitably remove every protection except those that keep them in power.

 

 

The post Biden Admin Follows COP28 Promise to End Fossil Fuels With Massive Oil/Gas Lease Sale appeared first on Granite Grok.

The “insurrectionist” clause of the 14th Amendment says, “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” Enacted after the Civil War, and ratified by the states in 1868, Congress wanted to prevent officeholders who joined the Confederacy from holding office.

Four of the seven Democrat-appointed Colorado Supreme Court justices ruled this clause prevents former President Donald Trump from appearing on that state’s primary ballot. The Michigan Court of Appeals rejected this argument, and the Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed a similar lawsuit. But several more states have pending lawsuits based on the insurrection clause. (RELATED: ALAN DERSHOWITZ: The Ridiculous Colorado Ruling To Keep Trump Off The Ballot Will Create Disarray In US Electoral System)

Despite Democrats having appointed all seven Colorado Supreme justices, three dissented. Trump vowed to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, where six of three justices were Republican nominees. It is practically a foregone conclusion that the Colorado case will be overturned, and the Supreme Court’s ruling could even be unanimous. Also, note that while Trump faces three federal conspiracy counts and one count of obstructing an official proceeding, the special counsel DID NOT charge the former president with “insurrection.”

In its 200-page majority decision, the Colorado Supreme Court said that on Jan. 6 Trump told supporters to “walk down to the Capitol” and “fight like hell” and “take back our country.” Not mentioned is that Trump also said, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the capital building to peacefully and patriotically. Make your voices heard.”

The Colorado Court found “substantial evidence” the Trump was “laying the groundwork for a claim that the election was rigged” before the November 2020 election and before the Jan. 6 riot. But does not Trump, or for that matter, any politician have a First Amendment right to complain, however unjustifiably, about the integrity of an election?

Hillary Clinton frequently called the 2016 election “stolen” and President Trump “illegitimate.” Never mind that former President Barack Obama’s Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson testified that there was no evidence that the Russians succeeded in changing a single vote tally. As to the effect of the Russian interference, Johnson said there was no way of knowing whether it affected public opinion or altered the election. But Democrats believe otherwise. A 2018 YouGov poll found that 66% of Democrats believe the Russians, to elect Trump, changed vote tallies. A 2018 Gallup poll found that 78% of Democrats believe the Russian interference “changed the outcome of the election.” But the media do not call Democrats “election deniers.” (RELATED: LARRY ELDER: The Feminist Movement Is Nowhere To Be Found After Hamas Brutalizes Jewish Women)

About the 2020 presidential election, a Quinnipiac University poll found that “seventy-six percent” of Republicans believed there was “widespread voter fraud.” Republicans, although slightly less likely to call 2020 stolen than Democrats about 2016, are, of course, “election deniers.”

Finally, the anti-Trump media accuses Trump of peddling “the Big Lie” about 2020 voter fraud, irregularities or illegality. After all, there is supposedly no evidence to justify the assertions. John Eastman, a former Trump lawyer who argued that state legislatures and Vice President Mike Pence possess the legal authority to reject certification, now faces disbarment. The California Bar Association asked this once respected and courtly former dean and law professor at Chapman University School of Law for evidence about 2020 election-altering widespread fraud. Eastman turned in over 80,000 pages of documents. In an hourlong speech available for viewing on Rumble, Eastman spoke in detail about just some of what he considered substantial election irregularities. It’s called “Taking a Stand Against a Weaponized Justice System.” I urge the most ardent believer in the “Trump promoted baseless conspiracy theories” narrative to watch the speech. Be prepared for discomfort.

Larry Elder is a bestselling author and nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. To find out more about Larry Elder, or become an “Elderado,” visit www.LarryElder.com. Follow Larry on Twitter @larryelder. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

 

Larry Elder | Daily Caller

COPYRIGHT 2023 LAURENCE A. ELDER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

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

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

The post If Donald Trump Is An ‘Insurrectionist’ For Criticizing An Election, What Does That Make Hillary? appeared first on Granite Grok.

The People’s Republic of Vermont banned fluorescent light bulbs. Not all, but the most common and practical home and office use varies. That is bad news for Vermonters but good news, maybe great news, for New Hampshire retailers.

 

Starting January 1, a new state law will prohibit the sale of specific mercury-containing fluorescent lightbulbs in Vermont, the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation said.

Restrictions include the sale of general purpose, indoor/outdoor, residential, and business mercury-containing four-foot linear, compact fluorescent, and twist-based fluorescent lightbulbs. Twist-based (GU-24) Compact Fluorescent Lightbulbs (CFLs) are also restricted from sale.

If your home or business currently uses these fluorescent bulbs, you will not be able to buy more after January 1. If your business sells these bulbs online or in a store, you will not be able to do so next year.

 

Vermont is correct about a few things. Many states have moved away from the Mercury bulbs, as have manufacturers. Alternatives are available that use less electricity and they are becoming more affordable. There are even 4 ft tube style LED bulbs to replace the old versions and this particular prohibition focuses on the standard 4-foot tubes you find in homes, warehouses, workshops, offices, and other professional workspaces.

 

Fluorescent lamps. Beginning on January 1, 2024, no four-foot linear fluorescent lamp may be offered for final sale, sold at final sale, or distributed in Vermont as a new manufactured product.

 

The old standard is not illegal to own or use. You simply cannot sell them in Vermont or transport them into the state for sale after the first of the year. And since the LED equivalents are still a lot more expensive, you can buy the banned versions in New Hampshire and drive them back to your home or workspace.

And to be clear, I am not suggesting you ignore any other requirements of handling. It is less of a hardship to make the time to recycle them properly than to drive over the border to buy them, so do that. But feel free to buy them in New Hampshire, and while you are here, get some beer, liquor, cigarettes, gas, fireworks, or anything else you might want to buy that is cheaper or can be purchased without paying any sales tax.

We won’t stop you doing that, either.

 

 

The post Night Cap: NH Border Stores Should Stock Up on Fluorescent Light Bulbs – Vermont Ban Begins Jan 1 appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Colorado Supreme Court, acting as supplicants for the enemies of Donald Trump seeking the most extreme remedy for driving the former president into the ditch, may have just unwittingly gifted the former president a Rocky Mountain high – in the polls.

This time, four left-wing Colorado justices attempting to kneecap Trump were not even going to wait on due process – the very foundation of law – to effectively declare Trump guilty of insurrection, a crime for which he has not, repeat not, even been charged. After believing their attempts to wipe Trump off the ballot would be a knockout punch, it is the left that is about to get walloped to the canvas with a right hook.

But how, you say, is this good news for Trump? Let us count the ways. First, we know that every time he has been targeted and indicted based on novel legal theories never before applied, his popularity has only increased. Second, this decision provides him with yet more valuable and indisputable evidence – perhaps the best yet – supporting his claim of persecution by the establishment left. He can enjoy that benefit without the liability of actually being banned from the ballot once the U.S. Supreme Court likely shoots down the Colorado ruling, thus bringing similar efforts in other states to a halt.

But there’s more. Third on the list of how the left is hurting its own cause with its lawfare crusade against Trump is its whole argument that Trump threatens “democracy” as never before. That assertion hardly stands up when it boots Trump off the ballot: “This is hands-down the most anti-democratic opinion I have seen in my lifetime,” said famed constitutional attorney Jonathan Turley.

A subset of democracy is reason number four: election interference. Even after its constitutionally dubious changes to election law on the fly in key swing states in 2020 that undoubtedly handed the election to Joe Biden, the left has crowed from the rooftops that Trump is an election denier intent on interfering with the electoral process. Now that they are trying to remove him from the ballot, what are they going to say? This is textbook election interference, though of a kind rarely, if ever, witnessed before.

Fifth, even Trump’s primary opponents – Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Ron DeSantis – have again had little choice but to jump to the defense of their rival despite his overwhelming lead, further strengthening Trump’s candidacy and all but ending the Republican presidential primary, if it wasn’t over already.

Leftists constantly indicting Trump have actually gotten the reaction they envisioned: forcing the GOP to support Trump. The idea was that Biden would then sail to another term against a convicted criminal sure to repel the American electorate in the end. The strategy has turned into the most classic backfire we have witnessed in some time.

The Persecution of Donald Trump

For starters, Democrats led by Hillary Clinton concocted a phony scandal to drive Trump out of the 2016 presidential race and then out of the Oval Office for treason. Then they impeached him. Then they impeached him again. Then, they raided his home. Then they indicted him. Then they indicted him again, and again, and again. Now, in a widespread effort to make sure no one will even have the opportunity to vote for him, Colorado is just one of more than a dozen states joining the effort to disqualify Trump. The first five states attempting to remove Trump were shot down in court. But cases in 13 more states remain to be litigated, and they will certainly be influenced by the Colorado ruling and any subsequent decision by the high court. But the Rocky Mountain State will stand in infamy as the first to pull the legal trigger on the most extreme measure available to generate a desired outcome, knowing if it succeeds, it will be open season on Trump throughout the country.

Democrats’ obsession with Trump has featured one overarching theme: They cannot leave well enough alone. Until they started throwing the book at Trump with one untested stretch of legal theory after another, their man Biden was running ahead of Trump. But with each successive indictment, Trump has risen further to the point of now holding a solid, if not commanding, three-point lead according to the RealClearPolitics Average. Who knows where polling would stand if the left had actually allowed the voters to process Jan. 6 for themselves? That infamous day takes on a fresh context with the removal of Trump from the ballot. Overkill?

At the same time, you must give the nihilistic Swampocracy in Washington credit for persistence and ingenuity, if nothing else. It has seemingly done everything that popped into its deranged mind to be sure, dead certain, guaranteed, that Trump will never again become president. How infuriating it must be to see every one of its attempts backfire. Rest assured, Colorado will be the latest. We can’t afford to take a chance on the voters’ judgment, screams the terrified left. Does this not sound like the plan cooked up in 2016 to make sure Trump would never be elected in the first place?

Rocky Mountain Low: Colorado Justice

The decision in this purple-turned-blue state begs many obvious questions for everyone from political junkies to disinterested voters. The Jan. 6 rally-turned-protest-turned-riot falls so far short of an act of insurrection as to make a mockery of the term. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, cited in the Colorado decision, was ratified for one purpose: to prevent Confederate soldiers from seeking national office following the Civil War. An insurrection requires an organized plan to overthrow the government – which did not exist on that dark January day in 2021. If there is not enough evidence to even indict Trump for insurrection, then how can he possibly be removed from a presidential ballot on that basis?

Like virtually every one of the 91 charges pinned on him in four venues, this is the first time a court has ever ruled on the basis of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. It is not dissimilar to the argument about another section of the 14th Amendment regarding so-called birthright citizenship: It was written and intended for the distinct purpose of making slaves citizens but is now employed successfully by immigration activists to confer upon anyone born even an inch inside our border permanent citizenship, even if they entered the country and remain here illegally.

Though it would appear highly unlikely, think what it would mean if the U.S. Supreme Court either refuses to act or affirms the Colorado ruling. Not only would many other states with similar lawfare suits trying to get Trump wiped off the ballot be emboldened, but it also opens wide the door for any reason – or no reason – to remove any candidate from a ballot going forward based on the personal opinions of judges. This from a party that has been screaming about democracy dying in the darkness of Trump.

Do we not base our republic first and foremost on the ability of voters – not courts – to cast their ballots for the person they choose? Despite no such constitutional provision, there could perhaps be a quasi-legitimate argument that a convicted felon should be removed from the presidential ballot, but to do so before justice has been served and due process granted tells you everything you need to know about those willing to go to the ends of the earth to stop the man now favored to become the next president. It is stuff not of a constitutional republic but a banana republic. The left’s failure to recognize all the flashing red lights they have set off with their single-minded persecution of Donald Trump will, one expects, come back to haunt them in the end.

 

Tim Donner is senior political analyst at LibertyNation.com. He is a former candidate for the U.S. Senate, entrepreneur, and founder of the nonprofit One Generation Away.

 

Tim Donner | RealClear Wire

The post Why Trump Should Love the Colorado Ruling appeared first on Granite Grok.

Al Gore famously launched the climate-carbon crisis campaign with his alarmist proclamations of “inconvenient truths” about human warming of the planet. His repeated gaffes have since undermined his credibility, making “the boy who cried climate wolf” howl ever louder.

Most recently, against the latest global climate summit.  Gore says COP28, which ended this week, was “on the verge of complete failure” because of conflicts of interest of “petrostates” that have not agreed to ban all fossil fuels. But other conflicts go unmentioned.

Climate-Binary Gore

Gore employed divisive “us versus them” language to coerce adherence to his demands, portraying all people as either saviors or enemies:

“There are 24 hours left to show whose side the world is on: the side that wants to protect humanity’s future by kickstarting the orderly phase out of fossil fuels or the side of the petrostates and the leaders of the oil and gas companies that are fueling the historic climate catastrophe. In order to prevent COP28 from being the most embarrassing and dismal failure in 28 years of international climate negotiations, the final text must include clear language on phasing out fossil fuels. Anything else is a massive step backwards from where the world needs to be.”

This sounds more like a unilateral demand by an un-elected ideologue than a reasoned appeal. For Gore, this “sky is falling” heated rhetoric is old wine in new bottles. He claimed in 2009 that there was a 75% chance that Arctic ice would be gone within five to seven years, which Politico fact-checked to conclude that Gore “misrepresented the details of the research.”  In his 2006 documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” he claimed global sea levels could rise 20 feet “in the near future”: Sea levels rose less than four inches between 1993 and 2021 (it would take an estimated 1,136 years at that rate to rise 20 feet). The former vice president also seems to have conveniently forgotten his 2006 assertion that unless “drastic measures” were implemented by 2016, there would be “no solving” climate change.

It is not surprising to see un-elected officials elbowing one another for the exalted position of world climate czar, but Gore’s bluster against a climate summit in the oil-producing Arabian desert raises some critical points for consideration – though perhaps not as he intends. One of Gore’s more challenging declarations was directed explicitly at UAE Sultan Ahmed al Jaber:

“[H]e’s charged by his sovereign … and the company that he heads, with a massive expansion of fossil fuels. They have got a plan to expand production of both oil and gas by an enormous amount, starting the minute the gavel bangs to end this conference.

“And that’s a direct conflict of interest. And it’s not a nitpicking thing to point that out. The people of our world deserve to have some confidence that this process has integrity. And we have been seeing the fossil fuel polluters try to manipulate this process for a long time, and the world’s running out of patience, because this is so serious now.”

Gore unintentionally raises two very important questions for the people of the world he claims to represent: conflicts of interest with China and with renewable energy manufacturers.

China and the UAE

The charge leveled by Gore against an oil magnate sultan invites a tangential question about China. How is the “world” looking to this summit to transform the climate when signatory China constructs hundreds of coal-fired power plants and manufactures the bulk of the world’s materials for solar panels and EV cars? Demanding commitments to eliminate all fossil fuels is folly when those fuels are necessary to construct the climate rescue mission. If “petrostates” are to be vilified for pumping the oil used to manufacture EVs, solar panels, and a bevy of US-consumed products, isn’t China a presumed offender for its use of coal?

It could be that, in the interests of at least feigning a democratic process, the globalist organizers of COP28 deemed it wise to include oil-producing and coal-burning nations (without whose cooperation all hope is lost) at the table. Persuading these nations to commit their resources to combat climate change necessarily involves both their consent and their resources.

Renewable Energy Pollution

Gore raises another conflict of interest that quite rightly should be addressed: Renewable energy manufacturers and food conglomerates have “tried to manipulate this process for a long time,” swaying governments to pour astronomical sums into technologies that pollute the planet every bit as much as those “conflicted” oil magnates. Burning Chinese coal to make silicon for solar arrays and smelt aluminum for EVs, the monied interests that once controlled the oil industry are now “stakeholders” in the renewable energy manufacturing gold rush.

Gore merits credit for challenging the odd bedfellows of UAE oil interests and global climate warriors. More integrity would be displayed by challenging the odd connection of Chinese coal plants to silicon production or solar panel (and EV) manufacturers to the low-income taxpayers who finance their production. These are inconvenient truths to self-anointed town criers like Gore.

 

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

The post Hypocrisy and Conflicts of Interest Flowed Freely … appeared first on Granite Grok.

A proposed national minimum wage hike to $17 per hour by 2029 would come at an estimated cost of 700,000 American jobs, according to the nation’s Congressional Budget Office.

The bill is S.2488 – Raise the Wage Act of 2023. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is the listed sponsor. It has been introduced, but it hasn’t been passed by either chamber of Congress yet.

Sanders was on social media on Monday railing against the wealthy elite.

“Corporate greed is Mark Zuckerberg becoming $3.4 billion richer TODAY while building a $100 million mansion in Hawaii with 30 bathrooms and an underground bunker. Meanwhile, a record-breaking 653,000 Americans are homeless & over 60% of our workers live paycheck to paycheck,” he wrote on X.

Some stats in the report support Sanders’ effort. This includes that an estimated 8.9 million workers with wages under $17 per hour could be affected. It is estimated that 400,000 could be lifted out of poverty by such increases.

The full report can be read here.

The report also notes that anytime wages are raised, the cost of the goods or services will rise accordingly.

“Higher prices for goods and services—stemming from the higher wages of workers who are paid at or near the minimum wage (such as workers who provide long-term health care)—would contribute to increases in federal spending.”

Another part of the report states more about how much would be gained in wages versus lost in jobs.

It states, “Those gains in earnings would be larger than the aggregate earnings losses from higher rates of joblessness. Thus, the income of families with low-wage workers would increase, on average, and the number of families below the FPL [Federal Poverty Level] would decrease. Higher-income families would experience a decline in purchasing power because prices for goods and services would increase.”

It continues that there will be other economic impacts. For example, with 700,000 new unemployed that means the cost of unemployment benefits will go up. The report also suggests that the of programs like food stamps will go down.

“The largest spending increases would be for the government’s major health care programs and unemployment compensation; the largest revenue decreases would be from income taxes,” the report states.

Sanders doesn’t like tipping?

Another component of the bill would be to do away with tipping. The report addresses this aspect as well.

“It would boost the earnings of most of those workers through higher wages but also reduce the earnings of some through higher rates of joblessness. Part of the increase in earnings through higher wages would be offset by lower income from tips,” it states.

Interest rates would go up

Another assessment from the report is that interest rates go up.

“In CBO’s assessment, the Raise the Wage Act of 2023 would cause interest rates to be slightly higher than they otherwise would have been over the 2024–2033 period. The Federal Reserve would adjust short-term interest rates to counteract the increase in overall demand and inflation stemming from the rising minimum wage.”

Been tried before

Over the years mandates in other states to aggressively bump up minimum wage have shown that the net impacts are sometimes unfavorable to the very people it is intended to help.

TrueNorthReports noted one such study that took place in Seattle.

“A 2017 study of Seattle’s wage increase by the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded that ‘the second wage increase to $13 reduced hours worked in low-wage jobs by around 9 percent, while hourly wages in such jobs increased by around 3 percent.’”

 

 

Michael Bielawski | Vermont Daily Chronicle

The post Sanders’ Minimum Wage Law Would Cost 700,000 Jobs appeared first on Granite Grok.

Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) recently announced it would no longer include New Hampshire House Rep. Travis O’Hara as part of its Hazlitt Coalition of Liberty Legislators.

For those not in the know,

The Hazlitt Coalition is a growing network of 300+ liberty legislators from nearly 40 states supported by full-time YAL staff advocating for principled policies that free markets, protect civil liberties, and promote peace. Our experienced mentors train legislators to effectively work with stakeholders and constituents to craft the strongest policies that solve society’s most pressing problems.

O’Hara has been dumped, but why? [Forwarded from a reader. The original email from Matthew Soss is dated Dec 21st.]

 

I am writing to inform you that we removed Representative Travis O’Hara from YAL’s Hazlitt Coalition of liberty legislators.

O’Hara was removed due to consistently poor voting record, missing key votes, and consistently poor New Hampshire Liberty Alliance ratings.

As a reminder, I’m here as a resource for you to help you work through tough votes and to get you in touch with experts who can assist so certainly don’t hesitate to reach out with questions and concerns.

Thank you to each of you for your continued dedication to the cause and to the coalition.

I’m excited to see the progress made over the past few months with candidate surveys, legislative preparation, fundraising, events, and much more.

I look forward to seeing what we can accomplish together in 2024!

 

I looked at Travis’ ratings. Liberty and HRA. They are not terrible, but his attendance could be better, and he likely missed several critical votes. To put that into context, the Republican majority is razor-thin. Every vote seems vital, but some more than others. The HRA scorecard only tracks votes on bills fundamental to the Republican platform or agenda. Travis missed 42% of those.

Rep. Travis O’Hara was also endorsed and supported by the progressive Citizens for Belknap (if I recall), which would naturally oppose any key Republican priorities. Show up and vote the “right” way enough to keep a respectable rating, but no-show on these other bills. I can see someone having that conversation.

It might have happened like that. Or, perhaps, O’Hara simply isn’t the candidate his citizens need to do what you elect a Republican representative to do. Show up. Vote for fewer and lower taxes. Keep the bureaucrats jackboots off their necks. Advance liberty.

YAL has had enough. Will voters kick Travis to the curb in November, or is this rejection by YAL a meaningless gesture?

Is Travis proud to have been excommunicated form their ranks?

 

The post Young American’s for Liberty Dumps Rep. Travis O’Hara from Its Hazlitt Coalition appeared first on Granite Grok.

Claudine Gay was celebrated as the first black woman president of Harvard. She is not the first black woman to have reached the giddy heights of leadership in the US however. Before she came along there were several notable ambitious and brilliant black women: Condoleezza Rice, Jennifer Rubin, Shirley Chisholm to name a few.

Claudine Gay has had a privileged education — the accusations of plagiarism raise the awkward question — what are the morals of a privileged education? She graduated from private prep school Phillips Exeter Academy in New Hampshire — the same school that Mark Zuckerberg once attended. He later went on to hack into Harvard’s computer system to steal photos of female students to line up alongside each other to judge who was “hot” and who was not for FaceMash, the precursor to Facebook.

President Obama (a Harvard graduate himself) became the “Facebook” president. His administration focused on college & high school students and how to manipulate them using social media and grants from the Department of Justice for movements that could be used for groupthink and activism for politics.

NH Senator Maggie Hassan’s husband, Tom Hassan, was principal of Phillips Exeter Academy when it was investigated for cover-ups of sexual assault in the middle of the Obama administration’s campus rape survivor “It’s On Us” recruitment frenzy. The NH Attorney General (who owed his position to then-Governor Maggie Hassan) declined to prosecute. Had he charged administrators at the school, one wonders if Maggie Hassan would have ever made it into the Senate at all? Her champions, who were also pushing the campus rape survivor narrative, Senator Jeanne Shaheen & Congresswoman Ann Kuster, were silent about the Hassans and the Exeter scandal.

Meanwhile, they were busy collecting federal grants for New Hampshire from the Department of Justice Office of Violence Against Women and promoting a privileged student (Chessy Prout) from St. Paul’s School as a “survivor” of “rape” by the son of “working class” parents (Owen Labrie). Labrie, by contrast, was a student on full scholarship who should have gone to Harvard (on a full scholarship) but was denied that privilege as a result of a political show trial from which New Hampshire and his recruited accuser made millions using his face as the image they wanted to portray white male privilege.

Defense attorneys asked Chessy Prout under cross-examination where she’d acquired the language she used for her “under oath” testimony. At one point, she admitted, “I try not to lie too much.” Government Affairs PR “expert” Daniel Hill of hillimpact.com came on board to promote her as a “survivor,” complete with contracts for ads with Target (of course). Wouldn’t want a movement without an opportunity to turn it into a multi-billion dollar retail industry, would they? Dan Hill preached the power of feminism at the World Economic Forum in Davos while advertising for unpaid interns.

Claudine Gay was a professor at Stanford University whose most recent President, Marc Tessier-Lavigne, resigned after a first-year student documented his use of falsified imagery in scientific research papers.

It is believed by some that the board of trustees for Stanford knew about the problems with Tessier-Lavigne’s research when he was hired as president. Was it the fact that he was from Pfizer that this was overlooked?

Liz Magill, who resigned as President of UPenn after her testimony in front of Congress a few weeks ago, was Dean of Stanford Law School before taking up her position as President of UPenn. Under her were Barbara Fried, Joseph Bankman, Pamela Karlan, and Michele Dauber, among others. All of these have had serious ethical violations exposed in the last couple of years.

Michele Dauber was behind the framing of 19-year-old Brock Turner and the interference with his sexual assault trial and sentencing to cause the recall of Judge Aaron Persky. A commemorative bench was put up on the site where his alleged digital penetration of 22-year-old Chanel Miller (a friend of Michele Dauber’s) took place. It included a quote from the celebrated “Emily Doe” victim impact statement, which NH Congresswoman Ann Kuster, ACLU Ambassador Amber Heard, and others read to audiences on Capital Hill and at awards shows in 2016. There’s just one slight issue — the Emily Doe quote on the bench at Stanford was very likely not written by Chanel Miller but by Michele Dauber herself or an activist working with her. Dauber had discovered — according to one of her public statements — that the issue of domestic & sexual violence brought women out to vote “in droves.” She was a Dem Caucus rep raising money for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election and the midterms in 2018. The issue of potential plagiarism seems to have been dismissed by Stanford.

Ironically, integrity in research is also dismissed by Rebecca Richman Cohen, a Harvard lecturer who made the documentary “Recall Reframed” about the recall of Judge Persky in the wake of the Brock Turner trial. Cohen’s research for her documentary wouldn’t even qualify as minimal— a cursory Google search proves that statements made by interviewees in her film contradict their own original statements in previous media records.

When I questioned Rebecca Richman Cohen in a Q&A following an online screening of “Recall Reframed” it was clear that not only had she not done her research but that the film itself was an attempt to gloss over a gross abuse of the criminal justice system by a Stanford law professor who used the trial for Democratic party political advancement. Cohen tried to claim that Professor Dauber was not a “carceral feminist” contradicting Dauber’s own statements about managing to get California minimum sentencing increased for the Democratic party. Cohen apparently didn’t even look at her own University’s Law Review on the subject. So what value is Ms. Cohen as an expert on anything to any student at Harvard?

Feminist Scripts for Punishment

President Obama allegedly lobbied for Claudine Gay to be Harvard’s president. Penny Pritzker is in the spotlight for heading the Harvard Corporation’s decision to hire attorneys to threaten the New York post with a defamation suit before any research had been done to verify or refute the Post’s claims.

Claudine Gay is “Teflon” just like Michele Dauber at Stanford Law School. Obama’s “czar” in the Department of Justice Office of Violence Against Women, Lynn Rosenthal, did say in 2014 (at the Dartmouth College Sexual Assault Summit) that the administration focused on campuses in order to influence generations to come and she worked closely with Russlynn Ali, Dauber’s friend in the Department of Education. Russlynn Ali now works at XQ Institute which advertises “DEI” and “Reimagining Education”. Page 79 of 838 pages in a FOIA email dump obtained by K.C. Johnson (after he had to sue the DoE to get it) reads:

“Finally, you asked for a contact to work with you over the next couple of weeks to assist the State Department in the government’s efforts to support the Muslim community.”

The email is dated November 2nd, 2010 and was sent by a Sunil Mansukhani to a redacted name with a cc to Russlynn Ali, Richardo Soto and Lilian Dorka all with Government email addresses.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/were-making-the-same-title-ix-mistakes-again

Supporting the Muslim community but no other communities? Why did the Obama administration’s Department of Education ignore Title VI designed to prevent discrimination or promotion of one race or religion over another?

DEI might have worked as a calling card for Claudine Gay to fail her way upwards using other people’s work as a crutch to get her into the ivory towers of Stanford and Harvard. But if she plagiarized in her 1997 dissertation and it was approved by the examiners then it begs the question as to what really is the moral value of an “elite” education.

Shamus Khan, a professor at Columbia University, has made himself into an expert on “privilege”. He wrote a whole book on it: “Privilege- the making of an adolescent elite at St Paul’s School”. One of the comments from a buyer by the name of “Chekov is not Czech” on the Amazon page reads:

1.0 out of 5 stars Khan’s book is a single sentence of Bourdieu’s Distinction (i.e., n o t an original insight)

“What very few readers/researchers/Americans see when reading Khan’s book is that Khan has taken his theme/thesis/hypothesis/argument entirely out of Pierre Bourdieu’s famous work, Distinction (Harvard, 1984). Read Distinction, and then read Privilege as a nice “interview” of what Bourdieu is the master of (in fact, Bourdieu himself has many such “interviews” in Distinction, but simply a few pages long, not an entire book to be purchased. You could easily and simply read the book reviews that Khan has posted on his wordpress website (connected to his profession as Sociologist at Columbia U) to ‘understand’ the book, in conjunction with page 311 of Bourdieu’s Distinction (copied below). Bourdieu would have been very impressed by Khan’s posting the reviews of Privilege, from political left to political right (it’s truly admirable), for Bourdieu would have seen the social structure via the reviews, just as Bourdieu himself gives us a glimpse of in Distinction. However, hands down, and I would hope Khan would admit this readily: Bourdieu is the master; Khan is just a follower, an acolyte of sorts. Privilege, perhaps if it wasn’t the work of a 26 year old, might have been much better if it had just focused on Khan’s main theme, that is, meritocracy and its euphemized, misrecognizable American form (and function) in today’s America. Instead, he brought to bear all his unbearable U of Wisconsin gender and race seminar junk.”

Would Shamus Khan receive the millions of dollars in grants for his research papers if he hadn’t attended St. Paul’s School, had his book not been published by the Princeton University Press nor he ended up with a job at another of the Ivies, Columbia University? Unlikely. The US Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, treats him as some kind of guru in the campus sexual assault, privilege and DEI space. He has spent his life in academia not in the real world where the 99% don’t have the time or resources to pontificate on any of his ideological and flawed research.

American Prep Schools, Ivy Leagues, Stanford, MIT are among the most expensive educational institutions in the world. What exactly does a student get for their financial investment? Certainly not a moral compass nor accreditation in original & critical thought.

Activism-led education is an extortion racket and a disaster. When the cracks in the campus “survivor” & #MeToo movements started to show, these activist academics flocked to Critical Race Theory. When these didn’t work and the quacks Ibram X Kendi (what was wrong with Ibram Henry Rogers?) and Robin Diangelo (“White Fragility”) could no longer profiteer from their shams, DEI replaced CRT.

Shiny DEI office plaques were put up on campuses throughout the nation advertising their new quackery. More administrators were hired who were so adept at their jobs that they used AI to write support letters for students in shock after campus shootings in Michigan. One wasted a visiting 5th Circuit judge’s time with an “Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze?” diatribe about which Liz MaGill’s replacement as Dean at Stanford Law (Jenny Martinez) wrote an absurdly long apology. “Sorry” is too simple and too lowly for “academics”. “Ethics” would put them all out of a job and rightfully so. It would save students a ton in fees to cover administrative bloat too.

These academic institutions are the recruitment centers for Big Government, Big Tech, Big Law, Multi-national corporations — some of which have paid out between tens and hundreds of millions for unethical practices and violations of US federal laws: Enron, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan come to mind. Cheating — whether it is for the the Enron Scandal, 1MDB scandal or for Jeffrey Epstein belongs to those who graduate from the nation’s so-called finest. Jeffrey Skilling who went to prison in the Enron Scandal is a graduate of Harvard Business School. Jamie Dimon lied about his knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein. He is also an alum of Harvard. Gary Gensler of the SEC has been keeping a low profile since his relationship with Sam Bankman-Fried received scrutiny. He is a graduate of UPenn. Joseph Bankman, a tax law professor at and graduate of Stanford Law School, “recruited” Daniel Friedberg of Ultimate Bet online Poker Ponzi scheme for Alameda Research. It is only when they get caught that they profess to have made unwitting mistakes. What is taught at the nation’s top high schools, law schools, business schools, in political science courses or at liberal arts colleges? How to get ahead as a cheat or “It’s not what you know but who you know”?

For those who didn’t make it into the school or college that would cost their families a life-time of savings just for the label, consider that Elvis Costello (“Brilliant Mistake”) never finished high school. According to Wikipedia:

“His mother told a journalist that, when Costello was 11 years old, his school entered him into a writing contest held by the Times of London intended for people aged 16 to 25, for which he won a prize. As he finished secondary school, he earned one A-level, in English, despite having made a firm decision to pursue a career in music a few months earlier and putting little effort into his final months of school.”

He thought he was the King of America
Where they pour Coca Cola just like vintage wine
Now I try hard not to become hysterical
But I’m not sure if I am laughing or crying
I wish that I could push a button
And talk in the past and not the present tense
And watch this hurtin’ feeling disappear
Like it was common sense
It was a fine idea at the time
Now it’s a brilliant mistake

She said that she was working for the ABC News
It was as much of the alphabet as she knew how to use
Her perfume was unspeakable
It lingered in the air
Like her artificial laughter
Her mementos of affairs
“Oh” I said “I see you know him”
“Isn’t that very fortunate for you”
And she showed me his calling card
He came third or fourth and there were more than one or two
He was a fine idea at the time
Now he’s a brilliant mistake

He thought he was the King of America
But it was just a boulevard of broken dreams
A trick they do with mirrors and with chemicals
The words of love in whispers
And the axe of love in screams
I wish that I could push a button
And talk in the past and not the present tense
And watch this lovin’ feeling disappear
Like it was common sense
I was a fine idea at the time
Now I’m a brilliant mistake

The Ivies and adjacent “Elite” Schools might consider offering a course in Ethics, Empathy, Inclusion, Brilliant Mistakes and High School Drop Outs. Would that be worth upwards of $70,000 a year for the privilege? No, but apparently a course in Taylor Swift is.

The post Claudine Gay, Plagiarism & the DEI Lie. appeared first on Granite Grok.

Canada represents the cutting edge of progressive thinking where socialized health care meets socialized mass murder under the guise of your having asked for it. An agenda hidden behind the dubious ramblings of social engineers mumbling about empathy and dignity.

Medically assisted dying cries about compassion while simultaneously making people confined by the public health apparatus miserable enough to want to kill themselves. Canada, for its part, has proven that the safeguards it promised would prevent abuse are meaningless as serial killers doing business as medical professionals come out of the public health woodwork to call the locals to their deathbeds.

The Pied Pipers of a socialized public health care scheme that increasingly leaves them with no other choice.

 

Assessing patients for assisted death when they really need other support is frightfully common (in Canada). In a study of “MAiD” assessments on 54 patients who didn’t have terminal illnesses, two-thirds had concurrent mental illness, a fifth had difficulty finding treatment for their afflictions, and over a third were simply not offered treatments.

 

Not even the economically prudent pain pill, which is more amenable to the budget than a procedure they can’t get for six to twelve months or at all because experts, boards, or commissions denied them a treatment (remember how the left said death panels were a conspiracy theory). They are abandoned to a life of government-managed discomfort, waiting to die, by a system that might then ask if perhaps now would be better than later.

Related: Slippery Meet Slope: Wait Six Months to Get Health Care or … They Can Help You ‘Kill Yourself’ Next Week!

As with all such things, mission creep sets in, expanding the meaning to encompass more conditions.

 

[I]n seminars conducted by leading euthanasia providers in Canada, providers have admitted that patients are indeed citing poverty as their driving factor for requesting euthanasia. One woman requested assisted death because she could not afford the vitamins, special diet, and physiotherapy that would relieve the symptoms of her non-terminal illnesses. Other patients with chronic pain, diabetes, cardiac issues, anxiety, and depression have requested assisted death simply because they could not find housing. The provider in charge of these cases stated that these people have “no other options,” as referrals will get them “not very much, and certainly not very fast.” The provider also made no mention that these applications were being discouraged or denied.

 

Make them miserable enough, and they will beg you to let them die in a framework with too many willing to find a way to make it happen.

 

Although physicians are required to have a second practitioner sign off on assisted death requests, the law allows them to ask as many physicians as they like until they find someone who agrees with them. Since providers have varying opinions on what qualifies one for assisted death, as well as what justifies cognitive ability to choose assisted death, it isn’t difficult to find a provider who will agree to kill a patient. [Ellen] Wiebe, for example, stated that she would consider a patient on a five-year waitlist for an effective treatment to have “irremediable suffering.”

 

How large of a leap is it to enable a scheme like this and then ensure the circumstances by which an increasing number of people, handicapped in any number of ways by deliberate government policy, pursue assisted suicide to escape the tyranny of low expectations in a State that once existed to do nothing more than preserve and protect their natural rights and – in the case of US States and the Nation itself – “promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

Canada is well down the path, as are Hawaii and Oregon. Vermont has had its feet on the road to death for years, and New Hampshire has a bill proposing we line up behind them. Who among us will stand up and make the case that while there is nothing wrong with compassion, there is when you pretend it can come from a government that has admitted there are too many of us in this world and they’d be okay if a few billion just dropped dead.

And then asks if -out of compassion – they can help.

 

The post Slippery Meet Slope: More Evidence The System Will Try To Convince You to Kill Yourself appeared first on Granite Grok.

I am a Granite Stater to the bone, but I have fallen in love with Maine over the last few years. My partner and I have deep roots in the Pine Tree State as she was born in Maine and spent much of her childhood in Central Maine. I enjoyed many vacations camping along the rocky coast, and three years ago, we found our summer home on Bear Pond.

The Pond is a magical spot because of its beauty and serenity, but more for the people we have met and now call best friends. The People of the Pond, as we call them, are the true gem.

Having a vested interest and spending four months of the year in Maine is a blessing and a source of frustration. Seeing the dysfunctional state of Maine politics but having no say as non-residents is a complex and challenging position. Writing this blog is my way of spreading the story of what the Liberal-leaning politicians of Maine are doing to harm this beautiful state.

Maine is a vast state with demographics that are very similar to many states in the Northeast. The population concentration in the major cities is very Left-thinking and, therefore, dominates the politics and policy of the less populated rural areas. The Conservative folks in Central and Northern Maine are the victims of the policies from Portland, Auburn/Lewiston, and Augusta. We share the frustration of the good people of Western and Northern Maine.

I have written a few times about the ultra-liberal Marijuana and absurd Abortion laws in my Conservative View From New Hampshire blog, and I am sure we will touch on them again. Today, I want to discuss a current movement to remove Donald Trump from the Maine Primary Ballot in 2024. This tactic has been debated in many states, and Colorado was the first state to remove the former President. The Maine Legislature held an 8-hour hearing last week to allow both sides to present their case on removing Trump, and the Secretary of State was to have decided by last Friday. Because of the Colorado decision, Maine has delayed action until both sides can provide additional testimony before a decision is made.

Delaying a decision based on that of another state compounds the lousy decision to consider the issue in the first place. Proponents of removing Trump are citing the 14th Amendment and claim that Trump was involved in perpetuating the January 6th assault on the Capitol. If true, these people say that Trump is ineligible to hold the office of President. Trump has never been charged with insurrection and, therefore, never found guilty. It is a fundamentally bogus claim with no reason for the contemplated action. Mainers should be monitoring this story as it develops in Augusta as the Legislature attempts to meddle in the election. Voters deserve to vote for their candidate, and the Legislature has no right to filter and prevent candidates from the ballot.

The post Bear Pond Conservative Chronicles: A Look At The Mess That Is Maine Politics appeared first on Granite Grok.

Just before leaving town for Christmas break, the US House gave Americans a last-minute holiday gift: a nearly trillion-dollar military spending bill filled with lots of goodies for the special interests and the military-industrial complex. Unfortunately, the rest of America got nothing but coal in its stockings.

With Constitutionalists like Rep. Thomas Massie on the House Rules Committee, Speaker Johnson made the unusual move of bringing the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) under suspension of the rules, which bypasses the Rules Committee but requires two-thirds of the House to pass the bill.

Considering that Speaker Johnson tossed into the “must-pass” bill yet another extension of Section 702 of the FISA Act, it’s unsurprising that he wanted to rush the bill through without the possibility of amendment. Section 702 allows the government to intercept and retain without a warrant the communications of any American who is in contact with a non-US citizen. It is clearly a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which is supposed to protect Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Section 702 was “legalized” under President George W. Bush during the “War on Terror” after it was revealed that Bush was using the National Security Agency to spy on Americans illegally. We were told at the time that government must be granted these authorities because we were under threat from terrorists. It would just be a temporary measure, we were promised, and then the authority would expire. That was fifteen years ago, and here we are, re-authorizing the government to continue to violate our liberties.

As with the rest of the violations of our civil liberties after 9/11, like the PATRIOT Act and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA, the federal government soon turned its terrorism-fighting tools inward, targeting Americans rather than foreigners who we were told wanted to harm Americans. That’s why the FBI’s so-called domestic terrorism watchlist continues to expand to include Christians and those skeptical of big government.

So rather than debating whether we want a government more like East Germany than the one our Founders imagined, Section 702 was tossed into the military spending bill.

The NDAA also contained a $600 million gift to the corrupt government of Ukraine. As opposition to further spending on Ukraine’s failed war with Russia increases in the House, Republican leadership decided to add what may be the last parting gift to the military-industrial complex. As with most foreign assistance, however, Ukraine will likely see very little of this money. Most of it will be laundered through the military contractors and lobbyists who line every corner of the Beltway.

The NDAA also pushes us further toward confrontation with China, authorizing more than $100 million to train Taiwan’s military and a further nine billion dollars to continue sending US military ships to harass China in its backyard.

I believe Speaker Johnson is intelligent with a bright future in House leadership. He has inherited a broken system and a legislative body that operates without any guiding principles. I sincerely hope he will begin to listen to the increasing voices in the House who are questioning the warfare-welfare state. We are more than 33 trillion dollars in debt, with interest payments on that debt dwarfing all other government spending. A crash is coming. There is no time for more “business as usual.”

 

Ron Paul | Ron Paul Institute

Copyright © 2023 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

The post Congress’ ‘Gift’ to America This Christmas appeared first on Granite Grok.

My dog Cosmo gets mirrors. He looks into them and knows that the dog he sees is him. Not a threat, and incredibly handsome. He knows this. This awareness does not always translate to windows or shadows.

He will bark at his shadow on a fence until it goes away. He’s funny like that. Reflections in windows are different from mirrors. Not as clear. This sometimes confuses him, and Austin City Councilor and now Congressman Greg Casar is like that, too.

Confused.

He barked a lot when it was fashionable on the left to hate the police (more than usual, summer of love, you may recall) and defunded them in Austin. He helped cut 100 million from the budget, which he said were resources that could be reinvested in the “community’s safety and well-being.” More barking. Greg moved on (politically) to Congress, where he is known to yap with the brain trust lovingly referred to as The Squad, which explains why he has asked the police to increase patrols around his Austin home.

He defunded them to make Austin safer, and I guess his community is not safer.

 

‘It’s come to our attention that Anti police king of the defund movement in Austin @GregCasar who only last week called APD an agency with racist practices has requested enhanced patrols around his house for the next week,’ the association wrote.

‘Maybe he should hire private security like his fellow squad members do. Sure seems like he wants the police in his neighborhood, just not yours.’

 

 

Would it be racist to refuse his request?

Racism is a lot like my dog looking at his reflection in a window. Sometimes, it seems like a mirror, and other times, it looks like a dog outside in the yard. It is confusing. The racist Austin PD (APD) doesn’t get to decide. They had better start doing more to protect his ass if it can find the resources, but that will mean fewer of them to protect the rest of The Community. That would be – at least in theory, the gerrymandered 35th in Texas.

The 35 runs down I 35 from Austin to San Antonio by no work of the left – but it has been a Democrat district for the ten years that it has existed and will likely remain one given that it begins in Austin and ends in San Antonio.

 

 

That squiggle is not Cesar’s fault. Still, he is on the hook for his defund antics, his ongoing disrespect for Peace Officers, his choice of congressional friends (Sandy Cortez has his back), and this recent request for heightened diligence from the racists he defunded to keep him safe.

His support for showing no support for the APD resulted in a slew of retirements on top of the defunding because smart cops who’ve put in the time knew their city was more interested in making them into the next viral political smear than having their back—a problem duplicated in nearly every (probably every) Democrat-run urban area from sea to rising sea.

Since the summer of Love and Defund Mania, homicide rates have risen an average of 10% across 45 US cities. According to FOX7, Austin ranked 15th on that list. I couldn’t find Austin on the list of 40 cities at the link FOX7 provided, but a general search for crime data showed a rise in homicides and property crime consistent with other urban areas post-defund, and there are more than 45.

It is less safe because they have fewer resources. Greg Casar is directly responsible for that in his community, and now he wants the APD to divert more of what is left to ensure the area around him is safer.

Greg Casar is an assh*le, and he’s barking mad (as in crazy) if he doesn’t see that.

 

The post Democrat Who Helped Defund Austin PD Asks for More ‘Police Protection’ appeared first on Granite Grok.

The war on common sense isn’t limited to gender conflict. The same people taking things away from women are keen on robbing everyone else of something. Washington State Rep. Amy Walen has proposed a bill banning gas-powered landscaping equipment. My first thought?

As a card-carrying member of the “just leave me the hell alone foundation,” I find these incessant incursions into every facet of life offensive. Who “the you know what” thinks they can effectively micro-manage everything? Democrats, that’s who. And always, in the void that passes for the head-space between their ears.

 

State Representative Amy Walen (D-Kirkland) pre-filed legislation that makes sweeping additions to the Washington State Clean Air Act. HB 1868 bans “gasoline-powered and diesel-powered landscaping and other outdoor power equipment” for “contributing to climate change.” The bill lists a number of unintended health consequences tied to the tools, as well, including the claim that they cause asthma.

The bill gets to the ban by empowering the Department of Ecology to “adopt rules to prohibit engine exhaust and evaporative emissions from new outdoor power equipment” by either January 1, 2026 or sooner, if the state determines it’s feasible to do so earlier. Washingtonians are expected to upgrade their equipment to zero-emission alternatives. Government work, however, is partly exempt.

 

Infowars frames this correctly as both a war on small businesses (who can’t absorb the regulatory and equipment costs) and a war on minority businesses. Yes, Amy, it’s racist!

 

Though Democrats argue their legislation should be viewed through an equity lens, this ban has a disproportionate impact on Latino and black business owners. Nationwide data stated 22.8% of landscaping companies are owned by Hispanics and 14.7% are owned by blacks.

The cost to transition to zero-emission alternatives is burdensome, too, even with financial assistance provided in the bill. For some businesses, it could still be prohibitively expensive. This financial burden could disproportionately affect minority-owned businesses, potentially leading to a reduction in diversity within the industry, if Democrat talking points are to be believed.

 

I’ve seen more than my fair share of evidence on these pages about how the Left’s priorities hurt the people whom they claim to help. This is not much different. Whaling Amy Walen is an environmentally #woke legislator in a Democrat-majority state. She has submitted a resume-plumping bill that will harm the locals, including minorities, for net-zero environmental gain. This is about her, not the environment, and that’s easier to figure out than what a Dem poll worker is doing with a suitcase full of mail-in ballots.

Aside from the cities where there isn’t too much leaf-blowing (for example), Washington state is a big lot of empty. The sum of its “landscaper” emissions is puny. China will have erased all assumed gains in total before I finish writing this post. Great harm for no benefit. Inane and grevious.

Replacements for gas-powered rigs will have higher manufacturing and decommission footprints, with much of those emissions offshored to foreign lands where Washington State Elites burnishing their climate bona fides will never see them. Lands and waters have been ruined for generations by Chinese Communist-owned rare-earth metals mines with no safety controls for workers or protections for the indigenous populations and resources around them. You’d think a bunch of globalists would have the sense to know how bad this is, you know, globally, yet they remain silent or ignorant.

If you want to make a real difference, ban imports from China, including silicon for solar panels, assembled panels or components, wind turbine bits, lithium batteries or their parts, and a million other shocks the climate is heir to from Chinese manufacturing. And don’t forget their slave labor.

Amy should propose regulations to limit the influx and influence of all Chinese products and interests. Kick them out of your universities. Stop taking funding or grants from Chinese investors. Stop giving grants to Chinese researchers. Take back any land they bought or, and here’s an idea, go to China and protest their record-setting, planet-choking emissions at the source.

I’m sure your organs will go to someone who needs them.

 

The post Leaf Blow Me! appeared first on Granite Grok.

The NH Patriot Hub is sponsoring a large networking event centered around connecting Constitution coaches/instructors with citizens who are interested in learning more about their rights and our great US and NH Constitutions.

We will begin the event with a prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, a few words about Benjamin Franklin’s influence on the US Constitution, and a 15 minute video on the Monument to the Forefathers.

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

Then we will break out into small groups so you can meet the Constitution coaches/instructors on a personal level.

You will have the opportunity to invite one of the Constitution coaches/instructors into your community to hold a Constitution class with your friends and family members and learn and ask questions together.  We will offer suggestions on places where you can have the class, or you can decide, with your coach, to hold it via zoom.

Once you have an understanding of this incredible document, you will be empowered to go out into your community and to the state house and hold your elected officials accountable to their oath of office, which is to uphold the NH Constitution and protect our God-given rights.

Next, we will hear a few success stories from citizens who knew their rights and are now holding their elected officials accountable to the NH Constitution.

Birthday cake, socialize, sign up for Constitution classes, and visit our information table.

 

Please Register for this FREE EVENT

January 17, 2024 @ 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm
The NH Patriot Hub – www.NHpatriothub.org
Doors open at 6 pm
The event starts promptly at 6:30 pm
Centerpoint Church 20 N State St Concord

The event is free – donations are welcomed

Hope to see you there!

The NH Patriot Hub Team

 

The post Let Freedom Ring – Ring in the New Year by Joining Us for a Networking Event… appeared first on Granite Grok.

We think of thieves as conducting their work when no one is looking, such as breaking into a house while the owners are away. But the most successful thieves have done their stealing in plain sight, on a grand scale, while the owners were home and often with their tacit approval, though with sleights of hand that few are able to detect.

Such a theft occurred when Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law on December 23, 1913.

A central bank such as the Fed has a remarkable character. According to establishment boilerplate, its purpose is to stabilize the economy and ensure prosperity and “full employment.” The decision-makers at the Fed are of necessity selected for their superhuman brilliance and neutrality of judgment, thus qualifying them to adjust the amount of money available to the banks so that they may, in turn, serve the interests of a public numbering some 330 million people.

If, for some reason, certain members of the public don’t reap the benefits of this policy—or worse, end up losing their jobs, their savings, their businesses, and their homes—it’s not because the Fed itself is a bad idea. How could it be? Without the Fed as an emergency lender, bankers threw the economy into panics in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

But there’s another side to the Fed’s character that is somewhat less wholesome than its public image and is best revealed by the way it was founded.

The Bankers’ Dream

Before the Fed’s founding, bankers in general and Wall Street in particular complained about US currency’s lack of “elasticity.” “Elasticity” in this context is one of the great euphemisms of human history. According to lore, this missing feature of “hard” money, such as gold or silver, was responsible for the panics of 1873, 1884, 1893, and 1907. The supply of the coins that were behind the paper banknotes couldn’t be increased when needed. Gold and silver were, therefore, said to be inelastic. Because of this inelasticity, the legend persisted that banks were having trouble meeting the demand for farm loans at harvest time, as G. Edward Griffin explains in The Creature from Jekyll Island:

To supply those funds, the country banks had to draw down their cash reserves which generally were deposited with the larger city banks. This thinned out the reserves held in the cities, and the whole system became more vulnerable. Actually, that part of the legend is true, but apparently no one is expected to ask questions about the rest of the story.

Several of them come to mind. Why wasn’t there a panic every Autumn instead of just every eleven years or so? Why didn’t all banks—country or city—maintain adequate reserves to cover their depositor demands? And why didn’t they do this in all seasons of the year? Why would merely saying no to some loan applicants cause hundreds of banks to fail?

The Morgan and Rockefeller bankers on Wall Street dreamed of having a central bank that could supply money when needed as a “lender of last resort.” A central bank would also control the banks’ inflation rate. If bank reserves could be maintained at a central bank and a common reserve ratio established, then no single bank could expand credit more than its rivals, and therefore, there would be no bankruptcies caused by currency’s draining from overly inflationary banks. All banks would inflate in harmony, and there would be tranquility and profits for all.

The bankers who traveled a thousand miles to meet on Jekyll Island in November 1910 understood they needed a cartel to bring their dream to life. And they needed the threat of state violence for the cartel to work.

Thus, included in their secret meeting were two politicians serving as the bankers’ advocates in Washington. The bankers planned to establish their cartel over the Christmas holidays, while the American public was distracted, though for political reasons, it was delayed until 1913.

The public would be a hard sell. Americans were profoundly suspicious of Wall Street and cartels. They distrusted anything big in business or government. A central bank operating for the benefit of the big banks had no chance of becoming law, unless it was promoted as shackling Wall Street itself. This could be accomplished, it was widely believed, through a government bureaucracy of overseers.

The Pujo Committee

Frequent speeches by Wisconsin senator Robert LaFollette and Minnesota congressman Charles Lindbergh brought public outrage over the “money trust” to a boil. LaFollette charged that the entire country was under the control of just fifty men; Morgan partner George Baker disputed the allegation, claiming it was no more than eight men. Lindbergh pointed out that bankers had controlled all financial legislation since the Civil War through committee memberships.

The government, acting as the sword of justice, decided to act, with most people oblivious to the fact that the executioner and the accused were one and the same. In response to the accusations, it formed a new subcommittee, which held hearings from May 1912 until January 1913.

The Pujo Committee was headed by Louisiana congressman Arsène Pujo, then roundly considered to be a spokesman for the “oil trust.” The hearings followed the usual pattern, bringing forth immense quantities of statistics and testimonies from bankers themselves. Though the hearings were conducted largely because of the charges brought forth by LaFollette and Lindbergh, neither man was allowed to testify.

Under the direction of Paul Warburg, the principal author of the Jekyll Island plan that in its essentials became the Federal Reserve Act, the banks provided 100 percent financing for something called the National Citizens League, the purpose of which was to create the illusion of grassroots support for Warburg’s brainchild.

University of Chicago economics professor J. Laurence Laughlin was put in charge of the league’s propaganda, ostensibly to bring a measure of objectivity to the discussions. John D. Rockefeller, whose representatives at Jekyll were Senator Nelson Aldrich and bank president Frank Vanderlip, had endowed the university with $50 million.

Woodrow Wilson was an outspoken critic of the money trust in his 1912 presidential campaign, all the while receiving funding from the very trust he was condemning. Wilson said:

I have seen men squeezed by [the money trust]; I have seen men who, as they themselves expressed it, were put “out of business by Wall Street,” because Wall Street found them inconvenient and didn’t want their competition.

Benjamin Strong Runs the Show

When the Fed began operations in late 1914, the man in charge of the system was Morgan banker Benjamin Strong Jr., one of the Jekyll Island attendees. Strong served as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York from its inception until his death on October 16, 1928. Strong, in the Morgan tradition, was an anglophile who inflated the US money supply from 1925–28 to keep Britain from losing gold to the US. Details of Strong’s reign and the precrash conditions he created can be found in Murray Rothbard’s America’s Great Depression:

The long-run tendency of the free market economy, unhampered by monetary expansion, is a gently falling price level, falling as the productivity and output of goods and services continually increase. The Austrian policy of refraining always from monetary inflation would allow this tendency of the free market its head and thereby remove the disruptions of the business cycle.

The Chicago goal of a constant price level, which can be achieved only by a continual expansion of money and credit, would, as in [Benjamin Strong’s policy of the] 1920s, unwittingly generate the cycle of boom and bust that has proved so destructive for the past two centuries.

George Ford is a former mainframe and PC programmer and technology instructor and the author of eight books and welcomes speaking engagements.

 

George Ford Smith | Mises Wire

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

The post Woodrow Wilson’s Christmas Grift of 1913 appeared first on Granite Grok.

This Christmas, amid the turmoil in the world, we may feel that we’re on the edge of another “fullness of time” moment. How should we best posture ourselves at this critical juncture?

“But when the fullness of time had come,
God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law,
to redeem those who were under the law,
so that we might receive adoption as sons.”
Galatians 4.4-5, ES

 

With New Hampshire’s unexpectedly controversial first-in-the-nation primary on January 23rd, we recognize a fast-approaching crossroads in a country coming apart at the seams. The turmoil of the elections is also reflected in the culturally divisive issues that will continue to play out in our state legislature this upcoming lawmaking session, as proposed bills impacting life, educational freedom, and gender come up for debate.

God’s people have been no strangers to having to wait for God-ordained “fullness of time” moments. Will we fully cooperate with Him and be patient as he unfolds His plan at His pace this new year?

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

To provide some context, the roughly 400-year period between the Old Testament prophet Malachi’s ministry and the arrival of Jesus lasted longer than the United States has existed as a nation. The Israelites had every reason to be discouraged. Although they had been freed from Babylonian exile since the 6th century BC, the nation had not coalesced and thrived as their post-exilic leaders had originally hoped. And then, in the early 60’s BC, the Roman Empire became their newest captors. Although the vassal-king Herod undertook massive building projects aimed at placating the Jews such as the expansion of the Temple in Jerusalem, true God-followers would have abhorred Herod’s stop-at-nothing cruelty and his extremely “political” leadership. When would breakthrough come for God’s people? Where was the long-awaited Messiah?

In our own American story, we remember how close we came to dissolving as a country only seventy years into our national existence. With Confederate victories commonplace during the first half of 1863, the battle of Gettysburg in July would serve as a “fullness of time” moment for Union forces that would change the tide of the war in their favor. At the epicenter of that moment was a New Englander, Maine’s Colonel Joshua Chamberlain, on a hill called Little Round Top. Sick from dysentery and malaria, with little remaining ammunition, and outnumbered and surrounded by the advancing Confederate troops, Chamberlain and his men miraculously repulsed the Confederate charge with fixed bayonets and a flanking maneuver that tricked the enemy into retreating. Several of Israel’s supernaturally-tinged Old Testament battle victories come to mind.

Like God’s people of antiquity, and like our fellow Americans of just seven generations ago, this Christmas we 21st-century Granite Staters find ourselves again in need of a breakthrough of Biblical proportions. We need a distinctly God-initiated interruption of our story.

We are perplexed by our culture’s militant rejection of what to us is the common-sense defense of the vulnerable: the protection of innocent life in the womb; the safeguarding of young hearts, minds, and bodies from destructive, sometimes-irreversible “solutions” to complex identity & sexuality issues; and the prioritization of parental authority in the formation of our children.

We fear disruption, upheaval, and even violence related to the upcoming presidential election of 2024, even while some wonder if our election process maintains any integrity in the digital age.

We struggle to make sense of disruptive events on our own southern border and conflicts on foreign shores, be they in the Ukraine & Russia, in Israel & Gaza, or in Armenia & Azerbaijan, to name a few. The related, polarized conflagrations on our own streets and campuses shock us.

Lastly, we mourn the apparent death of any national capacity for rational debate on the merits of issues, a capacity seemingly laid to rest by media sound-bites and a surprising lack of intellectual curiosity and understanding by a social-media driven public.

How will we move from partisan bickering to effective, morally sound solutions in any of these areas?

Just as Christ came at the “fullness of time,” and just as God has faithfully provided courageous leadership like that of Col. Joshua Chamberlain so many times over in our country, we can trust that He is still weaving His overarching redemption story into the fabric of our national narrative, including right here in the Granite State.

The same prophet who 460 years before Christ’s birth foretold that the Messiah would come to refine God’s people (see Malachi 3.1-6) also said:

“For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations,
and in every place incense will be offered to my name, and a pure offering.
For my name will be great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.”
Malachi 1:11, ESV

So we find ourselves at another “fullness of time” moment, leaning into God’s promise that He will make His name great both in our nation and in every nation of the world.

While we certainly can’t control when God decides to act or how He’ll act at such a time, we can control our engaged obedience in the waiting.

This Christmas, as expectant as the Jews were for the Messiah and as Civil War-era Christians were for a just end to fraternal bloodshed, we too are waiting for a God-ordained “fullness of time” interruption of our national story. In the meantime, we must remain vigilant in prayer, actively engaged in the issues, and increasingly obedient in the stewardship of our own souls, relationships, and resources.

The post A Christmas Reflection by the Director of our Church Ambassador Network, Neil Hubacker appeared first on Granite Grok.

It is Christmas again, a time to rejoice, but I find myself grappling with a pain from last year that runs deep within my heart. On a quiet morning like today, one year ago, my heart was shattered as I held my dearest Louie for the last time.  I cradled Louie in my arms as he ventured into the great beyond.

It is with a mix of sorrow and gratitude that I share these words – not seeking condolences, but simply wanting to celebrate the beautiful soul that meant the world to me – a tribute to the extraordinary spirit that was Louie.

This ache in my heart has not dulled with time; on the other hand, it has allowed me to reflect on Louie’s warmth and profound impact on my life. He was more than a pet; he was my confidant, source of joy, and steady companion through all the highs and lows of life. In every wag of his tail and every gentle nuzzle, I found a friend who understood me in a way words never could.

I remember our unique bond as I travel across the memories we created together. Louie wasn’t just a dog; he was family. His loyalty was a constant, his presence a balm for my soul. I could feel his spirit forever etched in every part of my being in the quiet moments. I find solace in knowing that time hasn’t dimmed the vivid colors of our journey.

The pain of losing a pet is because of the depth of love we share with them. Louie left an indelible mark on my heart with his expressive eyes and boundless affection. While the ache of his absence lingers, so does the warmth of his memory.

To those who have experienced the loss of a beloved furry friend, I understand the heaviness in your heart. Our pets may be gone, but the love they gave us lives on in the memories we hold dear. It’s a flame that flickers in the corners of our hearts.

As I light a candle in honor of Louie’s memory, I invite you to join me in celebrating the joy, companionship, and unconditional love our pets bring into our lives. In these moments of reflection, let us remember Louie and all the cherished pets who have left paw prints on our hearts.

Rest in peace, dear Louie. Your memory isn’t a fading photograph but a living, breathing presence. Your memory will forever be a beacon of love, guiding me over time. I will always love you.

The post He Wasn’t Just a Dog; He Was Family appeared first on Granite Grok.

To say it has been a wild year would be a gross understatement. Thanks to Joe and the rest of the gang that can’t shoot straight, we have had no shortage of topics in 2023. The difficult task has been to avoid redundancy as the disappointments and failures of Team Biden filled the headlines. I wanted to report good news but would not fall into Joe’s trap.

Talk about inflation slowing? When it approached 10%, it had to slow. There’s nothing good about high prices. Write about gas prices coming down. They are still 50% higher than when Joe took office. Should that be happy news? How about record numbers of Border crossings? Wait, those are not good numbers, but those of a President who destroyed our sovereignty. No, there was nothing positive to report from Joe Biden’s White House. So. what will Santa bring us for 2024?

I think 2024 will make 2023 seem like a slow walk in the park. We have the primaries that start in a few short weeks. Ordinarily, that would be enough to keep us busy, but this year will be a primary season on steroids. On the Democrat side, we do not even know who is participating. Biden will not be on some ballots by choice, and Robert Kennedy Jr. has opted for a Third-Party bid, which should petrify Biden. We are yet to know how Joe Manchin will participate and disrupt plans for the Dems.

The Supreme Court has work to do before any Republicans cast a primary vote. Colorado was the first state to remove Trump from their ballot, and Maine may follow suit. Both states will probably have to reverse their unwarranted decisions, but only after SCOTUS gets involved. That is not the only court involvement in the 2024 elections, as Donald Trump still has to navigate 91 indictments in multiple courts and states. You can bet the house that the DNC will try some other tactics to keep Trump away from the White House.

There is no guarantee that Biden will be on the ticket come November, and nobody on either side wants to see Kamala Harris in the driver’s seat in the Fall. If that drama is not enough, we have the Impeachment Inquiry that will expose America to the sins of the Biden Cartel. It’s hard to believe Biden’s approval numbers can drop further, but with many people hearing the facts for the first time, it will drive those numbers down.

Biden will also have to deal with the fallout from Hunter Biden’s court cases and Congressional hearings. To use Joe’s own words, it is evident that Hunter has broken many laws, and the only question is, will he sing to save himself or take the fall and wait for Dad to pardon him?

All that stuff is election-related. We still have the economy, the Border, Ukraine, Israel/Hamas, and all of the assaults by Joe Biden on our personal lives. 2024 will be a whirlwind, but one thing is guaranteed. There will be nothing positive to write about with Joe Biden until he drops out of the race or loses in November.

 

The post Sorry Santa, Joe Says No More Coal appeared first on Granite Grok.