Syrup of Ipecac For Lee Quandt

“A moment’s reflection shows that Liberalism is entirely negative. It is not a formative force, but always and only a disintegrating force.” —Francis Parker Yockey

RINO (ry•/n oh)  noun. (acronym)

            Republican in name only

  1. A person who runs for, or holds political office representing one’s self as a “Republican” but who adopts, votes for or advocates for political tenets that advance an agenda contrary to conservatism or the Republican party platform.
  2. A member of the Republican Party who is liberal.
Representative Lee Quandt (R)ino

One of our own RINO’s in the legislature has taken up the mantle of Charlatanry. But what makes this RINO Charlatanry so noteworthy is his engagement in tactics typically found on the left. People like Raymond Buckley, Kathy Sullivan, and Harrell Kirstein. Not only noteworthy are the tactics, but the very word choices used in the description.

This RINO writes, ”

Read more

The Shrill Kathy And The Birthers

“We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” —Benjamin Franklin

Shrill_Kathy_Chronicals_Grok.jpg

Kathy Sullivan is not only dishonest, but she is also a rank charlatan. The Shrill Kathy is the epitome of moral bankruptcy when it comes to New Hampshire politics.  In the UL today she quips, Why does Speaker O’Brien not call out his birthers? placing responsibility for the less than savory behavior of a few legislators squarely on his shoulders. So, let’s be clear about this because whatever “this” is, amounts to nothing more than  another wanton pedestrian rant of the Shrill Kathy.

In prior writings, The Shrill Kathy calls out O’Brien alleging that he fails to respect the process and ignores long-standing rules. Yet here we see a circumstance where Orly Taitz asked for access and redress (due process) that our rules mandate must be provided.  And the Shrill Kathy takes O’Brien to task for not stifling that process. Make up your mind! Sulli-Shrill… Which is it? O’Brien squelches? or O’Brien observes?

Read more

The Red Herring Of Granite State Gambling

“I don’t gamble, because winning a hundred dollars doesn’t give me great pleasure. But losing a hundred dollars pisses me off.” — Alex Trebek

Slot%20MachinesGROKNHI.jpg

 Back in the early 90’s while attending college at night, I took an elective course called Public Policy. At that time, I was a staunch advocate for expanded gaming in the Granite State.  “Put a couple of Casinos up around Breton Woods and the North Country!” I made all the usual pro-gambling arguments we see here today. Since that time, I have changed my position. I am against expanded gambling in New Hampshire now, but for the very narrowest of reasons, chiefly, that we are all being lied to.  

Conditions in the late 80’s and early 90’s were excellent to consider and adopt expanded gambling in the Granite State. Now it is not.  New Hampshire missed the boat on this big opportunity and the reasoning for the push now is faulty. One simply cannot advocate for something simply because Massachusetts is doing it. That logic fails right out of the gate. There is a shared sentiment in the Granite State that if Massachusetts does it, New Hampshire ought not to.

 The reason for the change of mind is not only simple, but quite logical. In the 80’s and 90’s there were far fewer gambling venues for Granite Staters to enjoy. Casino Gambling meant taking a trip to Atlantic City, Las Vegas or Down to Connecticut. However,  Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 literally saturated the gambling market with options. Since then, Rhode Island, Maine and Connecticut have jumped on board and now offer venues.  The market is saturated. More casinos means less revenue for all as each one fights and lobbies for those dollars.

 For years, I have watched busloads of seasoned citizens leave New Hampshire for Casino destinations. Now pro-gambling advocates warn that a Bay State Plan could siphon off Granite State gambling revenues. Well, not so much…dollars already leave the state “en mass” so in reality we have been losing this revenue all along….and now it is a big issue?  

Read more

JOHN LYNCH: A STEADY LEADER…WHEN?

“Without initiative, leaders are simply workers in leadership positions.” Bo Bennett 

Shrill_Kathy_Chronicals_Grok.jpg

In a letter to French Scientist Jean-Baptiste Le Roy in November of 1789, Benjamin Franklin quipped those ever long-enduring and famous words, “[B]ut in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes … ” It would appear Franklin had not contemplated the certainty of blow-hard political hacks and self-aggrandizing opportunists.

Upon Seeing the Union Leader Headline Tuesday, “Gov. Lynch will leave office very popular, and for good reason“, and who the author was,  predictable is the litany and diatribe that follows. And, with the whole and complete certainty of death and taxes, the “Shrill Kathy” hath delivered. In the 779-word bloviation, the “Shrill Kathy” delivered a mere 199 words extolling Lynch’s virtues and reserved the remaining 580 words for her usual and expected attack on Republicans, checkered with a contrast and comparison-like tone…Make no mistake about it…Lynch’s announcement, as with most other political events, is a mere pretext for her visera.

Read more

HOUSE JOINS SENATE, OVERRIDES SENATE BILL 88 VETO

“A moment’s reflection shows that Liberalism is entirely negative. It is not a formative force, but always and only a disintegrating force.” Francis Parker Yockey

Armed%20Senior.JPG

The House voted today to override the Governors’ veto of Senate Bill 88 on the heels of the Senate voting to override last week. The vote was 251 to 111. It should be important to note that the Governor and his faithful went into overdrive to build support for sustaining the veto, to include a walking tour of Lincoln street area of Manchester in the vicinity of Hayward and Somerville Streets. It was there where Attorney General stated, “And we will be providing drug dealers and street gangsters with a new right to respond using more violence in public places…”

At the Governor’s press conference the morning before the house leaders’ press conference, Chief Robert Wharem, President of the New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police, told WMUR, “Senate Bill 88 is one of the most dangerous bills we’ve had come before us in our time…” while he had roughly a dozen other police chiefs gathered around him, seeming to imply he speaks for all New Hampshire Chiefs. The difference here is many likely opted to stay home and not politicize this bill, remaining within the confines of their sworn oaths.

At the end of the day, none of their Charlatanry, pandering or demagoguing held any political water, resulting in the veto override which now means the bill is law. Now SB 88 is law. The streets will not run red with blood and responsible, law-abiding citizens will not be prosecuted for lawfully defending themselves against violent attacks.

But to be expected, whenever there is a gun crime it will be certain that the critics of the bill will point to this law as a manifestation of that crime, ignoring the fact that criminals with guns will still commit crimes. They did so before this law and will continue to do so even after this law.

This law protects law-abiding citizens, not Criminals. On the coattails of Senate Bill 88’s passage we will likely hear be hearing next from the Brady Bunch about the enormous social costs of gun violence.  Guy Smith, Author of Gun Facts, has undertaken a most complete compilation of data. Here are just a few examples:

Myth: The social cost of gun violence is enormous

Fact: Because guns are used an estimated 2.5 million times per year to prevent crimes, the cost savings in personal losses, police work, and court and prison expenses vastly outweighs the cost of criminal gun violence and gun accidents. The net savings, under a worst-case scenario, is about $3.5 billion a year.257

Read more

The First Circuit Videotape Opinion and House BIll 145

“In the Halls of Justice the only justice is in the halls.” ~Lenny Bruce 

little_brother_is_watching_back_GROK.jpg

On one October 2007 evening, Boston attorney Simon Glik, was walking past Boston Common where Boston police officers John Cunniffe, Peter Savalis and Jerome Brewster were effecting an arrest. Hearing a nearby person state, “Stop! You’re hurting him!” Glik began video recording the incident from approximately ten feet away, using his cell phone. Shortly thereafter, Glik was arrested and his cell phone confiscated.

Charged with violation of the Massachusetts wiretap statute(Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99(C)(1)), In February, 2008, the Boston Municipal Court summarily disposed of the wiretap charge, noting,  “the fact that the officers were unhappy they were being recorded during an arrest . . . does not make a lawful exercise of a First Amendment right a crime.” 

Glik filed a civil rights action against the officers and the City of Boston in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts when his internal affairs complaints were ignored. Summarily, The People’s Republik moved to dismiss Glik’s complaint asserting that his allegations failed to adequately support his claims and that officers were entitled to qualified immunity “because it is not well-settled that he had a constitutional right to record the officers.” The court denied the motion and the commonwealth’s interlocutory appeal followed in which they did not prevail.

In its opinion, the court stated, “Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting ‘the free discussion of governmental affairs.’” And the court ruled “a citizen’s right to film government officials, including law enforcement officers, in the discharge of their duties in a public place is a basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment…”

In the wake of this opinion are the countless arrests in the Granite State for the very same activities, as detailed numerous times in the New Hampshire Union Leader.  The one incident that comes to mind is a Sheriff’s Deputy attempting to thwart Representative Gary Hopper from video-recording in the Legislative Office building back in 2010.  Finally, House Bill 145 , presently languishes in the Senate and has met with a great deal of resistance from Law Enforcement.  

Police are concerned that the bill fails to protect both their privacy and that of the public they serve. Privacy? What privacy? they are Public servants subject to the accountability to that same public they serve!

Read more

Multiculturalism

“What ‘multiculturalism’ boils down to is that you can praise any culture in the world except Western culture – and you cannot blame any culture in the world except Western culture.” ~Thomas Sowell Far too many people define themselves in a hyphenated Status. This was virtually unheard of up until the 1970’s. Americans were, well…just … Read more

Teri Norelli Cries Foul on the Budget: Insert Yawn Here

“If you put the government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand.” ~Milton Friedman, Economist Democratic leader Terri Norelli takes pen to the Union Leader this morning to decry the Republican budget. Norelli does a masterful work in her use of descriptors and categorizations demagoguing the Republicans … Read more

Another Anti-Second Amendment Publication Heard from: Seacoast On-line Editorial decries Open Carry

“Remember the first rule of gunfighting… ‘have a gun’.”  ~Jeff Cooper founder, the American Pistol Institute The opening paragraph of the Portsmouth Herald Editorial reads, “A Portsmouth police detective was recently lauded for defusing a July 4 incident in which Stawbery Banke Museum officials asked a couple openly carrying pistols to leave a ceremony attended … Read more

Florida Adopts Drug Testing For Recipients Of Public Assistance

“One of the consequences of such notions as “entitlements” is that people who have contributed nothing to society feel that society owes them something, apparently just for being nice enough to grace us with their presence.”~Thomas Sowell

welfare_money_Grok.jpg

Florida is the first state to pass a law requiring those receiving state benefits to submit to drug testing. Florida Governor Rick Scott told CNN that the law was passed to provide personal accountability of those who would receive public assistance. Governor Scott believes that taxpayers should not be subsidizing the illegal drug use of those who are on the public dole. Under this law, those seeking to receive aid would be responsible to bear the up-front cost for drug testing, but the law provides for reimbursement.

And as predictably as could be anticipated, the rank-and-file liberal establishment lined right up to fight and advocate for status quo unaccountability. The perjuring impeached former Federal Judge and current State Representative Alcee Hastings made a whole bunch of noise about this bill being, “downright unconstitutional.” There is somebody we should listen to.  

The ACLU does what it usually does and filed a suit to block the law. Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida told CNN, “What (the Governor) is doing is giving ugly legitimacy to an unfortunate stereotype that has been in this country for a couple of decades – that all welfare recipients are a bunch of drug abusers,” pure demagoguery…But okay…let us look at what Howie confabulates.

It is a fair statement to say that not all people on welfare use illegal drugs. Fact is, we don’t really know how many people on welfare use drugs. Nobody wants to talk about it for obvious political reasons. However, lets take a look at what the National Poverty Center says about drug use:

“Citing (April 2004) estimates of the extent of substance abuse among welfare recipients, the authors suggest that policymakers and analysts have likely overstated the contribution of substance dependence to welfare receipt. The authors note that while substance use, abuse, and dependence are barriers to self-sufficiency, so are poor education, lack of transportation, physical and mental health problems, and other difficulties that are more common than substance dependence among welfare recipients. The authors stress the need for comprehensive services to address the multiple barriers faced by the most disadvantaged welfare recipients.”

NPC steers clear of making any concrete determination by simply directing attention away from drug use, to the whole host of other problems endemic in the welfare community. Their underlying thesis is to modestly acknowledge drug use but redirect the focus away from it and advocate for a more broader expansion on services. In other words, “Taxpayers, don’t ask us for details, you simply must pay more…”

The NPC has a graphic on their website that would suggest only 21% of welfare recipients use illegal drugs. Lets accept that at face value for the sake of discussion. In the Granite state roughly 53,000 households or 112,000  people use food stamps. That is roughly 1% of the total state population. According to the Henry Kaiser Family foundation, New Hampshire’s per capita food stamp benefit is $121.21. That is $13,575,520. So according to the National poverty center, the Granite State pays a public benefit in the amount of $2,850,859 to people who use illegal drugs. And with our liberal friends that is just aye-okay.

Read more

When It Comes to the Second Amendment, Guiliani’s The Man!

“I love New York City; I’ve got a gun.”~Charles Barkley

Guiliani_graphic_GROK.jpg

As I often do in the morning, I settled in with a hot cup of Joe to read today’s edition of the New Hampshire Union Leader. Turning to page A3, Dan Tuohy’s headline read, Giuliani takes stand on firearms rights“. Now, given Mayor Guiliani’s high public profile and his history on the second Amendment, I just had to read this story before anything else. I mean, why pass up a chance to be amused first thing in the morning? This might even be funnier than one of Raymond Buckley’s quotes.

Manchester Harley-Davidson dealership owner Steve Talarico introduced Mayor Guiliani, wanting to  “help clear the air” of any misconceptions about the former New York Mayor’s record on gun issues. “The mayor seems to be probably one of the most misinterpreted politicians on the Second Amendment,” Talarico tells his audience. Really Steve? Damn! sorry about that…Guess the Mayor really is a gun guy when he told the St. Louis Post in December of 1993, “…a uniform licensing system with real teeth in it, and a period where you’d have to demonstrate your capability of using a gun, and then every two years you’d have to go back and once again show that you’re stable, your healthy, you’re able to handle a gun and you know what to do with it…”Now, that doesn’t much resemble a gun control measure, does it? how ignorant of me.

Or how about this little gem as recently as February 2007 while making an appearance on Larry King Live? King asks, “Favor Gun Control? Favor Brady?” Guiliani responds, “For Handguns, And I did…” Silly me, I took that to mean Rudy told Larry King that he supported the Brady Bill. I must have been in doofus-mode that day.

Read more

Share to...