Skip

Co-founder of GraniteGrok, my concern is around Individual Liberty and Freedom and how the Government is taking that away. As an evangelical Christian and Conservative with small "L" libertarian leanings, my fight is with Progressives forcing a collectivized, secular humanistic future upon us. As a TEA Party activist, citizen journalist, and pundit!, my goal is to use the New Media to advance the radical notions of America's Founders back into our culture.

Tenth Amedment

The Jack Kimball for Gov event that the ‘Grok attended (me, Tom, Steve (miss ya, Tim!) last night was all about the 10th Amendment with Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center speaking speaking via a live stream setup; we’re working on the videos right now – had me remember this long article by Andy McCarthy over at The Corner (emphasis mine):

Perhaps because I see the Arizona situation more as a political one than a legal one, I come at it from a different angle. The nation is built on a political power-sharing arrangement in which the states maintained their sovereignty while surrendering certain powers to the national government. Two important things flow from this.

First, the states are sovereign. That is not just a slogan, it is a concept that has real meaning. Inherent in sovereignty is the natural right of self-defense. If states are no longer at liberty to protect their territories and defend their citizens, they are no longer sovereign, and the social compact on which the nation is based is broken.

Second, the presumption in our system is against the forfeiture of rights and powers. The Constitution expressly provides that unless a power has been delegated to the federal government, it is retained by the states. Our law holds that individuals are not deemed to forfeit their fundamental rights unless there has been a waiver that is clear, knowing, and voluntary. I don’t see why sovereign states would rate any less deference. This is critical because (a) the Constitution does not delegate the power of immigration enforcement to the national government (the power to set terms for naturalization, which is federal, is not a power over immigration enforcement), (b) the power to regulate immigration was understood to be retained by the states, as a core part of their police power, for the first century-plus of our nation’s history, and (c) the states have continued to exercise this power and have never forfeited it. In point of fact, until the turn of the 19th century, the pertinent question was whether the national government  had any power over immigration enforcement (Jefferson, for example, was quite certain it did not). It was federal power that was dubious; state power was unquestioned. See, e.g., Joseph Baldacchino, “Regulation of Immigration Historically a State Function” (National Humanities Institute, July 19, 2010).

To me, this is the necessary context for any consideration of a federal attempt to prohibit the exercise of state police power within a state’s sovereign territory….

Once again, RTWT…and he knows this subject cold.  Frankly, the fact that this topic, states’ rights, is even getting the attention it is right now is…

Read more

Avast ye mates, political boarding parties abound!

Well, as I said to one staffer on a campaign:

Well, the blunderbusses have arrived and reinforcements for them are just coming up over the hill – and some are marked as "deliver to GraniteGrok" as well!  I think the rabble rousing  and poo slinging has ignited among the candidates…

…Break out the popcorn!  Hoses, bandages, and surgeries begin at 6pm…

I’d like to think that we make our own here at the ‘Grok; yet, we are getting a number of blunderbusses from "Concerned Citizen"(s) who now are sending us stuff from all over the state – and who says New Hampshireites don’t take politics seriously!  Blunderbusses were never known for great accuracy (a Kentucky Long Rifle was good for picking off opponents at long distance) but work well for close in-fighting!

First in line certainly seems to be Bill Binnie (and no, for millions of obvious reasons, the word "poor" is not moving past my fingers here).  Remember this where Binnie accuses Ayotte of colluding with Cornerstone on the ad smacking Binnie around with his own words?  

Well, yet another unforced error, IMHO, from Binnie’s campaign when I read this (again, over at Drew Cline’s) as Brooks (Ayotte’s campaign manager) smacks Binnie around in return – but gives out an "attaboy" and lends a hand to Ovide for his "Pro-Life" stance in the process (links added):

As you are aware, the Chairman of Cornerstone, Shannon McGinley, has endorsed Ovide Lamontagne and serves on both his Women Leadership Team and Hillsborough County Leadership Team. Additionally, the Chairman of Cornerstone hosted an event for Lamontagne at her house, and just today Shannon posted on her Facebook page the following statement:

“ Ovide Lamontagne for U.S. Senate!! He shares my passion for the sanctity of human life at all stages or status and embraces the sanctity of marriage and that all children deserve a mother and a father.”

To claim that we are coordinating with an organization that is led by someone who is actively working against our campaign is not only illogical, but untrue. The facts in this case do not indicate any campaign is coordinating with Cornerstone or the National Organization for Marriage.

One could caustically ask:

Read more

Reparations for Gays? When will victimhood march ever end?

A big part of the Left schtick is setting up a group for sainthood victimhood, make them a protected class and thus making them more equal among equals (a la Animal Farm).  And that then, in the Socialist mindset, allows for this wealth transfer and political punishment: "You know, I – gay people in this … Read more

Ann Coulter News!

Given what I just put up, this is appropriate: Ya gotta love that line: "Our gays are more macho than their straights!"  So, where does that leave Thom Hartmann? (H/T: RightWingNews)

Is this what the Founders wished?

This is often the case:

Michael Ramirez

Michael Ramirez

And John at Powerline has some stats to go along with this.  Certainly, this IS all about what the original intent was – and it was about the immediate after effect of slavery.  It was not meant was a backdoor for families illegally entering the United States, "drop a baby", and leave.

The fact: it happens.  For that reason.  Is that right?  Ask your self – what is at stake?  Leftists will argue that birth = American.  How DARE we punish children for the sins of the parents?  But what is the consequence?

Exactly the right argument – it IS correct to lay the sin on the parents!  It is they that decided to enter illegally the country.  It is they that decided that the prize, American Citizenship for their offspring, the prize of living here in the United States was worth that risk of breaking the law. I have no problem in carrying out the consequence of that decision and that action – if you choose to disobey the law, regardless of the time you have spent here, YOU made a decision on behalf of your children.  Deliberately.  With forethought.  And I would say, with malice.  And for all of the cries of "you are splitting up a family" when the parents are caught, judged guilty, and deported, this IS simply the logical consequence of a bad action.  In essence, they wish to transpose a moral hazard and wrong for them into what appears to be a moral dilemma for others.  Simply, a smoke for mirrors.

In coming here and contravening our laws concerning legal immigration, and demanding that we give you all the rights and benefits of citizenship merely because you timed the birth of your child "just right", you have cheapened the value of American citizenship.  Polls have shown that many are here NOT because of the ideals on which America was born but simply because they can get a job and send money home.

Who likes to be "used"?

Read more

So, how is Binnie planning on going nuclear on the Union Leader?

In yesterday’s Union Leader (though reading it today) that questions what Bill Binnie is all about, I spotted this pretty good line: On June 30 Binnie released a "plan for economic growth" that was so vague it sounded as though it might have been scratched on the back of a napkin in 30 seconds by … Read more

“8 Ways Fascist Feminists are ruining America’s women”

Saw this over at Cassy Fiano’s and it caught my eye.  Again, we see what uber-Feminists have done to the traditional bricks of the underpinnings of our society.  Again, as we move to a completely "self libertine" way of thinking (as in the 60s "the ME Generation", the most hedonistic evah!), we find that decisions and actions have consequences.  When practiced by a large percentage of the population, the effects of those consequences spill out all over… 

American women have some of the best lives in the world. We can literally do whatever we want. American women can go to school where we want, we can go to college, we can work wherever we want, we can marry whoever we want, and we can choose to lead whatever kind of life we want to lead. Millions of women in oppressed countries around the world cannot even imagine the freedom that American women so enjoy — and take for granted. We’ve come a long way in less than one hundred short years, but a lot of women can’t see that.

We’re constantly told that we’re victims of an invisible patriarchy, that we’re slaves to our hormones, that without abortion on demand we can’t fully be women, that we don’t need a man but we need the government. The people that tell women these lies are the same people who pretend to be fighting for us, who have hijacked feminism: the fascist feminists. Whereas once feminists fought for equality, today the femisogynists fight for things like taxpayer funded abortion and universal health care. They fight for women to be able to sleep around like men and ignore the consequences. And most of the time, women don’t even know they’re being manipulated and lied to. Thankfully, once the lies are exposed, it’s easy to see the con.

Here are eight ways that fascist feminists are ruining America’s women.

8. Encouraging Promiscuity

Once upon a time, men had to earn sex with a woman…Men barely have to put any effort into it anymore, women just give it up hours after meeting random guys at a bar or a party.

This, according to the femisogynists, is called being “empowered”.

7. Sanctioning Victimhood

These are some of the attitudes you’ll find in the fascist feminist set…The reality is that the victim act is really just an excuse for fascist feminists to be greedy little whiners who get special treatment.

6. Dabbling In Misandry

…Ask anyone what they think of when they hear the word “feminism”, and they’ll almost always think of “man-haters”. And there’s a good reason for it, too. When radical feminists hijacked feminism

5. Destroying Chivalry

Read more

Great Medical system, eh? Big Government OK?

There’s always a but, isn’t there?"

Well, it seems that NH State Senator Jackie Cilley (D – District 6 from Barrington)  went on a junket to our neighbors to the North…and that’s fine. The resulting puff piece in Fosters had a couple of things in it that caught my eye:

"The near universal feedback was they see government as an important institution in their lives," Cilley said, explaining the only dissenting opinion was that of a sailor. Canadians she spoke to were even OK with taxation between 33 and 44 percent of income, she said.

"They all seemed to be aware that they pay a high level of taxes … and only one sailor complained about that. To a person, everyone else that I asked about this had a clear understanding and appreciation of what they receive for those taxes," Cilley said.

Yeah, just the way that Big Government people like to see their subjects – compliant, docile, and willing to accept diktats from above.  But apparently, she a member in good standing of the Political Class (love of government vs the independence of the citizen).

Yeah, just like that half million that the American taxpayers just spent for new windows for the Mt. St. Helens observatory – that has been closed for the last two years with no plans to re-open.  I’m quite sure you can tell MY level of appreciation for the

The problem here, unlike the Candian system, is that the American tradition is ANTI-Big Government; at least that was the way it was until the Progressive movement here in the United States started ramping up in the latter part of the 1800s.  Frankly, Americans aren’t exactly anti-government, they just want to govern THEMSELVES!  No, I don’t mean just electing their own to govern them, but that they want to be left alone to decide…

Read more

I’d rather have the suit AND the window

The guy we need to be watchful for and of is not just the guy that throws the physical brick through the window – but the regulatory and legal bricks instead: (H/T: NewsBusters)

Speaking of our Rights, how about MORE talk on the real First Principle?

I am a member of a number of email group lists – primarily those I would consider to be of the "Liberty and Freedom" (insert "Individual" into that as well) that are often very lively and there are a lot of Really Smart People talking about a lot of stuff – and there are disagreements!

Someone really smart brought up the phrase "Christian Fundamentalists" in a very slightly negative (in my reading of it) fashion as being one end of the political spectrum – but the other end was bracketed by "The Marxists and collective Salvationists" at the other.  Thus, the implication was written (IMHO) that Christians are the same as Marxists, just the other side of the coin.  Well, even with all the stuff I wanted to accomplish today, I felt the following was needed to be written.

I will quickly, and only briefly (as I have a jam packed day today and do NOT have the time to attend to this subject properly) wade in here.

I think it totally appropriate to bring "the God thing" into the conversation, and my eyebrows crawled a couple inches up my forehead at the phrase "Christian Fundamentalists", as normally that is used as a pejorative when brought into the political arena.

Yet, I think MORE talk of THE First Principle must happen – the our Rights stem from God.  The secular Left (and many on the Right) wish to suppress that discussion. The Left does because then they have to acknowledge that they and Government are NOT the absolute entities they believe themselves to be or should be – and thus, free to make decisions for the rest of us "without a controlling legal authority" as Al Gore once put it.  And if they continue to sever that relationship, they will have more and more leverage to continue their Progressive march towards complete Socialism – a God-less based society and a replacement of an internal law based society with more and more of a external law based society.

Those on Right simply think it is a "yucky" topic and belongs solely…

Read more

Live Blogging! – An event concerning the 10th Amendment in Hollis tonite

Tenth Amendment Center
Jack For NH Governor

The ‘Grok will be at the  Lawrence Barn in Hollis, NH (28 Depot Street) for an event where Jack Kimball for NH Governor will be hosting Michael Boldin (the Founder of the Tenth Amendment Center) will be speaking concerning this:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The event starts at 6:30pm; light refreshments will be provided.

The 10th Amendment; You know the part so long ignored, the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution,  that has the Constitution be a Limited document vs a Living document (as the Progressives would have you believe so that they can pay lip service to it, say the right words to it, and govern away from it [for their definition of "progress" is moving from First Principles).

At first, we were just asked to cover the event.  Well, Murphy’s Laws has kinda pushed us into being PART of the event.  The original text of this post was to include this:

Read more

BLOB launch #3 – ok, last one for a while

This still looks like a LOT of fun – and the kid has pretty decent control in the air too! And here’s a different view from in front of the "launch":

The Sandown Snub from Bill Binnie and Kelly Ayotte

Updated and bumped: we have a partial video of the event: a question asked of missing Kelly Ayotte.

(H/T: Tom)

============================================

Guest post by Matt Simon (cross-posted from NHinsider)

"Ayotte and Binnie seek distance from NH voters, ditch traditional Sandown debate"

Until Wednesday night, Sandown was one of those sleepy New Hampshire towns I had heard about but never actually visited. What finally drew me to Sandown was my desire to witness a long-standing, almost legendary tradition in New Hampshire politics: the Sandown GOP Senate candidate forum. Five candidates were confirmed well in advance (the four major candidates plus a very annoying chap called Dennis Lamare), and expectations were high for a serious forum allowing voters to ask questions of the candidates.

New Hampshire politics at its very finest, right? Well, I for one was kind of excited, so I decided to make the trip and see for myself rather than simply watching on community access TV along with thousands of voters around the state.

Unfortunately, two candidates, the two so-called "front-runners," decided at the last minute to ditch the Sandown debate, leaving voters to hear only from the two candidates who have actually shown they are capable of meeting voters face-to-face and winning their support. Jim Bender and Ovide Lamontagne both looked and sounded like…

Read more

Notable Quote – Kathryn Jean Lopez

President Obama, 5 days before ascending his throne Presidency: "We are five days from fundamentally transforming the United States of America!" ********** On reacting to Judge Walker’s ruling that California voters,  in voting to keep traditional marriage intact (along with a majority of other states in this Union) was unconstitutional with this pronouncement: “Gender no … Read more

So, Obama says he won’t give the keys back to the Republicans? Seems like Joe America is going to TAKE them away from him!

Well, this ain’t warmin’ the cockles of the Lefty hearts: the results of a poll done by uber-Dem James Carville.

Obama isn’t liking this phrase anymore: "It’s the economy, stupid!"

(H/T: Hot Air) 

Nor are these data points going to help the Progressive partying spirit (polling from Pajamas Media):

54% – General public supporting TEA Party Movement

31% – self-identified DEMOCRATS supporting the TEA Party Movement

****

Given your current knowledge of the Tea Party Movement and their positions on the issues, would you say that you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose the Tea Party Movement?

27% Strongly support
27% Somewhat support
13% Somewhat oppose
28% Strongly oppose
5% Not sure

Have you publicly shown support for the Tea Party Movement by speaking openly about it or is your support for the Tea Party Movement a private matter?

36% You publicly support the Tea Party Movement
52% You support the Tea Party Movement privately
12% Not sure

Do you consider yourself…

Read more

A phoney TEA Party Mantle – the story continues – some email responses.

So that the other Groksters don’t get on my case (again) about dragging this out, and perhaps save you all some time in having to read the details (especially Pat Hynes – he’s such a busy dude):

Well, I got a couple more emails – from friends.  One in particular REALLY bothered me – it turned out that Pat Hynes WAS being a bully – he was using Chicago tactics on MY friend, intimating that he could end up involved legally with me because of this post.

In other words, by putting out the spectre of my friend having to get a lawyer and being brought to court, Pat Hynes hoped that to use my friendship with this person against me. 

For only political gain for his client.

Essentially, Pat Hynes is trying to shut me up about talking about Sean Mahoney’s false claim to be a big part of the TEA Party here in NH.  Seems that me saying that Sean Mahoney is trying to ride the TEA Party coattails has bothered them both mightily.

I may also add, a whole bunch of others too – Sean Mahoney should be expecting to be asked some really tough questions now – more than a few folks are not amused.

I ended up with my last post this way:

>> It is in your best interest.

Am I to take that as a threat, Pat?  You’ve now crossed a line you should not have; you are now making it personal; you REALLY want to go there?????

Apparently, he did.  To recap from my earlier post:

  • The Prequel – April 15, 2010 – TEA Party event in Portsmouth.
  • The Reminder: (7/16) Local paper article – "presser" (maybe 2 reporters?)
  • The Call: (7/19) Call to the campaign office.
  • The Email: (7/19) The "clarifier" email
  • The "YOU’RE IN THE WRONG" Emails

And they continued – a number of them on the 19th, 20th, and 21st (and he said I was the one doing the harrassing?) all demanding that I call him (one even called me "a foll" [sic])

  • Calls with short endings

Let’s put this up (posted 7/21 just before I left for Las Vegas) as a reminder – I was losing patience with Pat Hynes:

I could have repeated this image a couple of times to more accurately depict the history, but once was enough (you get the idea).

And yes, I will add this "No, I am not recording this; it is against NH law to record someone without their permission."

Read more

So, Sean Mahoney’s online guy, Pat Hynes, is NOT among the powerful?

Am I done?  Maybe, maybe not…we’ll see.  In the mean time, I had emailed Patrick Hynes this:

I’m just a little bitty blogger with a small blog in small little NH.  You’re a national powerhouse who the monied powerful and powerful-wannabees are looking to hire; I’m not even the dot at the end of your sentence.

His response?

Your powerhouse rhetoric is just silly.
Well, according to this story in Politico, it certainly seems that I'm right - Patrick Hynes used to be a nationally rated blogger - now he's a national level political operative:

Not only is the blogosphere changing how voters consume information, it’s also creating new jobs in politics, policy and online communications consulting. Although there is still no formal job description for “blogger relations” staffers, these part communications, part research, part online political organizing specialists are a growing industry in the political world.

“It’s becoming as common to have someone managing communications with bloggers as it was to have a press secretary 10 years ago,” said Patrick Hynes, founder and president of Hynes Communications, a social media public affairs agency.

Now, you have to be good, to have a rep, to be included in a Politico story.  I think this buttresses my argument.  Think I'm kidding?  If you are in the same story as Michelle Malkin, you're top notch.

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXingYummly