Articles tagged as

GraniteGrok

Gilford Steamer a Government Watchdog? Nope – lapdog is more like it.

I have been absent for a couple of days here at the ‘Grok as I have been spending time with my “other ‘Grok”.  That would be GilfordGrok that covered only issues that affected my home town.  With Doug going into political retirement, it was all I could do to keep up with this site, so GilfordGrok, over the last couple of year,  turned into my abandoned red-headed step-child version of a blog-site (pretty much, all I did was post up video of the meetings of the Budget Committee).

Sidenote: every town needs a ‘Grok to do the work that the mainstream press can’t or won’t do.  And what we see happening in DC, what happened in Concord, happens everywhere including your town or city.  And with the passing of that conservative firebrand Andrew Breitbart, we ALL need to be Breitbarts!

Read more

Endorsement (for my Gilford readers)- Doug Lambert for Gilford School Board

I have submitted the following to the local papers:

First, the School Board decided to flaunt the will of Gilford voters, who voted 2-1 to not have a new Superintendent (hiring one the day before the election). Then, the Board decided to not hold the Special Meeting as petitioned by Gilford residents because of this action (and in violation of NH law). Then at the Gilford Candidates Night, the current Chair and past Chair (Kurt Webber and Sue Allen, respectively) insisted simply by saving $11,000 on busing costs was a superb reason to start up full day kindergarten – again, showing complete disdain for Gilford voters who had previously voted NO (video at GilfordGrok.com). Kurt Webber has further doubled down by stating he had cut the School Board’s budget (even though expenditures have grown) – and showing that the bureaucrat-ese of “Washington budgeting cuts” (where a “cut” = “increasing, but at a slower pace”) has been brought to Gilford.

Read more

Guest post by Peter Bearse, Ph.d and a former Congressional candidate

THE RISE of a NEW POPULISM

A rising new populism can become the heart of an America rising anew. What, after all, do liberals and conservatives have in common? It’s the recognition of “We the People” as more than the opening lines of our Constitution. “Power to the People” is the title of a conservative book, not just a leftist line. “The American Way” and “The American Dream” resonate with those on both sides of the political aisle. Some commentators have recognized that there is a common core of concerns animating both Tea Party and Occupy movement activists. The core concern is failure of political “business as usual” to serve more than the “One Percent” of insiders, crony capitalists, the “Best and the Brightest”; and other elitists who frequent Wall Street, Washington, D.C. and foster the incestuous interconnections between and among them.

Read more

Heh! Stacy hits The Charles Johnson Special!

Over at The Other McCain is this really short video – you have to watch carefully to see that blazing fedora whiz past: Doff that fedora, Stacy! Unless you’ve been in the blogosphere for a long time, you would not know that Pam Geller and Robert Spencer are hated by Charles Johnson.  And who is … Read more

Be Breitbart

Glen over at Instapundit has put up a fair amount of posts and words concerning the passing of Andrew Breitbart and passes this comment from one of his readers along: I attended my first caucus today. It was a great experience. We filled a middle school cafeteria to the brim, there must have been almost … Read more

“The Peoples’ Voice” – with our own Susan Olsen!

Now on WSMN 1590am Thursday mornings, 10am – 11am, is Grokster Susan Olsen’s new radio show called “The Peoples’ Voice” with ‘Grok friend, Karen Testerman: Susan Olsen and Karen Testerman (both above) and   of Smart Girl Politics in NH present The People’s Voice, every Thursday at 10am. Whether it’s local, state or national politics, this … Read more

David Brooks is the epitome of his own ‘moderate Republican’ vision

David Brooks is one unhappy dude – I would be, too, if I was the New York Times token “Conservative “.  Problem is, in order to be Conservative, one has to have a solid belief system rooted in actual conservative values – something he actually doesn’t particularly like (my previous post: strong American values are leading to “incredibly backward-looking campaign”).

Or have. I guess this shows how little one actually has to be right-leaning to be considered “Conservative” when everyone around you at the NYT is a flaming Lib.  And now he’s got another strike that confirms that view in his column a couple of days ago: The Possum Republicans.  A few things struck me – this first on those in the middle on keeping their political offices:

Still, it is worth pointing out that this behavior is not entirely honorable. It’s not honorable to adjust your true nature in order to win re-election. It’s not honorable to kowtow to the extremes so you can preserve your political career.

So when Brooks, the NYT Mr. Moderate, says that, two things jump out:

Read more

In Memoriam: Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012)

Andrew BreitbartIn doing my normal surfing before going to work, I include the “Bigs” (Big Journalism, Big Government, et al).  They are all noting the unexpected passing of Andrew Breitbart – an uncompromising Conservative that saw the liberal Media for what it was – liberal and anti-conservative, and not the “objective” view that they so desperately wished us all to believe.  He was one of the first to “take it to them” and unmask them concerning this and unmask those that they protected (think former Congressman Anthony Wiener taking Twit-pics of his naked self).

We had the opportunity to interview him several times over the last few years – I will pull those together later on today.

Brash, uncompromising, smart, courageous, didn’t care what his opponents thought of him – with the proper dashes of irreverence and craziness.  While not a personal friend, I will miss what he did for us all.

One of a kind.  R.I.P., sir – you will be missed.

Updated: Some of our recordings of / interviews with Andrew Breitbart after the jump

Read more

Why work when the Government pays you more to NOT work full time?

Over at Don Surber’s place, he had this post on the observation of a newspaper owner on “why aren’t people going to work?” Short answer:  Government. The observation: why aren’t people taking $10 / hour jobs and be self supportive and independent of welfare “strings attached”? Longer Answer: Due to the welfare system, it pays … Read more

Email Doodlings: HB437 – My take on repeal of gay marriage

On the same email thread that NH State Senator Ray White’s missive came from came this question:

Not sure why we’re wasting time and political capital on this issue, this year (an election year for God’s sake)…with an almost 100% certainty of a Lynch veto and failure to override…

At first blush, the intent behind the question was correct – the economic issues SHOULD be front forward.  I even started off with that thought….and then it hit me: why should we cede all the social issues to the Democrat / Progressives / Liberals?  To the Secular Humanists? Why should their morality become public law – why should their’s trump mine (which is far close if not, indeed, traditional American in outlook? The HHS insurance mandate now roiling America’s religious community is a great (and horrific) example of this – Progressives believing that Government has the legal right to so narrowly define what a church is that it can, out of whole cloth, strip their ministries from being “religious” ones to being secular by fiat decision.  And then force those newly re-classified secular (formerly religious) organizations to obey Governmental restrictions instead of being accountable to religious ones.

My answer (lightly edited, names redacted):

My take: I, too, would rather see more changes on the economic issues simply if not to allow Democrats to demagogue the “why aren’t you concentrating on jobs like you promised?” (even as Enterasys just moved 540 jobs into NH).

However, there is also the “walk and chew gum” at the same time argument.  Thus, I look at this from this perspective – the Republicans did not start the culture wars – the social engineering in recent years has been all Democrat based.  We need Republicans to point this out over and over and over and over again (and with better messaging than what has been done to date, I might add).

WHY would we, why SHOULD we, cede the culture war to the Progressives?  WHY should we just give up the social engineering side of the war?

Read more

US Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D): all too willing to use the fear of the IRS to stifle TEA Party opposition? How Orwellian of her…

Jeanne Shaheen Signature: IRS, get TEA Party“…those who cannot be co-opted are isolated and then destroyed.“

I had seen mention of the use of IRS going against TEA Parties (Richmond TEA Party, Ohio Liberty Council, it seems that others are in process) over at The TaxProf’s blog (via Instapundit, much more here at The Daily Caller on what the IRS is demanding for information), but loyal reader Steven sent this link along from Big Government.  Nice to see my US Senator Jeanne Shaheen all too willing to use the coercive force of Bigger Government (the IRS!) to silence her opposition!  This proves the phrase that I have been using: “The Bigger the Government, the smaller the citizen”.  We already have seen that Shaheen has no problem in using the force of the Federal Government:

Read more

NH HB437 – Guest post by NH State Senator Ray White on the repeal of same-sex marriage

Guest post by NH State Senator Ray White on HB437 (the bill to repeal homosexual marriage here in NH):

My email is running 10-1 against the marriage bill. When I get those emails, here is my response, which usually gets me a very ugly, hateful reply:

“Unfortunately, I have to disagree with your email. I must state up front that I am against same-sex marriage, civil unions, or any other relationship that is not traditional marriage as it was understood for the entire history of the human race, at least until the last few years.

Marriage is a special institution that all previous generations understood to be between a man and a woman. There has never been a society, a culture, a country, or a people that defined it any differently until very recent history. Although the argument has been made that my viewpoint is a religious understanding of marriage, the fact of the matter is that even so-called “pagan” or other types of nonreligious cultures have also agreed on this definition throughout history. This is because marriage is about the fundamental building block of society, and it has always been understood as so, regardless of religious beliefs.

It has been only in recent years that the notion has been put forth that marriage needs to be redefined and broadened. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is unbelievable that after thousands and thousands of years of human history, that we think we can turn our backs on this fundamental truth and still prosper as a society. It is complete hubris to believe that we are smarter than the billions upon billions of people who have gone before us. I refuse to subscribe to this thinking. I reject the notion that this type of thinking is discriminatory. It is simply a factual clearheaded statement of right and wrong.

I believe that the breakdown of the traditional family has been a huge detriment to society, producing incredible social ills that government now finds itself unsuccessfully wrestling with to correct and mitigate. It began several decades ago with the general acceptance of divorce, and has proceeded to the general acceptance of producing children without the benefit of marriage and commitment, where fathers are now optional sperm donors, and now to the topic we find ourselves discussing in this e-mail. It is no coincidence that everything I am describing has happened simultaneously, i.e. the rethinking and redefinition of marriage and the social crumbling of society at large.

Read more

Donna Brazile – no healthcare Freedom for ANYONE!

From Cafe Hayek: (emphasis mine)

I just received a lovely email from my old friend, Donna Brazile. OK, we’re not old friends. For some reason she has decided to put me on her email list. She writes:

This week, the Senate votes on a GOP amendment that would let your employer decide what health care you can receive. If they morally object to birth control, it’s gone. If some corporation thinks cancer screening is too expensive, forget it.

This amendment is dangerous, and the people pushing it need to lose their jobs.

It is insane that we get our health care from our employers. That happens because we have given a tax advantage to in-kind compensation such as health care. It’s a horrible idea and it leads people to complain about our employers deciding what health care we can receive. Our employers are just a conduit for government mandates, rent-seeking and inefficiency related to health care. What the government has done is tax-advantage health care via employers and then tell them what has to be covered. So the real outrage is that because of this, the government mandates the mix of my compensation package, biasing it toward a luxury health-care package that is the result of special interest clamoring.

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXingYummly