Saturday • January 11 • 2025
Vol.XVII • No.II
Manchester, N.H.
The Confucius Institute funded UNH. There is a contract through 2024 or at least a payment that has been made through 2024. Has anyone seen the contract? Why did UNH get chosen to introduce the unregulated “Dear Colleague” Title IX letter in 2011?
We want to thank Claire Best for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.
Why did Amy Guttman of UPENN meet with President Xi in 2009 to discuss building closer connections between US & Chinese universities? What was the quid pro quo?
Why did “Dear Colleague” set out to subversively get rid of due process without going through regulatory procedures?
Why did UNH develop “Bystander” and “Know Your Power” training?
Why did the White House/UNH/NHCADSV/Concord Police target Private Episcopal St. Paul’s School as opposed to any other school?
Was it for the same reason the White House-affiliated journalist Sabrina Erdeley targeted the University of Virginia for the fake Rolling Stone “A Rape on Campus” story? Because they had a stereotype in mind?
Why did they want to use St. Paul’s school to set an example to other schools around the nation, and why was the Government takeover/monitoring of it praised?
Why was Maxient.com behavior reporting software really introduced, and why is there an “analysis phase” – for whose benefit?
Why did they turn Chessy Prout, whose father was working in Hong Kong at Investco, into the chosen “survivor”?
Why was she given a Government Affairs PR representative (Dan Hill of hillimpact.com) whose specialty is special ops stealth media to help Department of Defense contractors get Government contracts?
Why did Chessy Prout get a speaker’s agency registered in Albany, NY, and Hong Kong?
Why did she go on a special trip to take #MeToo to China?
Why did Alexander Prout become Chair of Vital Voices Solidarity (Hillary Clinton’s non-profit)? Vital Voices is PR repped by SKDK, whose Anita Dunn was forced to step down as Director of Communications for the Obama White House for praising Chairman Mao.
Why was there a China-backed women’s non-profit mentioned in the Podesta Wikileaks files in correspondence regarding Lyn Forester de Rothschild and Hillary Clinton that dates to 2010?
Why did the State Department send a delegation to China in 2014 to discuss the women’s agenda and send Tania Tetlow JD, who is on YouTube saying that as a prosecutor, she would tell investigators and police that tainted and biased investigations in sexual misconduct didn’t matter?
What is UNH really up to? What is UNH Law really up to, and whose agenda are they and elected officials in New Hampshire really following?
Is Soteria Solutions (developed by UNH with NHCADSV’s Lyn Schollett on the board) tied to Soteria Mutual Holdings- owned by Black Stone, dealing in CCP Binance – or not?
The post How $1M From China-linked Groups Oiled New York Politics appeared first on Granite Grok.
The Department of Health and Human Services has proposed a series of changes to administrative rules governing the vaccine registry. The proposal can be viewed here.
Please Submit Group communications or Press Releases to editor@granitegrok.com.
Submission is not a guarantee of publication – Publication is not an endorsement.
RebuildNH objects to several of these proposed changes.
Tuesday, October 3rd, there is a public hearing on these rule changes. We are asking you to attend this meeting to object to these rule changes.
If you cannot attend, please email your objections to Allyson Raadmae and Lori Weaver.
Towards Liberty,
The post Public Hearing for Vaccine Registry appeared first on Granite Grok.
Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein recorded her last vote in the U.S. Senate less than 24 hours before dying Thursday at 90 years old. In the last years of her life, she clearly struggled mentally and physically to keep up with her day-to-day life. Still, when the Democrats needed her face, her voice, or her vote to push their agenda forward, her staff would dutifully wheel her out in service to the party.
Naturally, Democrats spent the morning following her death announcement praising Feinstein’s political career. “Sen. Dianne Feinstein was a friend, a hero, a leader who changed the Senate and America for the better[.] Mourning this tremendous loss—we’re comforted in knowing how many mountains she moved, lives she impacted, glass ceilings she shattered[.] America’s a better place because of her,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer posted on Twitter.
Dianne Feinstein returned to the Senate today.
In a wheelchair.
This is your Democrat Party.
Power at all costs.
ALL COSTS. pic.twitter.com/LNiOvBzyTD
— Sebastian Gorka DrG (@SebGorka) May 11, 2023
“Heartbroken to learn of the passing of my dear friend Dianne Feinstein,” former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi posted. “Her indomitable, indefatigable leadership made a magnificent difference for our national security and personal safety, the health of our people and our planet, and the strength of our Democracy.”
Pelosi also wrote that it was a “great honor to serve alongside” her fellow Californian.
The way Democrats talk about Feinstein’s legacy, one would assume they cared about her deeply. But you don’t allow the people you love to be used for political gain. They claimed to care about her life and accomplishments but refused to let her end her life with dignity.
In July, Democratic Washington Sen. Patty Murray was caught on a hot microphone instructing Feinstein how to vote on a funding bill for the Department of Defense. (ROOKE: There’s A Way To Fix How Poorly Single Women Vote, And It Isn’t Repealing The 19th)
“For me to say I would like to support a yes vote on this. It provides 823 billion. That’s an increase of 26 billion for the Department of Defense. And it funds priorities submitted,” Feinstein says in a video of the incident before an aide whispers in her ear. The microphone then picks up Murray telling Feinstein, “Just say ‘aye.’”
Asked to vote on the defense appropriations bill, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) begins giving a speech: “I would like to support a ‘yes’ vote on this. It provides …”
Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA): “Just say aye.” pic.twitter.com/Gw2eZ9rEMv
— The Recount (@therecount) July 27, 2023
Two months earlier, in May, Feinstein was transported to the Senate in a wheelchair by aides, visibly frail and confused despite a statement from her office claiming she was “prepared to resume [her] duties in the Senate.” Schumer was there to greet her. She looked befuddling, asking him, “Where am I going?” followed by, “I’ve got something in my eye.”
It was obvious that she came back to work despite her condition to be the critical deciding vote on the Judiciary Committee.
Regardless of what you think about Feinstein’s record, there is an unmistakable hatred for the elderly in our society. Americans are so used to throwing their aging parents in nursing homes and overlooking their mistreatment for the sake of convenience that no one questioned whether or not Feinstein was the subject of elder abuse every time she was taken from the comfort of her home to attend the Senate.
Democrats have no remorse for how they treated the woman they call “inspirational” and a “trailblazer.” Feinstein should have been allowed to retire to one of the mansions she bought using the millions of dollars she “earned” from stock market trading. Instead, despite decades of loyalty to the Democrats, she was forced to end her life as a tool of the party.
Mary Rooke | Daily Caller News Service
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 Democrats Should Be Ashamed Of The Sad Tragedy Of Dianne Feinstein appeared first on Granite Grok.
Americans for Prosperity (AFP Action) does a lot of good stuff, but as I’ve noted previously, they’ve climbed on the anti-Trump train this season. The message they think they are sending is this. If Trump is the nominee, Democrats will be activated, and that will hurt everyone up and down the ticket.
The latest glossy mailer says Democrats will be energized, [and] Independents will be turned off.
This assumes that any of that actually matters, which, as I’ve also noted, silly rabbit, is absent election reforms (of which we’ve had little to none); every election is 2020. The votes keep coming until the Democrat wins, and that’s every race, everywhere, all the time. Objections will be branded as election denial, blah, blah, you know, the drill.
I’ve made this point before, you say, so why dig up this dead horse? So you can kick it again? Yes, but with a new pair of boots.
Inspiration or observation can be capricious, and today, as I smirked at the newest installment of anyone but Trump theater, I had a new thought. I get their message, but sometimes it says more than you mean, for example. Independents will be more turned off by the prospect of a combative commander and chief who, whatever else you may think or say, oversaw one of the best American economies in recent memory.
AFP is big on kitchen table issues. The Democrat/Biden economy is a stanky sh!t hole. If Republicans can’t use that to win office, they don’t deserve to win (putting aside previous observations about cheating Dems and their 24/7 homonculi media marketing team). Everything costs a lot more, and the border – an issue that got Trump elected in 2016, is exponentially worse under Biden /(Obama 3.0) than Obama/Obama 1.0/2.0.
Biden is a terrible candidate, and I agree with Grokster Rob Roper that Stumbin’ Joe will be escorted off the political stage (for “medical” reasons) after he is nominated at the DNC Klan Bake and replaced with a young Marxist stud-like Governor Gavin Newsom, whom no one but the left finds dreamy. California is a regulatory hellhole that will exacerbate Biden’s stanky economic Sh!t hole albatross.
Democrat victory will require cheating, and it hardly matters who the Republicans nominate, which brings me to my other observation. AFP is saying, without meaning to, that no one else running from the right is worth the Democrat’s time or attention. Disregarding the insult to every candidate but Trump, why would a Republican or an Independent, faced with the current state of America, want a guy in the Oval Office that Democrats don’t fear?
And given a few more years, the Left will have either collapsed the economy or gotten the civil war they are after, and there won’t be much left to worry about except where to find food and more ammunition (open-border Chinese and Islamic infiltrators will probably have some if you’re looking.)
It’s ugly out there. And I’d be willing to support any nominee to prevent Joe Biden’s replacement from winning because I can still get Republicans to at least listen without threatening to silence me, imprison me, or bankrupt me. I should note that a few did try to get me fired a decade or so back, but I’ve not heard from them since they failed, and here I am. The point is that APF Action makes me think that they think Americans are that stupid, and perhaps they do. They’ve been mailing these flyers out all summer, and Trump’s polling is better and his opponents worse.
Reminder: We encourage Op-Eds and Rebuttles from Everyone on Everything. Send them to Editor@granitegrok.com. You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines’ on the FAQ Page.
The post Making fun of AFP Action ‘cuz They Make it So Easy appeared first on Granite Grok.
As those who have ever served in the military know, the United States Armed Forces is one of the most culturally and socioeconomically diverse institutions in America. It is full of patriotic Americans from all walks of life who come together to serve their country, fight for it, and ultimately die for it if called to.
To have served in the military in any form is to be a member of an exclusive club in this country. Although there are some barriers to entry, race is not among them.
The Armed Forces have also provided countless opportunities for citizens in our nation who—through hard work, grit, and merit–rise through the ranks, provide a meaningful and fulfilling life for themselves and their families, and are justly proud of their calling. No matter their race, Americans have found comfort in the idea that if you are willing to work and serve your country with honor, the military will reward merit.
Since January 2021, the Biden administration has made a concerted effort to inject “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) into almost every facet of military life. This includes mandatory training, a DoD-wide “Equity Action Plan,” and an entire day dedicated to “Leadership Stand-Down to Address Extremism in the Force.” Recently, this radical DEI advocacy was taken to a new level.
On August 9, 2022, in his previous role as Chief of Staff of the Air Force, CQ Brown sent a memo to both the Headquarters Offices for the Air Force Academy and the Air Education and Training Command titled “Officer Source of Commission Applicant Pool Goals,” the memo directed officials at those institutions to “develop a diversity and inclusion outreach plan aimed at achieving these goals no later than 30 September 2022.” Among these “goals,” Brown directed the offices to implement specific racial quotas broken down by percentage for each race. For example, the goal for “White” officer candidates is 67.5%, and for “Black/African American” officer candidates is 13%.
This is disturbing for several reasons and could be potentially catastrophic for the reputation of the military at a time when recruitment and retention is at an all-time low. Just this week, the Navy reported that it will miss its recruiting goal by 7,000 sailors this year, and the Air Force reported that it will miss its recruiting goal for the first time since 1999.
First, the military is one of the last institutions that Americans revere. A July 2023 Gallup Poll found that 60% of Americans have a “high confidence” in the military. This is a good thing and is likely due to the military having a reputation for being a nonpolitical meritocracy where decisions are made in the best interest of protecting the country and not based on ideology.
Second, our military exists to protect the American people, our homeland, our interests, allies abroad, neutralize our enemies wherever they hide, and ensure a safe and prosperous future for our children. We will do this by finding, enlisting, training, and retaining the best and brightest men and women the country has to offer, regardless of their race. Straying from that principle in the name of filling racial quotas is a disservice to the American taxpayer and makes Americans less safe.
Third, this directive is potentially illegal on its face. The United States Equal Opportunity Commission states on its website, “It is illegal for an employer to discriminate against a job applicant because of his or her race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information.” With this memo, Brown is advocating for just that. Air Force Officer applicants would be literally discriminated against because of their race if this new directive is implemented. There is seemingly no way to meet the quotas outlined in the directive without engaging in discrimination against certain applicants because of their race, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Most members of the Air Force and the military generally are honest, hard-working people who do not believe our future airmen should be reduced to racial statistics. Recently promoted, Brown will now leave behind this divisive policy and force those below him, who likely had nothing to do with the idea, to implement the policy. This is wrong.
We must do better. That is why my organization, the Center to Advance Security in America, has filed a series of FOIA requests to further investigate the implementation of these discriminatory policies.
The American military is the most powerful force for good the world has ever seen. If we want it to remain that way, we must shift our focus back to recruiting and retaining based on skill, merit, and future abilities – not race. It is not too late to shift course. If we do not, these out-of-control initiatives will continue, and military readiness will suffer.
James Fitzpatrick| Real Clear Wire
James Fitzpatrick is an Army Veteran and the Director of the Center to Advance Security in America (CASA), an organization dedicated to improving the safety and security of the American people.
The post U.S. Military-Sanctioned Diversity Initiatives are Out of Control appeared first on Granite Grok.
The SPLC’s Hate Map is a ridiculous partisan exercise with some real-world benefits. It shows observers whom the left fears or hates and which is reason enough to investigate them ourselves. Some will be awful, but most won’t. Gender Cultists in Oxford have embarked on something similar for churches.
“The Oxford Safe Churches project, run by a coalition of LGBTQ+ organisations and Churches in Oxford, have published their first faith report, titled ‘Attitudes to Queer Christians in Oxford Churches,’” reports the Oxford Student news website. “The report, published on Friday 22 September, uses a ‘traffic light’ system to rank the LGBTQ+ inclusivity of churches in Oxford.”
I think churches should be as open to members of the Gender Cult as any group of sinners (calm down, Lefties, we’re all sinners), but this grading system isn’t anything like that. The Church with the most favorable score,
“… is probably a church which has internalised a queer identity, it may be that a large number of LGBTQ+ people attend or even that they started or lead the church. Straight and cis people attend as part of the diversity of the church rather than the assumed norm. If someone were to speak against inclusivity, others would be very likely to defend it. LGBTQ+ relationships and milestones are publicly celebrated. Agencies and resources which offer LGBTQ+ people support and allyship are almost certainly linked to and promoted. Modelling of including behaviours and language is normative. Driving through a green light, you can be far more certain that the road will be clear and safe to drive.
Because faith is all about celebrating your sexuality? Note to the Gender Cult: it’s not, but as I’ve observed in the past, the gender cult is fixated on sexuality and sexual attraction with or without sex or marriage or the age of majority (yes, I said that).
Heterosexual adults are not fighting to discuss their sexuality with children unless they are pedophiles or members of the gender cult or both. It is otherwise frowned upon and likely to get you arrested and labeled for life. But gender cultists find any objection to their sexualizing children as bigotry, and you are welcome to your opinion, but schools produce exponentially more pedophilia arrests than churches and always have. But that’s not a concern becasue, with rare exceptions, the gender cult already controls schools.
And while the left has been infiltrating Christian churches for years, the gender-bending requirements are more recent but flourishing. An extension of a series of lies beginning with “We only want civil weddings,” to “We want church weddings,” to “We’re grading churches,” which leads to protesting, Gayjacking, blacklisting, and canceling.
And somewhere along the line, not long from now, the Church of Joseph of the Technicolor Genderless Dreamcoat will have a “pastor” who has sex with a minor, and if you don’t publicly celebrate that, you’re an evil bigot.
The post Can We Get the Gender Cult to Rate Churches in the US so It’s Easier To find The One’s That Aren’t Crazy? appeared first on Granite Grok.
In the recent decision of New York State Rifle and Pistol Assn v Bruen 142 S. CT. 2111, the Supreme Court very clearly held that the Second Amendment protects the rights of all citizens, even those in New Hampshire, to “armed self-defense.”
The right to armed self-defense applies anywhere and everywhere -unless the state can prove that the Historical record reflects a national tradition of gun restriction.
In announcing its decision, the Court explained: “We reiterate that the standard for applying the Second Amendment is as follows: When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects the conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”
Analytically, there are three points:
1. The Second Amendment provides that anyone and everyone is entitled, as a matter of highest Constitutional rights, to “armed self-defense”; everyone has an unfettered right to “armed self-defense” anywhere, anytime, anyplace.
2.If the State wants to regulate this right of “armed self-defense, it can do so in very limited ways subject to the following: the burden of proof is on the state to prove that a regulation limiting “armed self-defense” is constitutionally approved.
3. Such regulation is only constitutionally approved if the state shows that there is a national tradition dating back to the time the Constitution was written consistent with the regulation the state seeks to approve.
With regard to item 3, the Supreme Court referred to “sensitive places” which have had long-standing regulations/limitations on the Second Amendment. “Sensitive places” are places where the USA has traditionally limited guns (for example, court houses and prisons). However, the Supreme Court emphasized- it is unconstitutional for a town or city to declare an area to be “sensitive” just because of some modern-day notion of gun safety. A sensitive area is only sensitive if it can be shown to be subject to a historical tradition of gun regulation. In addition, “Sensitive Area” must be reflected in how the Government treats the so-called “sensitive area.” Consider this commentary approved by the Supreme Court:
“Passing a statute declaring some place to be a “gun free zone” does nothing to deter criminals from entering with guns and attacking the people inside. In contrast, when a building such as a courthouse, is protected by metal detectors and guards, the government shows the seriousness of the government’s belief that the buildings sensitive…Conversely, when the government provides no security at all-such as in a post office or its parking lot-the government’s behavior shows that the location is probably not sensitive….”
Tell me: why isn’t the State of New Hampshire enforcing this law? Why are there so many towns and cities that have wholesale ignored this decision and routinely continue to ban guns in a variety of places despite the clear language in the Court’s decision?
I heard one town official state, “We are like a business. And, of course, any business can ban guns on its own property.”
How about NO AND HELL NO.
In Koons v Platkin, the Federal court in New Jersey answered this question:
“While it is certainly true that the government has, with respect to its own lands, the rights of an ordinary proprietor, to maintain possession and prosecute trespassers….the State is not exempt from recognizing the protections afforded to individuals by the Constitution simply because it acts on Government property…”
In a separate case, Wolford v Lopez, a Hawaii Federal court stated;
“Whether the Government acted as a proprietor …has no place…under BRUEN.
Applying the Supreme Court analysis, various Federal Courts have held unconstitutional “gun-free zones” in the following cases :
1. Hospitals
2. Public Transportation
3. Places that serve liquor
4. Parks and playgrounds
5. Libraries
6. Places of worship
7. Financial institutions
In New Hampshire, many, many “gun-free zones” have been declared without regard to the “Supreme Court’s analysis. One common “gun-free Zone” is “Town Property.”
Consider the following from the town of Hollis: Several years ago, well before Bruen, the town of Hollis held an election on a warrant article banning guns from all town property. Such property includes town hall, but it also includes very large tracts of raw land, including conservation land.
What Constitutional legal theory did they rely upon to ban Guns? Several residents complained that the noise of guns engaged in target practice was a bother to them, and they wanted all guns removed from huge tracts of land the town “owns.”
Under Bruen, the Gun ban is clearly unconstitutional. No place does the Second Amendment state that guns can be banned because local residents don’t want to hear the noise guns make when folks are target practicing. Moreover, in terms of “historical tradition,” the land in question has been open for gun use-including target practice, for over 200 years. Revolutionary War soldiers practiced their aim prior to going off to war. New Hampshire sharpshooters (a rather famous group whose heroism helped win the battle of Gettysburg) practiced on the townland during the Civil War.
Finally, in no universe I know is the raw, open land to be considered “sensitive,” as the Supreme Court defined that term. Everyone has access to it. There are no gates with metal detectors or armed guards. Simply put, the Town of Hollis is engaged in an illegal act, an Unconstitutional act, by designating Town land as being exempt from the Second Amendment.
Sadly, the town of Hollis does not seem to care. I checked—no hearing on the subject. No inquiry. No effort of any kind to follow the Supreme Court decision in Bruen. I did see one guy in town who wore a t-shirt that said, “Pack the Court. Until then, ignore them.”
Seems like he speaks for Hollis. And indeed, all the other towns and cities in New Hampshire that refuse to enforce the Bruen decision.
Good job, folks. Makes total sense.
Our society is folding like a $1.99 lawn chair, so why not just ignore the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and anything else you don’t like?
The post New Hampshire Refuses To Enforce the Right To Bear Arms appeared first on Granite Grok.
Vermont is serious about destroying its economy and residents via meaningless reductions in carbon emissions. They’ve got commissions, committees, targets, and standards, so they’ve also got reports about how all that’s not working out for them.
All that chin-stroking, finger-wagging, hand-winging, mandating, and regulating, and as of 2020, according to this report, VT is the second highest emitter per capita in New England. The report is all about Vermont, but one of the key findings, the number one key finding, is “Vermont has the second highest per capita greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in all of New England, behind only New Hampshire” (emphasis in the original).
New Hampshire is number one again!
I’m excited to hear that, but it got me thinking. New Hampshire’s economy (GDP) is much more robust than Vermont’s. In 2022, Vermont’s total GDP was a paltry 38% of New Hampshire’s. 40,830.8 Million (VT) Compared to 105,024.6 Million (NH).
Note: All the data used in this article is readily available on the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Website, which I chose to provide consistency in reporting across both states.
New Hampshire’s GDP per capita is $75,666.13, while Vermont’s is $63,092.67, and NH has double Vermont’s state population. We have more people creating value from the emissions we … emit. The result is that our GDP per metric ton of emissions is higher than Vermont’s. New Hampshire generates 7.9 million dollars of GDP per metric ton of “emissions” compared to Vermont’s 7.3 million in GDP per Metric ton.
I bring it up becasue for years (before China went ballistic and surpassed everyone in emissions), the Left used to bitch endlessly about (a lot of things, and still does) how the US was responsible for 25% of the world’s emissions. We were also generating at least that much global GDP while others failed ot match emissions to productivity. But they left that part out and still do. And US emissions per GDP have shrunk while China’s has exploded.
If you want to get the most from your all-in, America is a better bet—the same applies to New England. We’ve got a lower tax burden, less welfare and poverty, a higher standard of living, low crime, and have had fewer of our natural rights infringed. And while I didn’t do the math for any other New England State state, I’m betting we fare well when it comes to the output we generate per capita compared to the emissions we allegedly emit, if emissions matter, which they don’t.
But if they did, does it make more sense to look for ways to handicap your people and their productivity or to optimize production from the energy used? I suppose both if you’re that keen on reducing a trace percentage of a trace substance that isn’t doing anything you claim, but that is not what the Left is doing. It is putting its crippling agenda before people, price, productivity, and prosperity, and it will continue to cost states like Vermont in ways that are a lot less invisible than CO2 and a lot more tangible, economically, than the voodoo political science of climate change.
And it is still New Hampshire’s problem. We share a grid with the rest of New England. When Vermont and Massachusetts signed on to California’s transportation emission goals, they tied us up, too, at least indirectly. Even if we never cut our wrists to bleed for on the alter of their environmentalism, the increased demand created by thousands of EVs, heat pumps, and whatever else they are planning will impact supply and drive up the price of electricity.
Unless the Governor and Legislature plan to make New Hampshire an energy-independent state willing to sell its excess into that grid, our advantage is at the mercy of their legislatures, and those bastards are crazy.
Someone should work out how we will sustain ourselves in the region faced with those complications before it’s too late. The Legislatures of Vermont and Massachusetts should not be enacting policies with that level of economic impact on New Hampshire’s citizens when we didn’t vote for them.
The post Vermont Emits Less “Carbon” than NH but Produces Less With it (So Is It Actually Emitting More?) appeared first on Granite Grok.
Many of us know and are experiencing an intense battle for TRUTH in the public forum of our National politics. The truth about the character of our leaders. The truth about the natural design of the human race. The truth about medical practices and health issues.
The truth about the atmosphere and climate change, and finally, the truth about the history of America’s founding.
The ongoing attempt by Academia to project a new version of our country’s founding and History through our education system is an attempt by the power of reinvention to change the idea of our country’s founding. Project 1619 is a collaboration of journalists trying to fit the narrative of negativity in regard to America being a great country, perhaps one of the greatest that has ever existed.
So let us approach the dilemma through the door of a quote from a famous author who is much on everyone’s mind today: George Orwell, you know him, the guy who wrote 1984. He said, “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.”
I would like to draw attention today to a particular area of American History that is most assuredly being denied and buried in public and private schools, as well as business settings and our courts, both State and Federal. Academia, particularly, has sought to suppress, rewrite, or conveniently ignore the vast information available about the role of Christianity as lived out in the entity we call the church in the founding of America.
In laying out a boundary to guide us, there were two settlements in early America, i.e., the 1600’s era. (There was a Spanish settlement in Florida by French Huguenots around 1565, now known as St. Augustine, but that is for another day.)
Jamestown, Virginia, and Plymouth, Massachusetts.
Jamestown (1607) was purely for economic reasons and was sponsored and paid for by the Virginia Company, and was a private venture that had been granted a royal charter by King James I, hence named in honor of His Majesty.
Plymouth (1620-1691) was founded by a group of Separatists initially known as the Brownist Emigration (named for their leader Robert Browne), who came later to be known as Pilgrims. Their desire was to be in a land where they were free to worship God as they saw best, not the established religion of the King of England.
The Pilgrims flourished after a few years of struggle, and we have often been told their story in history as a result of their thankfulness to God for preserving their lives. (One of our greatest holidays is in honor of their faith and thankfulness to God for preserving them, THANKSGIVING, and is still celebrated today.) Much can be said here, but this is a summation in its most basic format.
The Puritan influence, however, was a little different. The Puritans arrived in 1630, ten years after the Separatists, and had money and resources. They did not separate themselves from the Church of England completely. They thought they could create a true community of faith under the auspices of the Church, but they had to do it in another land. The Puritans overshadowed the Pilgrims in numbers and resources. As they gained ascendency, the American colonies, particularly in New England, became the wealth center of the New World. Fast forward 150 years….the colonies are now established and engaging in the IDEAS of freedom from England’s rule. These ideas resulted in what we call the American Revolution. Where did these ideas of independence, self-rule, self-government, freedom from government oppression, and equal justice for all come from?
The American Revolution was a direct result of people being educated on a mass scale. There were no public schools during the revolution period of the country. However, children were educated in numerous ways…parents, Pastors, tutors, philosophical societies, apprenticeships, and dame schools in which the children were taught to read and write by women in their own kitchens. The Old Deluder’s Law of 1642 was passed in the Massachusetts Colony and stated that “All youth are to be taught to read perfectly the English tongue, have knowledge in the laws, (civics) and be taught some orthodox catechism.” (religion)
No separation of government and God could be found anywhere.
The Pastor was the single most powerful voice to influence and inspire the thinking and reasoning of the colonists. For example, Over the span of the colonial era, American ministers delivered approximately eight million sermons. These messages were often one-and-a-half to two hours or more in length. Based upon this, the average 70-year-old churchgoer would have listened to 7,000 sermons in his or her lifetime, which consisted of over 10,000 hours of listening and learning. This is the equivalent of ten separate undergraduate degrees in a modern university.
The sermons provided families with a superb educational experience. Sunday morning was not only a time to gather for friendship and local town news but also to hear a message from an individual who was probably the most educated in the community. The sermon was based on Biblical knowledge first and foremost. However, due to the formal training of most ministers, the sermon often referenced the great historical thinkers of classical literature and leaders of the day in government, philosophy, and science. Pastors would read the laws recently passed in Congress and teach the congregation whether or not this law was in alignment with the Bible’s teaching on the subject.
Sermons were a part of the culture of the day. Many public occasions, such as Thanksgiving, election day sermons, local militia sermons, and, of course, weddings and funerals. Many sermons were published as political pamphlets.
George Bancroft, a 19th-century statesman and historian, wrote, “The Revolution of 1776, as far as it was affected by religion, was a Presbyterian measure. It was the natural outgrowth of the principles which the Presbyterianism of the Old World planted in her sons in the New World -the English Puritans, the Scottish Covenanters, the French Huguenots, the Dutch Calvinists, and the Presbyterians of Ulster (Ireland). The American Revolution was but the application of the principles of the Reformation to civil government.”
I am looking forward to bringing you vital information on the role of the Clergy and the Bible in connection to the foundation of our country as a CITY ON A HILL, a direct quote from Puritan leader John Winthrop, who connected America to a divine destiny. This phrase was used by other founders and in our modern time, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Regan. The author of the quote, of course, is Jesus Christ. (Matthew 5:14)
Until next week….
Allen Cook, Senior Pastor
Grace Ministries International
Brentwood, NH
Editor Note: Pulpit Polity will be a regular Sunday morning feature on GraniteGrok.com.
The post Pulpit Polity – Faith, Education, and America’s Founding appeared first on Granite Grok.
Democrats love impeachment hearings and then they don’t but they are connected, the hearings. Democrats impeached Trump for trying to uncover the Biden-Ukraine money-laundering scheme and they rewarde Trump with a star chamber hearing devoid of facts or substance. Now Biden is on the hook for exactly that.
Among other questionable antics.
House Democrats will do or say anything, often with the aid and comfort of Republicans, so the current exercise may seem futile. The Senate will never sign off, so why bother? becasue that’s how things are done, and we’re stumbling like drunken fools into another election year.
Sharing the Biden Family secrets might be good for Republicans, and as we’ve reported for years, there is a lot of money moving around in exchange for what looked like access and favors. If it’s all on the up and up, sharing it with America should prove that.
Democrats appear reluctant to let Americans decide, and Rep. Nancy Mace has words for them. Adult words.
BREAKING – EXPLOSIVE: This is Bullshit! Democrats, please, spare me your hypocrisy, Joe Biden is corrupt, and here is the evidence, Congresswoman Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) EXPLODES at Joe Biden’s impeachment inquiry hearing. WATCH pic.twitter.com/ff8cVEAQ21
— Simon Ateba (@simonateba) September 28, 2023
HT | Breitbart
The post ICYMI – Rep. Nancy Mace Has Words for Democrats at Biden Impeachment Hearings appeared first on Granite Grok.
There is a truly remarkable … remarkable for its, at best, lack of substance and, at worst, casual disregard for facts … op-ed in the Union “Leader” (should be Misleader) regurgitating the same stale NeverTrump arguments against Trump that have failed to resonate for months. Here it is and then some comments:
First, how ironic that the very people claiming that Trump-voters are quasi-cultists begin their “op-ed” by sounding like cultists … “Governor Chris Sununu has been right about many things … “. Really? Like COVID? Oh, I’m sorry NH-NeverTrump … I forgot. It’s actually Trump’s fault that the mighty Sun-King locked down New Hampshire.
Next, there are NO facts presented to show that the Special Election turned on Trump. A far more likely explanation is that the NHGOP just SUCKS at electioneering. The NHGOP lost seats in the 2022 midterms. But that’s Trump’s fault, according to NH-NeverTrump. And if the NHGOP had won seats in the 2022 midterms, as the Party out-of-power (in terms of the Presidency) is supposed to? Well … that would have been explained by NH-NeverTrump as … DESPITE Trump we managed to blah, blah, blah. These people are conspiracy-theorists. Everything, according to them, proves “Orange-Man bad.”
Next, note how NH-NeverTrump legitimizes the Democrats’ law-fare against Trump … “Trump’s been found liable for fraud … It’s now documented that his financial empire is bogus and illegitimate.” Anyone with even cursory knowledge of this case knows that it is bullish*t … Mar a Lago worth only $18 million? Only a corrupt Democrat-judge could make such a finding. Indeed, NH-NeverTrump is essentially trafficking Democrat lies when it makes outrageous, demonstrably false claims like this.
Note, also, how insulting NH-NeverTrump is to the voters they have failed to persuade … “[t]he fealty that members of the Trump cult offer to the former president continues to perplex”, “[w]hen will the scales fall from the eyes of Trump’s Granite State supporters”. Does NH-NeverTrump even realize how condescending and obnoxious they sound?
And then there’s more Trump-deranged, at best fact-free claims … Trump lost the House in 2018 (had nothing to do with Paul Ryan and his ilk refusing to fund the border-wall) … Trump lost the Senate in 2020 (had nothing to do with the 2020 election being rigged) … the “Trumpsters” took out Kelly Ayotte in 2016 (had nothing to with with Ayotte spending most of her term as McCain’s sidekick pushing for endless wars and then spending the last year voting with Shaheen to … you know … appeal to the undeclared voters). Everything is Trump’s fault … EVERYTHING!!!
The truth, Melissa, is that you NeverTrump people are living in a parallel universe. GOP-voters do NOT want to return to the pre-2016 endless-war, got-to-get-the-wine-mom-vote, Bush/McCain/Romney GOP.
The post NH-NeverTrump … Wash, Rinse, Repeat appeared first on Granite Grok.
It’s easy to talk about the sexual revolution as if our country is past our fling with godless morality. Its proponents laugh at their hippie orgies in the middle of muddy fields like it was innocent fun instead of the quicksand that captured not only their generation but also the ones that followed.
It turns out that the children raised by drug-filled sex feigns are not alright. They took a beautiful country and turned it inside out to resemble the trauma they carry inside them. Men rightly recognize there are significant issues in our society that require immediate attention but are in denial of their role in the continued decline. As long as they are the number one consumers of sexual content, our societal shortcomings will persist.
Four times as many men as women (44 percent vs. 11 percent) admitted in a May 2022 Institute for Family Studies survey that they watched porn in the previous month. Sixty percent of men who admitted to watching porn in the past 24 hours reported higher rates of loneliness and isolation. Porn is a bastardized version of marital sex. The more you consume, the worse you feel because an imitation is never as good as the real thing.
A lot of the online vitriol spewed at women by men is a result of those guys’ ambivalence about watching so much porn.
Guys consume porn and part of them is aroused and part of them is disgusted.
He desires the women he sees, but also judges and despises them.
He comes away…
— Dean Abbott (@DeanAbbott) September 25, 2023
Sexual content is tailored explicitly for male appetites. This has always been true, but the internet exponentially expanded the demand to commodify female sexuality for men. (ROOKE: Blaming Feminism Is A Cope For Men Who Traded Masculinity For The Mirage Of Free Love)
It shouldn’t be shocking to say women crave attention from men. It’s how humanity survives. We search for a mate, get married, and have children. But men stopped protecting this societal structure after the sexual revolution, leaving women to navigate an emerging sexual dynamic where they are no longer prized for their virtue. Instead, the sluttier, the better.
Women quickly learned that men no longer wanted to protect their sensuality. If they hoped to be desirable to the opposite sex, it required they lose their morality and domestic purity. A great representation of this is the musical “Grease,” with Olivia Newton John as Sandy Olsson and John Travolta as Danny Zuko.
The movie came out in 1978, well after the effects of the sexual revolution started showing. Sandy felt she needed to change from an innocent All-American girl wearing beautiful feminine dresses to a cigarette-smoking wild woman with a skin-tight leather bodysuit to win Danny’s affection.
There is no difference between this and a woman creating an OnlyFans account to produce content she knows will help her gain male subscribers. Women will continue to degrade themselves until men prove to them that they are worth more than $7.99/month.
Porn has encouraged men to see femininity as something to consume, rather than something to cultivate.
— G.G. Geist | The Potter’s Philosophy (@gg_geist) September 27, 2023
A Founding Father and our nation’s second president, John Adams, warned what would happen if men did not safeguard female innocence in our country. While visiting France as an American diplomat in June 1778, Adams wrote in his diary that his international travels taught him that “the manners of women were the most infallible barometer, to ascertain the degree of morality and virtue in a nation.”
“The Manners of Women are the surest criterion by which to determine whether a Republican Government is practicable, in a Nation or not. The Jews, the Greeks, the Romans, the Swiss, the Dutch, all lost their public Spirit, their Republican Principles and habits, and their Republican Forms of Government, when they lost the Modesty and Domestic Virtues of their Women,” Adams continued.
When men allow their sexual desires to trump their responsibility to protect society, we get a nation like ours where cities are in chaos, children are mutilating themselves, and the government is rounding up political dissidents. America has undoubtedly lost our public spirit. If we want it back, men will have to choose purpose over porn.
Mary Rooke is a reporter at the Daily Caller.
Mary Rooke | Daily Caller News Service
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
The post If Men Are Serious About Saving America, They’ll Launch A War On Porn appeared first on Granite Grok.
Money from foreign players is not allowed in American politics. George Soros is probably the best-known foreign-born individual who spends millions of dollars annually influencing elections and policies. Soros was born in Hungary over ninety years ago and became a United States citizen very early. To say Soros is a Progressive is an understatement. He funds green initiatives, and the campaigns of many Progressive DAs considered responsible by the Right for the demise of civil order in some of our bigger cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.
As far Left as Soros is, his son and heir to the Soros fortune is further Left. Alex Soros is thirty-seven years old, and George has relegated much of the decision-making of the Soros Foundation to his young son. George Soros has a net worth of nearly $10 Billion, and Alex will have plenty of money to play with in the American political arena.
A new name has surfaced who is just as dangerous to America as George Soros, but this person has to be covert in how he spreads his money as he is not an American citizen. Hansjorg Wyss is a Swiss billionaire with a net worth of a paltry $5.1 Billion, and he enjoys spending some of that money each year to fund Progressive policies and candidates. Not being a citizen, Wyss had to set up a foundation or multiple foundations to spend his cash influencing American politics.
Through his $2.7 billion Wyss Foundation, his $232 million Berger Action Fund, the Democracy Alliance’s Democracy Fund, and the Arabella Advisors network of dark money, Wyss has joined other progressive billionaires like George Soros, S. Donald Sussman, and Pierre Omidyar in financing Democratic politicians and progressive activists. He has spent considerable money to buy five newspapers in Maine. Wyss has also attempted to buy newspapers in Baltimore, Chicago, and New York. Apparently, he plans to influence Americans by controlling their news source.
Wyss has to direct his “Dark Money” through a holding company or Fund; in his case, The Berger Action Fund is the primary funding source. Some of the recent donations are:
Nonprofits that have received millions in donations from Wyss funneled more than $3 million to Stacey Abrams, who won the gubernatorial Democratic primary in Georgia Tuesday, and another $3 million to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in 2020, according to the most recent tax filings for Fund for a Better Future Inc. This California-based nonprofit supports anti-Republican initiatives.
Fund for a Better Future received $14.7 million in donations in 2019 from the Washington-based Berger Action Fund, a nonprofit linked to Wyss, tax filings show. The Fund doled out $3,137,000 to Fair Fight Action Inc., a nonprofit connected to Abrams, in 2020 and $3 million to House Majority Forward, a nonprofit with ties to Pelosi.
This foreign money corrupts our already sad political system from the outside, which is supposed to be illegal. Of course, people with the means will always find a way around the rules, which is what is happening with Wyss. The laws must be tightened to eliminate the loopholes. We know this money is being funneled, and these funds must be shut down, not because the majority of money supports the Left, but because they are wrong.
The post Soros Is Not The Only Wallet We Need Fear appeared first on Granite Grok.
We are happy to announce that tickets for ‘Groktoberfest are officially on sale starting … Now! Food, Music, Beverages, speakers, and some Fun! I’d also like to welcome our newest newsletter subscribers to the list.
Get Tickets NowWe have had many generous donors support us, and we want to make sure they hear us say thank you (often) and have an opportunity to receive updates about GraniteGrok, our content, our fundraising, events, and how we are investing their support to grow the reach of independent media.
Part of that effort is Groktoberfest. We still need to raise funds for the first year. Thanks to all of you, we are over a third of the way. Groktoberfest will hopefully add to that by increasing interest and adding monthly subscribers. We are also building a list of Sponsors whom we hope can get us over the top for our first year’s goal.
Speaking of first, or should I say next! Tickets are on sale now!
Join us on October 28th, 2023, from 1-4 pm for Groktoberfest—a celebration in support of Independent media and GraniteGrok.com. We are planning live music, comedy, Local Groups and Vendors, food, beverages, and (hopefully beer), and a growing list of speakers featuring…
– Hal Shurtleff (on his 9-0 Free Speech Supreme Court Win)
– Dan Richards (Defend Our Kids)
– Jeff Chidester (Also serving as our MC)
– Steve MacDonald & Skip Murphy
With…
A Gun Raffle! – We are Raffling a Ruger 10-22: Tickets sold at the event!
– Video messages from local and national folks.
– For a vendor table, contact Diane Bitter at ddbitter@aol.com – (603) 498-4232 (We want your groups to join us!)
– Meet authors from GraniteGrok.com
– More planned, stay tuned!
Location: The Londonderry Fish and Game Club
5 Lund St, Litchfield, NH 03052
You can access the ticketing App via a QR code.
Use the embedded form below, or go to the ticketing page here.
DonorboxEventWidget.embed({container: 'donorboxEmbed',embedFormSlug: 'https://donorbox.org/embed_event/504084'});
Thanks for Reading, donating, and supporting GraniteGrok.com! And we look forward to seeing you at Groktoberfest!
The post Groktoberfest Tickets Are Available, Now! appeared first on Granite Grok.
Drag queens are men dressed as clownish caricatures of women performing burlesque. It is about sex and sexuality. But progressives keep saying it ain’t so despite the costumes and the behavior; let them prance about appropriating female stereotypes in front of children.
We’re not sexualizing children, they say, which is to say they are lying.
Yes, it is an alternative lifestyle, but so is bondage, drug culture, hard-core pornography, self-mutilation, and helping Democrat campaigns, none of which are healthy.
Projecting that upon children too young to even understand is cruel and unusual punishment. But Princeton, the university, has decided to teach Drag as an elective.
The program is offered through the school’s Gender + Sexuality Resource Center and is open to all undergraduate and graduate students interested in the world of drag, according to the center’s Instagram page.
Throughout the 2023-24 school year, enrolled participants will cover an array of topics, including the history of drag, “Sewing 101,” choreography, face painting, photoshoots and other topics, according to the program’s registration form.
The Sexuality Resource Center. Not Performance Studies, Theater Arts, or even Stage Management.
Princeton didn’t even have acting classes in its curricula until the addition of Drag University. But it has a center for sexuality, which is an interesting twist. As a culture, Westerners are increasingly opposed to physical sex. I’ve heard people who trapped themselves on the gender spectrum refer to it as disgusting. Win for team Depop. Make them obsessed with sex (gender), make it meaningless, and watch them abandon it.
I’m not entirely sure that’s a bad thing. If you are that easily misled, perhaps excluding yourself from the gene pool is a collective good. But it is still social engineering at its finest, so we must object. Princeton is teaching Drag to students who are paying 83,000.00 per year. What’s next? Ivy League Drag teams performing for honors.
And how long before this area of study expands to include recruiting minors, or is that already part of the program?
HT | PJ Media
The post So, Drag Queens Are All About the Sex? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Where will their minds be in 4 more years? Nashua, very much like Washington, seems to have an age problem with leadership.
Perhaps Nashua should enact an Ordinance with a mayoral mandatory retirement age of 70. Mayor Donchess is mentally slipping, like his Corporation Counsel, Steve Bolton. He seems to be unable to remember where is tucking money in the City budget building in hidden line items to stash away cash. We all know how it goes; you get older, and you put things in places you just can’t remember.
He claimed in a recent BOA meeting that the FY2022 Audit (yes, 2022, and it is September 2023) has been completed. He is imagining the presence of the Auditor in his finance meeting in 2023 to present the FY2022 Audit. The Mayor chairs that Committee. But it did not happen. A slipping mind.
He has forgotten he signed a $7.1 Million Loan in 2020 between the City of Nashua and a public Corporation formed to construct and operate the Nashua Arts Center. He forgot to record the Loan on the City Financials. Yikes! The Mayor is conflating this Loan with the money spent on the Arts Center. Citizens did not know about this Loan because it was never recorded as part of the $21 million of bond proceeds obtained to construct the Center.
Now is remembering the Loan he signed to be a Lease Agreement. He did sign a Lease Agreement so taxpayers could pay rent to an Art Center that we bought by bonding with our tax dollars. But, he also signed a Loan for $7.1 Million while taxpayers pay the bond debt.
Mayor Donchess is a lifelong Attorney who appears confused. Is it age or has he been in politics too long? Let’s eliminate the age factor and retire Mayor Donchess permanently.
To the Nashua Democratic Party of “youth” – find leaders who don’t have one foot on the banana peel and another in the grave.
The post Nashua, Like Washington, Seems to Have an Age Problem appeared first on Granite Grok.
After very little thought, I renamed this recurring topic. My dog is still white and with us, but he is a lab, and since this is a pseudo-sciency observational update (fisking) sort of thing, LAB works. White Dog Research is now White Lab Research, and we just saw the first tick of Autumn.
Wednesday. One tick. That’s it. We had not seen any after a light spring, but I wondered when we’d see them again. Not if, but when. They are like out-of-state Democrat voters. They are inevitable.
Today is Saturday, and we’ve not seen any since, but it’s early. I expect to find more.
The other thing we’ve not seen much of this year is wackadoodle Climate Cultists posing as journalists ranting about an explosion of blood-sucking parasites. There are always a few out there (blood-sucking parasite journalists), but this year, they were distracted—all the flooding in June, arson (wildfires) in July – which was a boiling, record-setting (not really) month for heat.
Hurricane season has been more active, but not in the way the Cult likes it. The number of storms is up, but they have not been kind enough to trash the eastern seaboard with the regularity you get from too much bran in your climate colon. They keep losing steam and drifting north, losing power until they are just windy cloudbursts. It’s a thing, but not the eye-catching storm chasing devastation that gets people to stop trying to keep up with the Kardashians if you know what I mean.
The Latest season of Batchelor in Paradise is starting tonight, and with the writers’ strike over, the blood-sucking ticks in the Climate Cult will need something massive to distract us from our, um, distractions. There is some small hope. We’ve got tropical storm twins mucking about southeast of the Sargasso Sea. Phillipe and Rina. Phillipe is packing a bit more punch for now, but they are scheduled for a rendevous (nowhere near us) and to wander uselessly across the middle of the Atlantic.
Behind them, the storm conveyor running off the west coast of Africa continues to churn out potential, but it has been doing that for months, and with October looming, the odds of a nice CAT 5 killer storm have waned. No plague of ticks in New England. One landfall hurricane. Maybe we’ll have a cold, snowy winter this year. It has been a while, so we’re due, and if there’s one thing we know about the global threat of anthropogenic warming (AGW), it also results in cooling.
And I have yet to see any cult stenographers blame the dearth of ticks or lack of hurricane landfalls on AGW, but history tells us this is true. An irrefutable hypothesis is justified by all circumstances, or the money laundering operation could suffer.
The post The First Tick of Fall appeared first on Granite Grok.
GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy joined TikTok in September, becoming the first Republican presidential candidate to do so. As expected, Ramaswamy was swiftly criticized by many within his own party, culminating with the fireworks at Wednesday night’s debate.
Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley lit into Vivek for using the app. “Every time I hear you, I feel a little bit dumber. This is infuriating because TikTok is one of the most dangerous social media apps we could have,” she said. It’s worth noting that TikTok is so “dangerous” that Haley’s own daughter uses the app.
Other prominent Republicans have even called for a full TikTok ban. Sen. Josh Hawley assailed the app with particular fervor back in March.
I get it. There are legitimate concerns over the app. The Chinese Communist Party may be spying on us or stealing our information from the Chinese-engineered and –owned app, and they should be held accountable with a solution that ensures the privacy of American users. There is a laundry list of issues with China, from COVID-19’s origins to unfair trade practices, but while President Xi Jinping grows closer to Russian President Vladimir Putin and threatens to invade Taiwan, our presidential candidates are sitting here scared of an app called TikTok.
China isn’t doing anything with TikTok that American tech companies aren’t also doing. It’s naïve to think Mark Zuckerberg isn’t farming your personal details to send you specified ads on Facebook or Instagram right now. And Amazon knows what you want before you want it. Thanks, Jeff Bezos.
Ramaswamy, who has risen to prominence as the millennial candidate, announced his TikTok debut with a post on Twitter. “Kids under age 16 shouldn’t be using it, but the fact is that many young voters are & we’re not going to change this country without winning,” he wrote. “We can’t just talk about the importance of the GOP ‘reaching young voters’ while hiding in our own echo chambers.”
This truth couldn’t be more evident. I traveled to Iowa with the Ramaswamy campaign in July for my TikTok channel. We filmed an MTV “Cribs”-style bus tour and discussed American patriotism, family, and more. The posts racked up millions of views on my page, 80 percent of which came from the coveted 18-34 demographic.
Ramaswamy taking the plunge to join TikTok is a strategic move that more GOP candidates should adopt if they want to be competitive against Democrats in 2024, as a Gen-Z TikTok journalist (don’t laugh) with over 150 million views on the platform. I can tell you that many young voters don’t even know who some of the candidates are. Young people aren’t turning on the TV to watch a debate or a town hall. They’re scrolling through TikTok. In fact, only nine percent of daily traditional TV viewers are Gen Z. On my TikTok channel, I receive thousands of comments from young Americans who say I am their favorite news source.
I am hopeful that Ramaswamy’s decision to join TikTok will inspire the other candidates, but I’m not expecting all of them to come around overnight. While I was covering the first Republican debate in Milwaukee in August, a communications director for one of the GOP candidates told me he would not even open TikTok on his phone.
Get on TikTok; reach young people. That’s the name of the game. And if you get a few targeted ads that hit too close to home, that’s just the cost of doing business. The reality is you can’t fight the CCP from the sidelines while Democrats are in control of the White House and Senate, so come up with a plan to build a broad coalition, including young people, to take the reins of government and handle the CCP accordingly in January of 2025.
Tucker Carlson wasted no time embracing new media after his controversial firing from Fox News. Tucker brings in more viewers on Twitter than any other cable news show. His first episode alone garnered 85 million views in the first day. Tucker joined TikTok in August.
By the end of 2023, 54.4 percent of all Americans will no longer pay for a traditional cable TV service. That statistic should concern GOP candidates and party leadership, who have buried their heads in the sand for far too long. But it’s better to be late to a party than stay at home wondering what could have been.
The pros outweigh the potential cons when it comes to TikTok adoption. Republicans are slowly embracing new media, but are way behind the Democrats in terms of youth outreach. The DNC already has its Army of Influencers – that’s literally what they’re called – working overtime. Public FEC data has already revealed that the DNC is paying Palette Management a whopping $210,000. Palette manages Harry Sisson, the 20-year-old tasked with making Biden seem cool to Gen Z. You’ve probably seen him screaming into his phone about how hunky Joe looks in his swim trunks on some Delaware beach while the world burns.
Ramaswamy saying yes to new media has brought real results for his campaign. Three months ago, barely anyone knew his name or how to pronounce it. Today, he’s a major player for the highest office in the land. The GOP should be using TikTok to speak to young people directly. It’s not rocket science. Communicate with young people on an app they already use. Tell young people what solutions you offer to their main issues. Pull that off, and they just might join your coalition.
Link Lauren is an independent journalist and content creator. He covers politics and culture on his TikTok channel @itsLinkLauren.
Link Lauren | Daily Caller News Service
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
The post Vivek Knows The Best Way To Reach The Youth … But Republicans Won’t Like It appeared first on Granite Grok.
In the first 260 days of 2023, the Oakland Police received 10,547 stolen vehicle reports. That’s 40.56 reports every day (Jan 1-Sep 17). If that trend continues, assuming it does not trend up, that would be 14,806 motor vehicle thefts in one year. Go Democrats!
Nothing says we suck on crime like murder and violent crime, but without looking, I think Oakland has claimed the crown when it comes to vehicle break-ins and author theft.
“It’s astounding, it’s really hard to believe,” said Lori Chudacoff, whose husband was carjacked in Oakland this weekend.
“That’s insane. I didn’t realize it was that bad,” said Oakland resident Jennifer Prakit, who had her car stolen Saturday morning.
“While the number is pretty staggering, I wish I could say that I was truly surprised or am truly surprised for that matter because of the lack of leadership in Oakland city government and the lack of accountability,” said Oakland resident Eugene Kopman. “My car was parked at the Coliseum BART. I took my son to a baseball game last Sunday and I came back — the car was gone.”
Officers say there are more stolen vehicles than reported car break-ins, which number 10,335 to date. Officers said most people don’t report break-ins any more.
The other city by the bay is like a giant Carvana Vending Machine, except the car owners and insurance companies pay, and the vehicle “recipient” gets a free ride, and there’s lots of broken glass.
“It’s astounding, it’s really hard to believe,” said Lori Chudacoff, whose husband was carjacked in Oakland this weekend.
“That’s insane. I didn’t realize it was that bad,” said Oakland resident Jennifer Prakit, who had her car stolen Saturday morning.
What seems harder to believe is that while folks seem disenfranchised with Oakland’s “leadership,” they don’t seem inclined to do anything about it. The city’s last Republican mayor served in the 1960s. The City Council is all Demcorats, and that appears to have been the trend for decades as well.
You voted for this, even after the BLM/Antifa riots.
In 2021, Oakland Democrats cut the city police budget by 18 million, redirecting the spending (they’d never dream of giving that back) to “The Department of Violence Prevention with the intention of improving public safety.” I’m guessing they weren’t focused on auto hijacking, break-ins, or theft, or those should have declined.
It also looks like the police budget had already grown significantly since 2019 before they cut the 18 million, meaning they still had more money, so what’s the problem? Perception.
Democrats quickly embraced the police brutality narratives peddled by Black Lives Matter. They put targets on every cop’s back while making it clear they didn’t have their back. Following the Summer of Love, 83 officers left Oakland City service, and they continue to shed officers.
According to OPD’s latest staffing report, of the 83 officers who left last year, 45 resigned and 35 of those went to work for another police agency, while 18 officers retired and seven took a disability retirement.
And despite the eighteen-million dollar Department of Violence Prevention budget, homicides continue to climb.
“Killings on Monday and Tuesday represented the 100th and 101st deaths investigated as homicides by Oakland police this year (2023).”
“..in 2020, amid the coronavirus pandemic, homicides investigated by Oakland police jumped to 109 — part of a national trend that saw a spike in violent crime in cities across the country. That trend continued in 2021, when police responded to 134 homicides in Oakland — the most since 2006, when 148 people died here.
Every life lost is tragic, but what I find curious is how no one seems to know why. The Mercury News headline linked above 9/27/23 is “Oakland hits triple-digit homicides for third straight year, leaving officials grasping for answers” (emphasis, mine).
The usual suspects are blaming gun violence. “California Attorney General Rob Bonta — a former Alameda County state assembly member — called the killings “unacceptable” and decried gun violence as “a disease unique in the world to America.”
Really? California has some of the strictest anti-gun laws in the nation, which, as Hoodline.com notes, “Fail to Curb Firearm Violence in Oakland and Stockton: Study“
Despite possessing some of the strictest gun laws in the United States, California’s Legislature continues to propose and approve multiple bills aimed at addressing the prevalence of guns. In June, Governor Gavin Newsom proposed a constitutional amendment to enshrine gun safety measures nationally; however, the persistence of gun violence in the state raises questions about their implementation and enforcement, as reported by CBS Bay Area.
California has taken various steps to combat gun violence, such as restricting minors from buying and possessing firearms, prohibiting the possession or transfer of ghost guns, and launching the California Firearm Violence Research Center and the Office of Gun Violence Prevention to study the nature of gun violence and devise prevention strategies.
The problem with violence isn’t guns. It’s the same problem with robbery, rape, burglary, and auto theft. It is decades of derelict Democrat rule. If you want to be anti-crime, you have to be anti-Democrat, and there’s no way around that.
The post If You Want To Be Anti-Crime, You Have To Be Anti-Democrat appeared first on Granite Grok.
California and other states (and many nations) have enacted laws to regulate “ethical” treatment of animals in agriculture. This trend accompanies modern jurisprudence shielding domestic pets and criminalizing animal cruelty. Advocates for animal welfare legislation, such as PETA, invoke claims of “animal rights” — but these same groups call for boycotts on products made from these animals.
To erase meat, milk, bacon, leather, and honey from human use is to eliminate (rather than ethically regulate) the animal husbandry that gives life to these creatures. This is a strange way to address the “rights” of these animals — raising questions not about the morality of farmers, who mostly strive to take good care of their livestock, but of the moral reasoning of animal rights activists.
Animal ThinkingThere is a philosophical question about animal awareness implicit in this debate. How, for instance, do humans know that dolphins are not chatting at some very high level of communication? Border collies easily learn hundreds of words, as do crows. Are animals aware of death and suffering, and does that awareness impact the view of their “rights”?
PETA sidesteps this question with accustomed irony, appealing to end the existence of animals by exploiting not merely claimed but often nonexistent suffering and assertions of cognate awareness. Says PETA: “We believe that every creature with a will to live has a right to live free from pain and suffering.”
It is bizarre that PETA would assign a right “to live free from pain and suffering” to creatures only “with a will to live.” What of the animals PETA wants to put forever out of a job by eliminating the industries of which they are the core, or the dogs and cats PETA so efficiently euthanizes humanely – do they not have “a will to live”? A similar circular argument is heard by abortion proponents who assert that “terminated” babies are spared a life of hardship. But don’t they have as much will to live as a cow in a field, or a sow suckling her shoats in the shade?
Ayn Rand argued that ethical treatment of others – including animals – depended on awareness of life and death and the values that arise from that consciousness. The Atlas Society (named for Rand’s classic Atlas Shrugged) related:
Bovine Philosophizing?“As Ayn Rand argued, value depends on the existence of a being that faces the alternative of continued existence or the end of existence — and a being that must act to continue in existence. Values, then, are those things that are required for the being’s continued life. Therefore, a value is always a value for some reason (it is required for life) and to some organism (the being acting in the face of the alternative of life or death) … Humans are the only organisms that are capable of volitional rationality and, as such, are the only organisms capable of morality. And while animals certainly face the alternative of life or death and thus pursue value, they do not react to this alternative by choosing what actions to take and what values to pursue to maintain their lives. They do not and cannot pursue moral values.”
This is visible in cows, who spend most of their lives seeking forage, then gacking up cud to masticate while contemplating the view. What are they thinking?
As ruminants, bovines have four stomach chambers. When they are not churning green gunk around in their bellies and chomping mouths (while multi-tasking with manure distribution and methane flatulence/burpation), they are likely taking a snooze. But what are they thinking?
Cows are not contemplating their endless struggle against that dark night we humans see as death. Cows will look past the electric or barbed-wire fence for greener pastures but don’t dream of a pastoral afterlife on the other side of their own mortality. They don’t even look past one meal to the next, or even past chew to chew.
Animal SoulsC.S. Lewis pondered the idea of animal spirituality in his tome The Problem of Pain, suggesting domesticated animals might accompany humans to heaven. G.K. Chesterton dodged the issue – in accustomed fashion – by hitting it straight and bluntly head-on:
Some Closing Ruminations on Ruminants These lambs are not suffering“Mr. G.K. Chesterton after stating frankly that the subject is one of the many questions on which he is content to be an agnostic, says: – ‘About one thing I am quite clear, that it is perfectly right that the two ideas of the immortal man and the immortal mongoose should be treated as quite distinct. The second is simply a speculation about the mystery of nature that lies around us; the first is a practical question affecting the common conscience of a man and the consequences of his own action.’”
A cud-grinding heifer may see her image in a window and reflect on her rumination – perhaps ruminating upon her reflection. We will never know, but we know she is alive. She is also tended by a human steward without whom she would quickly perish with assured pain and suffering. Unaware, the heifer is not a slave to the human, nor is the human slaving away to maintain water, food, healthcare, clean bedding, and sanitation for her bovine charges a slave to her cows. It is a symbiosis, ancient and bountiful.
PETA and its army of anarchic animal activists speculate about the mystery of the rights and consciousness of dolphins, cows, and coyotes. But a rational being would ask how killing creatures – man or beast – in the name of being humane is humane. Only humans are asking this question, which much concerns “the common conscience of a man and the consequences of his own action.”
John Klar is an Attorney, farmer, and author. Mostly farmer… And Regular Contributor to GraniteGrok and VermontGrok.
The post Ethical Dilemmas About Killing an Animal for Climate appeared first on Granite Grok.