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

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

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

Well, what shall we do about that?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We may never again see such a huge landslide.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And in the meantime, we are flooded with articles telling us that Pallywood is a fake. pic.twitter.com/DtJkNrfRZm — Richard Landes (@richard_landes) May 2, 2024 Tom Bowler

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Evolution of Mobile Gaming

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

Accessibility and Convenience

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

Enhanced Graphics and Gameplay

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

Social Connectivity

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

Benefits of Mobile Slot Play

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

Convenience and Flexibility

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

Variety and Choice

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

Considerations for Mobile Slot Players

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

Internet Connection

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

Battery Life

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

Conclusion

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

 

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

Time and again, we are told by the politically correct “experts” not to worry about Islam posing a threat to our way of life. We are repeatedly lectured that only a very small minority of Muslims are troublemakers who are giving the peaceful masses of Muslims a bad name. We are also informed that the terrorists, who happened to be Muslims, are the disaffected and the young. And not to worry, since as the fire of youth turns to ashes of old age the rebellious will mellow, as they always have.

With heavy assurances like this, coming from so many know-it-all authoritative figures, we can sleep soundly without the aid of sleeping pills. After all, people reason that these pundits are “experts” whose job is to know and tell it like it is. Those who voice contrary views must be a bunch of racists and alarmist hatemongers. Who is right?

Wouldn’t it be more prudent to let the facts settle the matter rather than blindly accepting either position? Of course, it would, except for one huge problem. In the face of threats, people tend to go to the mind’s medicine cabinet and take a few denial and rationalization pills, in the same way, that it is the aspirin bottle they turn to when a headache strikes. Why not? We are the Easy Species. We love effortless, quick, and simple solutions. And that’s not invariably bad. It has given us all kinds of labor and time-saving devices.

Yet, the Islam problem is very real and deadly. Neither the pronouncements of the experts nor the tranquilizing pills of the mind can make it go away. It is here, and it shows every sign of imposing itself on us. Let us look at some of the facts.

* Not every Muslim wears an explosive vest ready to detonate amid a crowd of innocent civilians, yet there are more volunteers for the mission than there are explosive vests. The Islamic Republic, for instance, hasn’t even officially joined this form of jihad. Yet, by its own admission, it has over 10,000 volunteers trained and ready to be deployed, and thousands more are queuing to join in. This time around, the jihadists heading for Allah’s heaven might come fitted with nice little suitcases of dirty bombs instead of the bulky explosive vests. Recall that it took only 19 of these killers to launch the aerial mass murder of 9/11 that killed 3,000 people, shattered our open, trusting way of life, and cost us billions of dollars.

* The jihadists are not confined to a minority of disaffected Muslim youth. How young were Bin Laden, his deputy doctor of death Al Zawahiri, Mullah Omar of the Taliban, Khamenei, and the late Rafsanjani of Iran, to name a few? How disaffected are they? Muhammad Ata, leader of the 19 airborne thugs and the decapitator of Wall Street Journal reporter Pearl, was somewhat younger yet well-healed and Western-educated.

* Just coin some terms such as the “Melting Pot” or “Multiculturalism,” and you have the problem solved? Roll out the red carpet for the immigrant Muslims, treat them as you would your own citizens, give them stipends, medical care, and free education and they will integrate seamlessly into society. No such thing at all. The idea of Melting Pot may work with people who come from different lands to make the new country their home. The Islamists, on the other hand, come with the belief that they already own the place and want to make it part of the Ummah. Some forty percent of second and third-generation Muslim Britons reject British democracy, express their allegiance to Islam, and want to live under Sharia. So much for the Melting Pot comfort pill.

* The new Islamist arrivals take advantage of the provisions of the most benign system known to humanity, democracy, to implode it from within. Muslims, by sheer numbers, will soon be in a position to vote out democracy in many countries. They are already doing that in bits and pieces. They are imposing many of their values in a number of societies, even while they are in the minority. Politicians, hungry for votes and devoted to the practice of political correctness, bend backward to accede to Islamists’ demands.

* As for Multiculturalism, it is even more of a delusion than the Melting Pot myth. It is a second-generation Comfort Pill. Since the Melting Pot proved to be worse than a placebo, the politically correct gave us the new pill. A glance at Europe shows how Multiculturalism in fact has served as the incubator of Islamism in no time at all. Europe’s Multiculturalism is rapidly birthing a Uniculturalism if the Islamists’ medieval way of life can be dignified as a culture.

* Respect for diversity, separation of religion and state, and freedom of belief and expression are pillars of democracy, yet anathema to Islam. In no Islamic land do you find an ecumenical organization. It is only in non-Islamic countries that the shameless duplicitous Muslim, be he an imam, a mullah, or a regular run-of-the-mill faithful of Allah, meekly participates in ecumenical feel-good gatherings.

* To Muslims, no other religion is deemed worthy of recognition, much less accommodation. There is not a single church, synagogue, or Buddhist temple in all of Saudi Arabia. They are barred. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s raft of genocidal pogroms includes the heinous practice of bulldozing even the cemeteries of its Baha’i religious minority. The Islamic tyranny of the mullahs imprisons Christian Iranians for celebrating Christmas. Egypt denies its own citizens identity cards for refusing to lie and fake their religious beliefs or disbelief. The ID cards are required for education, securing work, receiving medical care, and just about every right of citizenship. Without it, a citizen is literally subjected to slow death.

* In Islam, only Muslim men and, to a lesser extent, Muslim women are entitled to certain rights. All non-Muslims, including the so-called people of the book, namely Christians and Jews, are at best second-class subjects, subjects who must pay the back-breaking Jizya, poll tax, for their “sin” of not converting to Islam. So, as Islam makes its inroads in new lands, as its membership swells through explosive birth and conversion, secular democracies will be inevitably replaced by Islamism with its stone-age Sharia laws. The best offer that Islam will make is to spare the non-Muslim’s life if he puts on the heavy yoke of Jizya for the rest of his living days.

* Not to worry about the horrific things that are happening on the other side of the world? If Muslims act heinously toward non-Muslims, it is just the way things are in those countries and it is hardly any of our business. This is the same attitude that set the Islamization of Europe on a seemingly irreversible track. One European country after another is rapidly buckling under the weight of Islamism.

* Most importantly, not to worry about the Islamization of our country? After all, Muslims are about 6-7 million minority in a population of nearly 300 million, you reason? That even a smaller number of these Muslims are hothead radicals, while the majority is just like everyone else? However, small minorities can overwhelm the majority by use of coercion and deadly force. Islamists are notorious for their dedication to the use of force to achieve their aims. The Taliban were a very small minority in Afghanistan; the Islamists were a tiny faction in the 1979 Islamic Revolution of Iran. Both overwhelmed the masses and imposed their reign of terror. The terrorist Hamas is also a “minority” in number, yet it rules the Palestinian Territory. Hizballah of Lebanon is a minority, yet it has taken the country to the verge of destruction.

* Islamists are Islam’s locomotive that takes the wrecking-ball Islamic train on its demolition course. Islam and democracy are incompatible. As democracies practice their magnificent accommodating belief, they knowingly or unknowingly lay the track for the advancing wrecking train of Islam. We, in the United States of America, must resist Islamism while it is still gathering momentum unless we wish to end up in the same fix as the Europeans. ,

* We, in the United States, further need to embark on a comprehensive legal, educational, and social campaign to eradicate the deadly plague of Islam. By effective action, we even save those peaceful Muslims from their own affliction. I am not hatemongering. I would love to see all Muslims become ex-Muslims and full-fledged members of a diverse, tolerant, democratic society. It is a statement of fact about what Islam is. Islam is a highly communicable pandemic-violent disease that demands urgent and serious containment.

Europe is already badly infected with Islamism. It is the coal miners’ canary. It tells us that the next stop is America. We must act and act now. We must not sacrifice our cherished way of life and the lives of our children at the altar of political correctness: the incubator of Islamofascism.

The post Night Cap: Political Correctness is the Incubator of Islamism appeared first on Granite Grok.

When the New York Times publishes something, it is a sign to the coastal elites that it is okay to discuss it. Here are some guidelines, what you are to believe and disbelieve, none of which should be mistaken for reporting. These are instructions. They expand the narrative bubble to control the messaging.

Especially if the content substantiates something previously labeled by the Left as a right-wing conspiracy, like people harmed by the COVID injections, but here we are, three years and some months into a massive experiment, and the Paper of Record (at least for progressives) is opening the door just enough to allow its readers to broach the subject at the water cooler.

People of the Left. Vaccine injuries are real, with conditions.

Provisos, Restrictions, Limitations…

You are officially permitted to acknowledge COVID vaccine injuries (including yours) on the following terms. They exist. People suffer. Some of those people are progressives (more than average, given the uptake demographics). And they’ve been suffering in silence. Serious side effects are rare. Death from a COVID vaccine is still tied up in the stall. We’re not discussing it. I also saw no mention of mRNA, not that it matters. This story is not about how the Public Health Industrial Complex fast-talked a gazillion people into rolling up their sleeves for something that was neither safe nor effective. It is about how when harm happens, as rare as that is, the system isn’t very good at helping.

It is a “yes, vaccine injuries are real” smokescreen for a “government should do more” screed.

The Times thinks that corporate immunity (PREP) protections are the problem – which they are – but in this admission, the relationship is little more than an abused spouse who refuses to tell the police anything but how clumsy she is. I fell down the stairs. Again.

She has two left feet.

The NYT remedy for that “problem” is the same system that didn’t listen during the Pandemic and isn’t listening after it. As Jeff Childers notes, the cure is more of what didn’t work to fix what’s not working.

How could all this anti-progressive gaslighting and illiberal lack of sympathy have possibly happened? How can the Times reconcile this long period of denial and deception? Because it’s just so darn difficult to track vaccine injuries, and because we need even bigger government, that’s how:

The nation’s fragmented health care system complicates detection of very rare side effects, a process that depends on an analysis of huge amounts of data. That’s a difficult task when a patient may be tested for Covid at Walgreens, get vaccinated at CVS, go to a local clinic for minor ailments and seek care at a hospital for serious conditions. Each place may rely on different health record systems.

There is no central repository of vaccine recipients, nor of medical records, and no easy to way to pool these data. Reports to the largest federal database of so-called adverse events can be made by anyone, about anything. It’s not even clear what officials should be looking for.

Remember that time during the Pandemic when everyone who hates privacy and freedom insisted we should all have to carry around passports to move about in public? They thought paperwork to ensure you were inoculated with the government-approved serum that did not stop the infection from spreading would stop the spreading. More of them are the cure for this.

Yes, please, may I have another (the government punches Liberty in the face).

Hard Pass

Times readers might be doe-eyed by it all. A lover softly whispering I’m sorry, let’s work this out, along with a soft-sell story about people like them suffering from their blind embrace of everything wrong with what went wrong. We weren’t all in this together, but some of us are in this together, so let’s dust off the wife beater and grab the largest bottle of Knob Creek we can find and see how long it takes for me to “fall down” the stairs again?

But what about the revelation? COVID “vaccines” did cause injuries. That has to mean something!

You see, covid vaccine injuries are brand new types of injuries, so what can you expect from busy, hardworking scientists? Dr. Woodcock explained, “I mean, you’re not going to find ‘brain fog’ in the medical record or claims data, because it doesn’t have a good research definition.” The former FDA Commissioner insisted, “It isn’t, like, malevolence on their part.”

It’s not like malevolence. It is malevolence. It’s like deliberate institutional neglect. But they meant well. “Federal officials,” the Times explained, “worry that even a whisper of possible side effects feeds into misinformation spread by a vitriolic anti-vaccine movement.” But health agencies’ duty is to pursue the truth, even when it’s complex or inconvenient, not to curate a simplified narrative for their perverse perception of an infantilized general public.

They should be more concerned with letting the government do stuff (any stuff), but maybe that’s just me. And perhaps that has something to do with the Times poon-feeding its audience a taste of reality. It’s a sampler narrative. Take a sip or a bite, and if you know someone with inexplicable post-Jab complications or someone who knows someone, it’s okay to say that out loud to someone other than your therapist. But don’t get too carried away.

The issue isn’t how the government lied to you and hurt you and how the media helped cover it up to prevent people from avoiding the potential for harm; it is how the government is going to help us next! It’s risky. This snowball at the top of the Matterhorn could gain both size and momentum, but maybe that’s a good thing. An out-of-control problem of that scope can only ever be handled by the government, right? So let’s agree on that (hopes, the Times).

Hard Pass (Again)

Let’s agree that the response to the Pandemic was Pandemicm of scope so poorly handled that it created this problem with the help of the New York Times.

That if you let people go about their business and take Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin if they wanted to instead of engaging in medical witch trials, a lot of people might still be alive and healthy, and this Times article never gets written.

You’d (of course) have had no excuse for vote-by-mail, and Biden wouldn’t be president. No war in Ukraine. Peace in the Middle East. Russia, China, and Iran would still likely be cowed. Our economy would be stronger, gas cheaper, and there would be no Federal EV mandates or rapid transgendirification of the military. Neither the Taliban nor China would have many billions of dollars worth of US military hardware (abandoned in Afghanistan). The National Debt would be lower, still too high, but not like it’s risen under Uncle Joe. The Blue States and cities would not be underwater with the swarms of invaders because the border would have stayed secure, and immigration laws would have been enforced. The drug overdose and drug gang problem that had receded under Trump would not have reemerged, so more friends and loved ones would be alive. Crime would likely be lower, wages higher, and we’d have real job growth instead of the fake-Biden- government jobs-growth-Potemkin-village.

And the number of vaccine-injured would be a lot lower.

But that’s not what we got, nor what they want. Democrats vote for decline, even when faced with it, then vote for more of it, dragging everyone else along for a ride whose only allowable response or cure is more of what made things worse.

But they did admit there were vaccine injured.

The post The New York Times Almost Breaks 7th Seal on Vaccine Injuries… appeared first on Granite Grok.

The reason the DemocratsWoke-Communists use “democracy is on the ballot” as one of their elections mantras … is because most voters don’t understand/refuse to believe that America has NOT really been a democracy since the “intelligence community” killed JFK. The ignorance and manipulability of Americans is appalling.

Even if you have no knowledge of history prior to 2016, the Trump presidency is sufficient to understand that we have a permanent, unelected government that works hand-in-hand with globalists, corporatists, and the “media” to manipulate Americans. Excellent synopsis below regarding the actual insurrection/soft coup that began the instant Trump was elected … which most Americans, because they have been so manipulated by the Media, big tech, etc., etc., etc. consider normal behavior and NOT a soft coup.

And the soft-coup of 2016 was quite bipartisan. The GOP controlled Congress from 2016-2018. The GOP could have shut down the phony Congressional investigations, but chose not to. Why? Hint … the GOP’s leaders were named Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan. Mueller was appointed by a DOJ that was supposed to be working for Trump. Why was that?

But just keep pretending bitter-clingers … Republicans, good; Democrats bad. Republicans, good; Democrats, bad. Slava Ukraine. Slava Ukraine. Slava! Slava! Slava!

Russiagate Was Always The Real Insurrection

It would not be an exaggeration to say that Russiagate was the greatest disinformation campaign of the 21st century.

The Steele Dossier, the Alfa Bank story, and the infamous 'peepee tape' were all fabrications.

For years,… pic.twitter.com/88997w4Hn8

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) May 2, 2024

 

The post Things You’re Not Supposed To Know Or Say appeared first on Granite Grok.

It’s weird what you remember. I distinctly remember being at my friend Phil’s house in the late 70s (early 80s?) and seeing a copy of Yankee Magazine. The featured article was about a proposal to put a dome over Winooski, Vermont.

Numerous examinations of the why, where, and what-for exist, but Winiooski gained fame and infamy, and it only cost someone else 55,000.00 dollars in federal grants to explore the idea. The Feds proposed it; Winooski said yes to the exploration but no to that dome.

Years later, the town, more woke than ever, has achieved a different kind of dome. One that protects exorbitant public school spending at great expense, which commenter Jay Eshelman noted a few weeks ago in comments.

Jay Eshelman

Consider Winooski, VT. Winooski just passed a $31,970,907 school budget serving approximately 764 Pre-k through 12th grade students. That’s $41,846 per student, for a kindergartner or a high school senior. And for that investment only half of VT students are academically proficient, suicides for 18–24-year-olds tripled last year, and drug overdoses have quadrupled over ten years.

Meanwhile, for perspective, parents can send their kids to VT State University for a full year of standard undergraduate college programs for $22,882 – and that includes room and board.

‘Suicide mission’ is a reasonable characterization for Vermont’s future (if one can call it a future). Forewarned is forearmed New Hampshire.

I don’t recall if it was a contender for comment of the week, but it shows us what happens when we lose sight of the point of public education. It is not sports, music, grooming, anti-racism theory, or – now – mental health care or indoctrination. All it was supposed to do was teach math, reading, and history (maybe ethics or debate). We get lip service to academics but plenty of the other stuff.

You’d be right to ask, but what about math and reading? And maybe we need a new institution for that? Something that isn’t training acolytes to some progressive god-state. You can try. Its defenders have crafted a narrative dome around the corruption of public education. The organized missile defense system of Union flunkies and local water carriers often shoots down locals who try to get inside. Those who make it in are bullied into a quick exit. It is rare to see any other outcome, and these are expensive losses, not just financial ones.

‘Public schools’ are not preparing children for much of anything. These kids, on whom more money is spent than perhaps at any time in the arc of public schooling, know less and are less capable than almost every previous generation, none of which had the modern tools or access to potential learning.

Dropouts from decades past likely left with more skills and learning than today’s graduates, while places like Winooski charge a premium for the decline.

Talk about shrinkflation. Joe’s worried about people paying more money for fewer chips in the bag while unions and administrators in Public Schools are demanding more taxdollars for an education that churns out kids a few cans short of a six-pack.

 

 

The post The ‘Dome’ Winooski Built appeared first on Granite Grok.

Yes, that’s what I said and it’s the harsh and unpleasant truth, as truthful as saying that Melanie voted for an income tax.  No member is exempt from blame so each one gets their rightful 1/24th, but some are definitely more deserving of rebuke than others, according to my report, but let’s first make it known that Commander Sharon put HB1002 on the consent calendar when it received a 5-0 committee blessing.

What that meant was that there was to be no floor discussion in the Senate chamber on Thursday.  About 17 minutes into the video of that day, she motions to Jeb to adopt the bulk batch of bills, and he asks the body, “all in favor, say ‘I’.”  And he almost forgot to do that, but the clerk reminded him to.  That, dear readers, was the very LAST window of opportunity before the Corner Office to fight back, when Jeb followed with an “anyone opposes?”  Sheeple!  Sharon’s sheeple, and I hold them to a higher standard than Donna Soucy’s sheeple because the latter is nothing but enemies of NH.

I spoke at April 9’s Judiciary Committee hearing against the RTK Tax and was followed by Laurie Ortolano, a local mentor and advocate who no longer needs an introduction.  The Grok Faithful should know that the Senate, as a government body, miserably failed at doing the People’s Work in a manner that serves the best interest of the people they’re elected to serve.  I will not close with any further editorial, just a summary of my activism and how it was responded to, so without further delay, here’s my report in the same order that the clerk calls the roll:

1) She was Included in two emails with nine others sounding the alarm on this impending train wreck. On Wednesday morning, I had a 5-minute in-person talk about my own local RTK experience with the assessor’s office, considering that she’s the daughter of realtors.

2) Cosponsor.  Signed into the Judiciary committee hearing register in support, though allegedly by someone else when I showed him a picture of it.  Played stupid on the idea of an amendment(exempting locals doing RTKs at their own city halls) along with his buddy, #17, in the presence of a District 17 constituent witness.

3) Senate President.  He had the opportunity to use his power in a variety of good ways, but he didn’t want to disrupt his big retirement announcement in the chamber while his wife was visiting.

4) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

5) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

6) Election Law and Municipal Affairs chair from a city aspiring to be “Nashua Jr.”  Emailed twice with 9 others(see #1), but at least he said thanks for the email both times.

7) Included in two emails with nine others.  No reply or in-person contact.

8) Included in two emails with nine others.  Discussed in person at last Saturday’s Pine Tree Riot event and got the “we’ll see about that” shrug.

9) Included in two emails with nine others.  No reply or in-person contact.

10) Enemy camp: I don’t email them.

11) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

12) Cosponsor and senator in the most corrupt city in NH.  Much could be said, and a detailed timeline of communication could be built on communication attempts and dialogues with him.  He had multiple reminders and opportunities to apply the brakes, and he chose to let the train wreck happen.  It’s like someone watching a kid or blind adult about to get hit by a semi-truck and doing nothing.  If he’s expecting a “get out of jail, free” card because he’s MY senator, he’s in for a surprise because he was “just following orders”(from #14) instead of actually serving his constituency.  Also claims he’s proud of his record.  Is he now?

13) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

14) Cosponsor, Judiciary chair, and 2nd in command, presumptive heir to the gavel.  Moved OTP in committee with minimal words said and the four other members went along without any resistance as seen in the April 18 executive session video.  Lives in same town as the Speaker of the House.  Coincidence(regarding where the power nucleus is)?  You tell me.

15) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

16) Included in two emails with nine others.  No reply or in person contact.

17) Included in two emails with nine others.  Answered first email last Saturday morning with a “thanks Julie, I’ll take a look at the bill, have a great weekend.”  I had an unexpected encounter with him and #2, and he played stupid when I asked about the amendment.  Councilor Prescott appeared mid-conversation, and Nurse Terese observed the whole thing.  #s 17 and 2 are seemingly joined at the hip, freshmen who were ushered into their seats, along with #22 and with the blessings of the establishment elite.

18) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

19)Included in two emails with nine others, both receiving auto-replies saying “Thank you for your email.  If you are writing about a particular piece of legislation, please know that I review all of my emails and I appreciate you taking the time to contact me.  However, due to the volume of emails I am receiving, it is no longer possible to respond to each one in a timely fashion.  The thoughts and opinions of my constituents are very important to me, and I will certainly consider your input.”  Unexpected in-person encounter Wednesday morning and had very little to say.  Also played stupid and clearly did not want to talk.

20) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

21) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

22) Included in two emails with nine others.  Also a Judiciary member and a lawyer.  Emailed numerous additional times before the hearing along with another Judiciary member and the chair and therefore very familiar with Laurie Ortolano’s story.  Packed up and walked out on the April 9 hearing instead of taking advantage of an opportunity to cross examine her with questions while at the mic.  Encounter Wednesday near kitchen elevator and started talking about his cats when I called out his name and said “I am disappointed in you, VERY disappointed.”  Often seen with Kuttab, who wants to go to law school and is the prime sponsor.  Friendly, but must think I’m stupid because I’m not a lawyer.

23) Included in two emails with nine others.  Also a cosponsor, Judiciary member and a lawyer and shares a secretary with my senator.  Emailed numerous additional times before the hearing along with another Judiciary member and the chair and therefore very familiar with Laurie Ortolano’s story.  No reply or in person contact regarding HB 1002, but promptly and cheerfully replied to a few emails about his sanctuary city bill and a higher office candidate he supports.

24) Enemy camp, I don’t email them.

The post The Senate Passively and Collectively Voted for a New TAX appeared first on Granite Grok.

They’re flying so thick and fast it is amazing.

Take heart – there will be both a Wednesday and Friday Edition.  Last week’s Friday Edition.  And if Israel is of interest, my last topical post here.  (Note that I’m taking a week or so break on the Israel posts, and may need to drop to a Monday-Friday schedule on memes for a while.  I do have a couple of essays in progress, so stand by for those.)

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 ***

 

 

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

 

 

I was very lucky to get her autographed to picture (alas, not personalized).  Framed and on the wall.

 

 

 

Less than 20 years.  When it happens, it can happen surprisingly fast.

 

 

 

And welcomes little fishes in, with gently smiling jaws… and promises of free stuff.

 

 

 

 

They want them all.  Period.  My reply?  Here (may have to go to PG-13 settings).

 

 

 

 

 

No words except for “Bullet.  Brain.  Assembly required”.

 

 

 

 

 

Proverbs 22:28

King James Bible: Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.

 

 

 

The more I learn about feminism, the less I think it was about equal rights, etc., with which I would agree – and more about pushing women into the tax base and destroying the family through “entitlements” and an “I deserve…” mentality.

 

 

Skipping the whole Oath of Allegiance to the US thing.

 

 

 

 

One of the enormous weaknesses of the Left is the need to be LIKED.

The Right Way: The Leftist Sense of Self (obamasez.blogspot.com)(formatting and link in original):

Ultimately, for the Leftist, it’s not about what they think, it’s about what others think about them. Read this essay by a psychologist whose work and essays I really like; alas, she’s gone dark after Obama’s re-election. And then READ IT AGAIN – it’s that good. They’re not strong enough to stand on their own convictions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That’s really a good point.  And it brings to mind this quote about forcing people to comply with untruths:

“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
― Theodore Dalrymple

 

 

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

 

PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA

 

 

I remember seeing a video of the above event.  The two women, mother and daughter, are cheering and jumping at the “BORTED” sign.  Screaming together like fangirls having just gotten hugged by their favorite pop star.

Think about that.  The girl, having gotten pregnant through her own voluntary act, is celebrating the murder of her child.  But the mother is celebrating the murder of her grandchild.  Now, imagine in ten years when her daughter is married and announcing she’s pregnant.  Will there be even a frisson of regret or realization?

 

 

The ghoulishness of this is staggering.  But it’s of a piece: the denigration and diminishing of human life.  If they’ll celebrate this, the murder of an innocent – what will they do when they come to get you, a MAGA deplorable, who stands in their way of creating Socialistopia?

 

 

Think that can’t happen?  Here’s just one example, among myriad examples, of that exact mentality:

 

 

I know I keep hammering this theme, but you must assimilate it to your core.  If you are not one of the herd, you are a threat.  And one last Thought Splinter:

If mankind’s CO2 emissions are a threat to the entire biosphere, i.e., to all life on earth, what would they NOT DO to save the biosphere?

Remember what John “F*cking POS traitor” Kerry’s daughter said:

 

 

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

 

 

 

I like my hamburgers.  I’ve even had bean burgers once in a while.  I will, no way Jose, have a fake meat burger.

 

 

 

I remember in grad school, one of my fellow engineering students had a cartoon up of two garbage men at work; the caption was Liberal Arts majors after graduation.  One of them was saying “I love the way the trash surrenders to the compactor, as if making way for its fellow refuse…” and the other said “That reminds me of an ancient Japanese haiku!”

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

Eye chart; can’t read that.  But the context / stuff you can read is damning nonetheless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

Link section (some mine, some from my Jarhead friend):

 

10 Lies Democrats Tell About Elections (And How To Refute Them) (thefederalist.com)

There is almost no subject the left won’t lie about. Whether it’s denying basic biology or fabricating “bloodbath” hoaxes about their top Republican rival, no topic is off limits for the Democrat “disinformation” police — and that includes elections.

—

Unredactions Reveal Early White House Involvement in Trump Documents Case | RealClearInvestigations

Is there any actual surprise at that?

—

Why Don’t Media Care About The Man Who Killed Four Cops? (thefederalist.com)

Not meeting the required Narrative.

—

A Secret Finally Revealed: Americans Can Know the U.S. Cities Receiving Hundreds of Thousands of Immigrants Flying from Abroad (cis.org)

Whatever you think you know, my bet is you don’t know a fraction still.

—

GERMANY: Donald Trump warned you about this and you mocked him for it (barenakedislam.com)

I remember how he was mercilessly ridiculed for this.  But…

GREAT NEWS! New German poll reports there is now widespread opposition to mass Musim immigration (barenakedislam.com)

Related:

They Lied to You: Biden Regime Issues Rule Change to Give Taxpayer-Funded Obamacare to Illegal Aliens – Obama Promised This Would Never Happen | The Gateway Pundit | by Cullen Linebarger

More on migration:

Is London now a Muslim majority city? (barenakedislam.com)

Pretty clearly.  More:

Still buying that far-left crap sandwich about “diversity being our strength?” (barenakedislam.com)

Broadly, on migration (for any nation):

 

 

—

The Vast Pharmaceutical Conspiracy to Silence Online Dissent (midwesterndoctor.com)

If vaccines in general, not just the so-called “vaccine” for Covid, actually were truly SAFE AND EFFECTIVE they wouldn’t need to do this.

—

The End Approaches – Vox Popoli (voxday.net)

Short of actual involvement by NATO, Ukraine will fall. Or, at least, the part Russia wants.  Speaking of NATO involvement:

France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront – Asia Times

Hungarian Foreign Minister Warns Macron Risks Sparking World War III – modernity

—

Hamas Fangirls Are Hurting The Feminist Cause – Victory Girls Blog

Feminists.  Leftists.  IDIOTS.  Related, at least to me:

Glazov Gang: Daniel Greenfield on ‘Domestic Enemies’ | Jamie Glazov Productions

Lots of videos, not just the one referenced.  And… airborne HIV?????

—

Biden Scheme To Spy On Trump Supporter Bank Accounts Even Wider Than Reported – Great America News Desk

All this is doing is accelerating distrust in the financial system.  Which many be a feature; the more people pull out, the lower things go, the worse things appear, and the more incentive they have to seize ever more control.

—

In closing, here’s an encouraging sign – among many private discussions I’m having with a lot of politically-conservative Jews who DO NOT LIKE that new “anti-Semitism” bill:

Jews Must Not Let Politicians Curtail Free Speech – Tablet Magazine

This is a Jewish magazine, with what is – IMHO – a forceful denunciation of the bill.

 

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

 

Pick of the post:

 

 

That revolving door has to be closed.  Whether in pharma or defense or anything else.

 

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

 

Palate Cleansers:

 

—

—

 

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

 

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

Please do consider buying me a coffee.

Buy Me a Coffee

 

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

 

The post MONDAY MEMES appeared first on Granite Grok.

I have seen and heard the campus “protesters” described as Marxists. They are NOT. They are actually their own manifestation of socialism (which I call Woke-Communism), but if the choice is limited to Marxist and Nazi … the far better descriptive is Nazi. I will explain why.

Marxism and National Socialism were both 20th-century manifestations of socialism/collectivism/communism, whatever term you prefer to describe a system of governance where there is a ruling class and the rest of society is coercively structured to serve the ruling class under the guise of serving “the common good,” “the State,” “social justice,” “equity,” blah, blah, blah.

Marxism was a socialism based on class. Lenin said that German workers and Russian workers should not be killing each other but instead should be killing their bourgeoise overlords. (This was at the time of World War I, bitter-clingers). The campus protesters are NOT urging Palestinian and Israeli workers to unite and bring down the bourgeoise. They are NOT Marxists.

National Socialism was a socialism based on race. Hitler sought to unite all the Germanic people and use the Slavs as essentially slave laborers. And, almost as soon as the Nazis gained power, Hitler began instituting apartheid versus Jews and others … and I am going to assume you know how things progressed and ended.

The campus protesters have much, much more in common with Nazis than with Marxists. Their socialism, like National Socialism, is based on race … the Jews are the oppressors, and the Palestinians are the oppressed. The campus protests are a manifestation of the identity politics that is driving today’s Democrat Party.

Today’s Democrat Party represents a socialism based on identity. Society is to be coercively structured to supposedly protect the “marginalized,” the “oppressed,” blah, blah, blah … i.e., “people of color,” “LGBTQ+,” etc., etc., etc.. It resembles National Socialism in that your place in this society is to be determined by your skin color, your sexual preference, etc., etc., etc..

Today’s Democrat Party is actually quite similar to Hitler’s National Socialism. Calling them Marxists is imprecise. Calling them Nazis is much less imprecise. I use the term woke communists.

The post The Campus “Protesters” Are Nazis, Not Marxists appeared first on Granite Grok.

Fans of Dr. Demento will already be familiar with the tune and the original, but it’s not a problem if you’ve never heard it. It is a humorous 1963 ‘novelty’ song by Alan Sherman about a kid sent to the fictional Camp Grenada.

You can listen to the original here.

Fast-forward to now, and an enterprising someone (Vaad HaBadchanim?) has rewritten the lyrics. It’s a college kid on campus and, well, you know what’s going on – on campus!

Check it out.

Hello Muddah, Hello Fadduh (A Letter from Campus) pic.twitter.com/GTDnVEK7Cr

— Vaad HaBadchanim (@VaadHaBadchanim) May 2, 2024

 

The post A Letter From Campus – Hello Muddah, Hello Faddah. I have Joined Camp, Intifada … appeared first on Granite Grok.

Another week and hundreds more comments. We pick one from each day of the previous week, and you get to vote on who wins the honor. All we ask is that you read them and vote.

One maintenance note: We are waiting on the full backup to proceed with site changes. New management made a once simple task more complicated.

So, here they are!

Post: Promoted from Comments: “For a long time, parents have treated ‘public schools’ like some kind of birthright, to be funded at everyone else’s expense.”
Author: Houmid

Comment: The largest consumer of property taxes in New Hampshire are the school systems. Throwing more money at the schools is not improving our children’s ability to succeed and thrive. What that money is doing is driving more and more divisive programs that promote racial discrimination, sexual depravity, total confusion of reality, and a jobs program for so called educators that would never have been allowed to teach 100 years ago. More to the point, there are zero incentives for public school systems to halt rising costs, much less reduce them.

Property taxes make sense for the provision of necessary services that benefit everyone in a community. Municiple taxes for police, fire & rescue, and road maintenance are needs for everyone. Ditto water and sewage if your municipality provides them. Everything else is fluff. But property taxes for public schools is an abomination that never should have been allowed. Funding for schooling your children should have remained the responsibility of people with children, not everyone. Granted, nearly everyone benefits when education is provided to all children; so some limited taxation for those without children may be acceptable. Unfortunately, our governments suck when it comes to limitations.

The elderly, in general, have not had children in the public school system for over 20 years. The elderly, in general, have paid for 45 years into the public schools. The elderly, in general, will benefit from the services provided by those educated over that 45 year period. However, the elderly are most definitely not going to be benefiting from any further money dumped into the education system. Ergo, the justification for taxation of the elderly is non-existent.

Furthermore, the vast majority of the elderly are on fixed incomes. Their wealth saved over the years is static, or decreasing. Their property, should they own any, is usually their biggest source of wealth, and does not generate any wealth. In short, property taxes on the elderly for school systems is slow theft from the elderly.

New Hampshire currently has RSAs (72:39-a) permitting elderly exemptions from property taxes. The RSAs are convoluted, based on age, income, and assets. Most towns have a form almost as complicated as a 1040 to try to determine if you qualify. Basically, you have to be at the poverty level to qualify; which means it’s useless as a tool to discourage out of control spending.

I propose to simplify the situation. Rescind the current elderly exemption RSA 72:39; and replace it with a blanket exemption from all school taxes for any resident property owner 65 years or older. i.e. You have to own the property, you have to be living on it, and you have to be at least 65 years of age.

Post: Diversity Means, Less White People
Author: Hunter

Comment: All of us will be astonished when the time suddenly arrives. A consensus of the citizens in a situation like this is like a seed crystal dropped into a super-saturated solution. One moment there’s nothing but clear liquid, then one little speck falls in and suddenly there’s a huge mass of interlocking crystals. I doubt any of us will be able to predict the event or moment when the American people will have had enough, but it is pretty clear conditions are ripe. “Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable”, indeed. Just remember Jefferson’s next line.

What exactly will happen once that moment of clarity arrives, who knows? There are any number of actions which could conceivably completely alter the equation forever. Despite the pretensions of “the Men Who Would be Kings” they have nowhere near the power or knowledge to rule 340 million people scattered over 3.8 million square miles of often rugged territory, ESPECIALLY when the main thing uniting those people is a shared cultural heritage of liberty at least most of them know grew from the world’s most successful revolution. Something as simple as a campaign of passive resistance or even ‘malicious obedience’ is quite capable of bringing the entire corrupt edifice crashing down, to say nothing of sterner measures. Why do you think the “Men Who Would be Kings” flail about so desperately?

Their deepest fear is founded on the knowledge that America is only as governable as we CONSENT to be governed. A very large fraction of the population for a myriad of varying reasons is very close to deciding they no longer wish to play along. All that remains now is that spark, that clarifying event to finalize that nascent decision. Some day soon, the American people will remember that they are strong, and don’t HAVE to live in fear of those who are supposed to serve them. Then… things get interesting, in any of a multitude of ways. Only part of what happens after that I’m sure of is that it’ll sure suck to be one of “The Men Who Would be Kings” – just ask the ghost of Daniel Dravot.

Post: Trump Was Right — The EV ‘Bloodbath’ Is Already Here
Author: Kevin Scully

Comment: The fact that the Ford was able to turn a profit despite the breathtaking losses in the EV Division can mean only one thing. When you buy an over-priced ICE vehicle from Ford, you are actually paying for two cars. One for you and one for someone who wants their virtue-signaling EV toy.

Post: Night Cap: Food, Famine, Fear: Beware the Great Agricultural Reset
Author: Steve Smith

Comment: My wife and I have been working with the same institutional financial adviser for 20+ years, and this year when we asked what we should do to prepare for the future, he strongly suggested buying an emergency food supply and ammunition. This was not the typical investment advice, but we now have a 6-month food supply stored away.

Post: Homeschooling Survey: They Use Many Different Methods to Learn to Read
Author: CT Patriot

Comment: Thank you for this analysis, Jody. Even with this small sample of responses, I suspect the results can be extrapolated, applying as well to many more of the homeschool population.

I recall interviewing a high school teacher in Western Massachusetts about 20 years ago (on other matters), and asked him if he thought the literacy level was declining. He replied that at the beginning of every academic year, before he knew his students, he asked for a show of hands how many had parents who read to them–or with them–regularly. Very shortly, and continuing throughout the academic year, he observed that every single student who raised their hands was a fluent reader. Anecdotal results, to be sure, but very consistent.

Your survey results support Ian’s contention that you can’t force a child to learn when he doesn’t want to and, conversely, you can’t stop a child from learning when he wants to.

I guess it’s like the old Chinese saying (paraphrased): When the student is ready, the teacher appears.

Post: How Maine Gun Laws Help New Hampshire: Kittery Trading Post Threatens to Move All Firearms Sales to Granite State
Author: Recognizing_Truth

Comment: To determine whether a content- based law passes constitutional muster, courts generally apply a legal standard called strict scrutiny,
under which the government must show that the law is the “least restrictive means” of advancing a “compelling” governmental interest.
So, let’s take a look
1) A waiting period for a firearm has never been shown to diminish the number of suicides, so the argument that a waiting period is necessary because it will “save a life” of someone who is intent on killing themselves is unsubstantiated
2) A waiting period would not have stopped any of the shootings in Maine or elsewhere as every one of the criminals had the guns in their position for periods of time far exceeding “3 days”.
3) Criminals by nature do not follow laws. A waiting period for obtaining a gun will not stop a criminal who does not care about legal means of obtaining firearms, and only legal means of procuring are affected by the 72 hour waiting period.
4) The three day waiting period adds a hardship only with law abiding persons and businesses and adds an extreme hardship for those who have to travel to an FFL that is some distance from them (most of Maine is rural). One long trip to order and sign forms and have a background check. Then the long trip home. 3 days later another long trip to pick up the firearm and then the long trip home. The time, fuel, wear and tear on the vehicle, etc. significantly adds to the cost of obtaining the firearm and more adversely affects lower income individuals. The added fuel consumption in a state that claims all fuel burning should be curbed in the name of ending “climate change” is detrimental to the government’s other compelling interests.

The “government’s compelling interest” is unclear as none of the reasons given for adding this law clearly state what that interest is. As this doesn’t affect criminals intent on crime, but does restrict law abiding citizens in the exercise of their rights, the law does not demonstrate how it either would meet the government’s compelling interest, nor that it is the least restrictive method for doing so. It also more adversely affects lower income individuals and makes it less likely they will be able to exercise their Constitutional right. The law does NOT stand strict scrutiny and will fail judicial review as being unconstitutional.

Post: Night Cap: TWENTY (20) Percent Of Mail-In-Votes in 2020 Were Fraudulent
Author: notoriousBLOG

Comment: Three and a half years later and the “truth” that most on the right already knew is being told. What are we to do when Washington is so corrupted that this type of activity is actually orchestrated from the White House and the ABC agencies? The bigger question is will there even be an election this November? What do the powers that be have in store for us this go-round? Will it be another plandemic? Will it be martial law declared to cancel the elections? Or will the puppets find a way to lock up or otherwise eliminate Trump? This is going to be the year that determines the fate of our entire existence as a sovereign nation.

Vote: The poll is live from Monday, May 5, at 7 a.m. ET until Tuesday, May 6, at 8 p.m. ET. One person, one vote. No mail-ins. Postal trucks arriving after the poll closes will be turned away!

Pick one Commenter as This Weeks Winner

• Houmid
• Hunter
•  Kevin Scully
• Steve Smith
• CT Patriot
• Recognizing_Truth
• notoriousBLOG

Vote

The post Help Us Choose Another ‘Comment of the Week’ Winner! appeared first on Granite Grok.

Of the 7,309 aircraft in the U.S. commercial inventory, 3,173, or 43 percent, were manufactured by Boeing. As the world’s largest aerospace company and leading manufacturer of commercial jetliners and defense, space, and security systems, Boeing supports airlines and U.S. allied government customers in 150 countries.

It is acknowledged that air travel is one of the safest means of transportation. No mode is 100% safe, and it is comforting to know the efforts spent on ensuring the plane we board is as secure as humanly possible. The maintenance and safety inspections are integral to the airline industry’s safety record.

Recent incidents have focused our attention on the credibility of information supplied by Boeing about the quality and safety of the airplanes it manufactures. Admittedly, there are few incidents, but the facts behind the headlines are disturbing. Two in particular are alarming. The first is the door that fell off the Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 in mid-flight in January. The fortunate element is that nobody was severely injured or killed in this incident. Unfortunately, the airline may have known the problem; therefore, the plane was restricted to overland versus overwater routes. This plane was at a low altitude when the door was displaced, which was a Godsend, for at cruising altitude, passengers may have been sucked out of the plane. A tire fell off a United Airlines Boeing 777 in March as it departed from San Francisco International Airport. The reasons for these two accidents were very simple. The door was missing a bolt, and the tire had missing nuts.

Boeing has come under close scrutiny and investigation because of these and other incidents. During these investigations, many whistleblowers came forward with disturbing information about alleged practices at Boeing that put airplanes and passengers at risk. Two of those whistleblowers are now dead. I have a difficult time believing this is a coincidence, but I hope to God these men were not killed to prevent damage to a major corporation. I am also not naive enough to believe it is impossible.

There is a core cause of quality issues at Boeing and other companies with similar problems in different industries: DEI. The emphasis on filling quotas and checking boxes in lieu of competence is causing devastating dynamics. I do not care about the color of the skin or the sexual preference of the mechanic, whose job is to put the bolt in the hinge to keep the door on the plane. I want them to understand and perform the job without error. We have abandoned excellence for teamwork and employee feelings that we are paying the price by putting ourselves at risk of injury or death. Had that door fallen off at 40,000 feet over the Pacific, we would have been talking about a major disaster.

People are beginning to understand that DEI is harmful for many reasons and are taking action. Even in my hometown, parents have spoken up and forced the school board to terminate the DEI coordinator who had been placed by the local BLM chapter. People are taking back our country, which had been restricted and modified by the Radical Left and exacerbated by COVID.

There will be investigations, and Boeing will be held accountable for their actions and issues. Hopefully, the death of these two men who bravely came forward to point out issues at Boeing will be found to be natural. If not, we have far deeper problems to address.

The post Who Knew A Whistle Was A Deadly Weapon appeared first on Granite Grok.

When it comes to home renovation or improvement projects, finding affordable solutions is key. Interior doors play a significant role in the overall aesthetic and functionality of your space. Fortunately, there are plenty of options available for those seeking interior doors cheap without compromising on quality or style. In this guide, we’ll explore various avenues for acquiring budget-friendly interior doors and tips for making the most of your investment.

Budget-Friendly Options for Interior Doors

1. Stock Doors: Many home improvement stores offer a selection of stock interior doors at affordable prices. These doors come in standard sizes and designs, making them a cost-effective choice for budget-conscious homeowners.
2. Unfinished Doors: Opting for unfinished interior doors allows you to save money upfront and customize the finish to match your decor later on. You can paint or stain the doors yourself, creating a personalized look without breaking the bank.
3. Composite Doors: Composite interior doors are made from a combination of wood fibers and synthetic materials, offering a durable and budget-friendly alternative to solid wood doors. These doors mimic the look of real wood at a fraction of the cost.
4. Online Marketplaces: Browse online marketplaces for gently used or surplus interior doors at discounted prices. You may find quality doors being sold by individuals or businesses at a significant discount compared to retail prices.
5. Wholesale Suppliers: Wholesale suppliers often offer interior doors at discounted rates when purchased in bulk or as part of a larger order. Consider partnering with a wholesale supplier for your interior door needs to secure competitive pricing.

Tips for Saving Money on Interior Doors

• Compare Prices: Take the time to shop around and compare prices from different retailers and suppliers to ensure you’re getting the best deal on interior doors cheap.
• Consider Material Options: Explore alternative materials such as MDF or composite for cost-effective alternatives to solid wood doors.
• DIY Installation: Save money on installation costs by installing the interior doors yourself or enlisting the help of friends or family members with DIY experience.
• Look for Sales and Discounts: Keep an eye out for sales, promotions, and clearance events at home improvement stores and online retailers to score even better deals on interior doors.

Experience Affordable Elegance with Trio Doors in Toronto

Elevate your space with interior doors cheap from Trio Doors, the leading online door store in Toronto. With a wide selection of budget-friendly interior doors in various styles, finishes, and materials, Trio Doors offers quality solutions at unbeatable prices. Visit their website today to explore their collection and find the perfect interior doors for your home without breaking the bank.

Transform Your Space on a Budget

In conclusion, finding interior doors cheap doesn’t mean sacrificing quality or style. With a little research and creativity, you can source affordable interior doors that enhance the beauty and functionality of your home. Explore your options, compare prices, and consider alternative materials to stay within budget without compromising on your vision. Visit Trio Doors online door store in Toronto and discover how you can achieve affordable elegance with their selection of interior doors. Don’t miss out on the opportunity to transform your space without breaking the bank.

The post Affordable Solutions: Finding Interior Doors Cheap appeared first on Granite Grok.

Nashua residents and defenders of liberty are encouraged to attend Nashua Code Week, May 6-10. Nashua is a member of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI).

This cheerful, sustainable “environmental” organization is globalist in scale and nature, with over 2,500+ local governments as its members.

A global agenda with high-level events? Like… Davos perhaps?

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

Code Week will generate manufactured consent for globalist agendas like “inclusionary zoning” and smart cities and codify these sustainable development goals into Nashua’s zoning ordinance. ICLEI encourages municipal governments to take their directives from un-elected, unaccountable foreign consortiums rather than their own taxpayers.

The first session is Monday, May 6, 7- 8:30 p.m., at City Hall’s 3rd-floor auditorium. Doors open at 6:30. Come learn what’s coming down the pipeline from the UN. The week-long series will conclude on Friday, May 10th.

One may wonder how Nashua is going to co-create a new zoning code in collaboration with the public in the span of 6.5 hours over four days. If what is being discussed is actually new, why is there already a new zoning map ready to be presented on Friday?

Nashua residents are encouraged to attend these public sessions and learn what is going to be done to their city. Grok readers are encouraged to support efforts to withdraw the United States from the United Nations.

Schedule and details for Nashua Code Week can be found here: https://www.nashuarecode.com/

 

Editor: The author’s identity has been confirmed, but they have asked to remain anonymous.

The post Zoning (In Nashua) is FUN! appeared first on Granite Grok.