The Noisemaker

And You Were Worried About Bag Fees?

Steve Mac Donald — Tue, 29 May 2012 13:08:29 +0000

A woman was kicked off a plane for wearing a shirt that read, “If I wanted the Government in My Womb I’d F*** a Senator.”

There are plenty of things wrong with this. First, it assumes that the Senator in question would be both male and adequately equipped to achieve the implied destination. While many Senators, regardless of gender, could be considered big (you know) as an insult, that does not automatically translate to human anatomy. In fact, if the goat-entrails of the anecdotal collective consciousness are correct, the bigger the (you know) insult, the smaller the real thing actually is.

Senators also tend to lack ba**s, so this seems like an accurate analysis. Viability of the “swim team” is a matter of detail we’ll pass on for now, but I will add that Democrat John Edwards “boys” were still swimming when he cheated on his cancer-stricken wife which suggests that the womb is achievable regardless of the size of your…constituency…at least for an Ex-Senator.

We also have here a woman who is not just sexist (Senators in this scenario must be men), but must also be a statist. Her concept of government interference begins and ends in Washington DC. Yes, I have to presume that she means a US Senator. If they were a true believer in Republicanism and State Sovereignty they would have taken the time to add “State” in front of Senator, or more likely would be wearing a shirt on which the word Womb would be replaced with the word Ass. But this is clearly a woman who would travel all the way to DC to have the “government” interloping in her womb.

Then there’s that whole stay out of my womb sub-culture whose roots come from the EMILY’s List, Planned Parenthood, League of Women Voters, National Organ of Women, all abortion all the time, and while we’re at it, you’d better pay for it groups. This is pay to play without the play, unless–according to the charming lady in the T-shirt with the word F*** on it–you happen to be a sitting US Senator. This suggests that this person also promotes or expects Senators to be on the take and that this is the best way to get the government involved in your issue. The irony of that is too vast to explore at this time so back to the Wombistas.

This is the kind of ignorant thinking that get’s your womb over-regulated by the HHS department of Childless Family Services in unpleasant ways you never imagined–just ask the Chinese. And the chasm of ignorance is vast. The same sort that wears T-shirts with the words F*** and” my womb” on them, who are not a porn star (though they could be), are the same voting sluts that demand the government act as their prevention pimps at taxpayer expense. And there’s the rub. You can’t demand the government finance anything related to your lady parts and expect them to not take an ongoing interest in their investment. In fact, that is how the government goes about the business of taking control of things, be they banks, car companies, small businesses, education curriculum’s, highway spending, bike paths, health care systems, or wombs. A point I just made three weeks ago here.

Before the government can legally take other people’s money and spend it, even if its on traffic in and out of ‘your vagina’ they have to pass a law. You need a law to support taxpayer funded abortion, a law for taxpayer funded contraception, and other laws for whatever else it is about your vagina that constitutes “women’s health” and “human rights.” So you should be finding new places in your vagina for more laws not less. And not to scare “Don’t Tread on my Uterus” but every law requires scores of bureaucrats to write relevant rules and manage the regulations, implement them, and even enforce them, which will turn your vagina into a Law library and result in a uterus that has not only been thoroughly trampled on but will need to lease out space for the ever-expanding bureaucracy.

The Senator is just a facilitator. He’s not even going to call you after, except perhaps for a cash donation to his re-erection campaign. (That was intentional). And not that you’ll listen but if you don’t want the ‘Government’ in your womb, stop inviting them in. They are like vampires. Say yes once and they keep coming back until they’ve sucked you dry.

So should they have kicked someone this ignorant off the plane for the words on her T-shirt when, after all, they could have asked her to change it or cover it up? Yes. People this confused should not be allowed to fly in the passenger compartment. We should treat them like the fruit or exotic animals people try to sneak in from foreign countries. The risk of a disease spreading like wildfire after landing could incapacitate the entire nation for years. Crap. Too late. That’s what happened in 2008.

Well, think of it as containment then. No point letting things get worse. We’ve actually go a shot at starting to turn this death spiral around. And no, it’s not free political speech to wear those particular words on a T-shirt in public when there are plenty of others that will get the job done; it is just bad manners.

You are reading “And you were worried about bag fees” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)

Anonymous Allegations?

Steve Mac Donald — Tue, 29 May 2012 13:06:31 +0000

by Steve MacDonald

Over at the Concord Monitor web site, someone going by the name of ItsaRepublic, has been doing some very heavy lifting for GraniteGrok. They have gone to bat on the investigation of Public Employees who have been using the Monitor’s web site, during office hours, at taxpayer expense. Not exactly a friendly environment to promote anything we do here, but we appreciate the effort.

And as I have pointed out previously, the Monitor had begun letting those sorts of comments stand (where in the past they had been known to ‘moderate’ them out of existance), and letting the debate take it’s bi-partisan course. But when it comes to allowing links back to GranitGrok articles on the investigation itself, a CM Moderator has explained why they wont be doing that any time soon…

By CM Moderator – 05/24/2012 – 8:39 am

We do not post links to websites making anonymous allegations against real people. It does not matter whether the site leans to the right or the left.

That’s curious for a few reasons. First, I’ve seen what the monitor passes off for news. Enough said? Second, Anonymous? Allegations?

I have a real person (Dick de Seve), who happens to be a real State employee (DES), who admitted to posting real comments during real work hours (In an email to me, personally) (see also here), with corroborating evidence (600 comments posted at the real Concord Monitor, with real times and real dates), along with related posts on the real DES and State DoIT policies, and a series of real Right to Know requests and the results of those so far (far too numerous to link all of them here.)

Can we get real, here?

Admitting by name to the act, with substantial evidence, in clear violation of policy, is an “anonymous allegation?” Talk about a tough room.

Then there’s GAIA, who is still anonymous, but whom the allegations against are not just substantiated (and twice what de Seve managed in a similar time frame), they too reside (in their greater abundance) on the servers of the Concord Monitors web presence. This is a 30 year New Hampshire State employee, reading-digesting and posting political comments, during office hours, on state equipment, in violation of the state’s DoIT policy, when they are supposed to be doing the people’s business–that’s all the people’s business, whether they lean left or right.

In case this is too difficult for the left to follow. You look at the comments, and the times and dates posted, and a calendar, and it all sort of comes together like a puzzle. You know what else will come together rather easily? I’m going to go back and look to see if either of these folks posted alleged links to other alleged websites, and if there are any anonymous allegations about real people on them which the Concord Monitor allowed.

Sure hope I don’t find any. Wow, that could be embarrassing. (Good thing I have given them plenty of time to come up with another excuse.)

Not that it matters to the CM but regardless of their opinion of our investigation, we exposed people stealing taxpayer time and got them to stop. All things being equal–and we know how much the Monitor like’s “Equality”–dozens or even hundreds of state employees of varying degrees of guilt may well have joined them and stopped wasting taxpayer resources on themselves. We applaud this sudden, if unexpected bout of conscience but we’re not done. We’ve got a few more on the burner, waiting to boil over, and we’re still looking. That just might encourage other taxpayer funded folks to stop wasting taxpayers time and money, on taxpayer equipment and networks, whether the Monitor wants to help or not.

Of course the monitor could help. We wouldn’t mind at all. They could do their own investigation and help save the taxpayers some money… or try to pretend there’s no problem so we can later embarrass them with things we know already. But I don’t think they will. The overall message being promoted by state employees, at taxpayer expense (on their site or any other), is the message of the Concord Monitor. It’s a left leaning, Democrat Party, tax and spend narrative. Besides, if every state employee stopped posting at the Concord Monitor, on state equipment, during work hours, their page hits and unique users would probably take a hit so large you’d hear the smacking all the way up in Pittsburg, NH. (It’s wayyyyy up north.)

Good thing a lefty, pro-socialist, rag like the Concord Monitor doesn’t give a damn about capitalist motivations like web traffic, and page hits, except for that whole capitalist pig pay wall thing, you know… um… well…awkward. I guess they can always stick with Anonymous allegations schtick. At least until we find links to them all over their pages.

I’m actually looking forward to that.

You are reading “Anonymous Allegations” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)

Right Online 2012

Steve Mac Donald — Thu, 24 May 2012 10:11:26 +0000

I’ll be heading to RightOnline 2012 in just few weeks. The event is this June, in Las Vegas.

Here is a bit of video from last year to get things started.

Concord Monitor Takes a Stand – When It’s A Republican

Steve Mac Donald — Mon, 21 May 2012 14:54:20 +0000

by Steve MacDonald

We’ve been reporting the apparent theft of services by an SEIU Union Chapter VP and NH DES employee Richard de Seve for months as we struggle with the Department of Environmental Services and the State’s IT department, and their resistance to part with data, in response to our Right to Know Requests about state employees using taxpayer time and state equipment to politic at (ironically) the Concord Monitor.

We even called the Monitor out on it for ignoring the story and pointed out when their moderators were deleting comments from their site about our investigation, and their not reporting it.

While the Concord Monitor has (at lest temporarily) stopped deleting the comments, they have yet to make a n editorial peep about the problem of Democrats and Union sate employees wasting thousands of hours in payroll, with state equipment, to engage in on-line political activity. Not. One. Word.

But when the accused is Republican Bob Mead…and they can tie him to Bill O’Brien, they are all over it.

Public employees who want to engage in political activity should take time off to do so. That happens routinely in New Hampshire, for example, when a member of the governor’s staff takes a leave of absence to work for his or her reelection campaign.

What were New Hampshire taxpayers getting for their money when they paid Mead’s salary? What does any taxpayer, particularly those who are undeclared voters or members of a minority party, get when state employees do the work of political parties on the job? Not anything they’d willingly pay for. The next session of the Legislature should specifically prohibit on-the-job political activity by all state employees.

Great Idea that, suggesting such a thing. Wish we’d thought of it. (That’s right we did.)

You have to admit that this would have been a great time for some balanced editorializing; to mention of Dick de Seve, or the almost no longer mysterious Gaia, both Democrat state SEA (SEIU) employees with years of recorded abuse of the taxpayers trust for political purposes, on their very web pages. But no. (Not very encouraging coming from the “equality” crowd running the Concord bird cage liner.)

For the record, we agree with the Monitor that “state employees” should not engage in political activity while doing state business. Now if we could get the Monitor to name all the guilty parties without deference to party affiliation. That would be something to see.

You are reading “Concord Monitor Takes a Stand…when it’s a Republican.” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)

New Hampshire Gets Another “Passing Grade”

Steve Mac Donald — Wed, 16 May 2012 16:29:34 +0000

by Steve MacDonald

Courtesy of The Blaze.com.

The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to supporting entrepreneurship, and Thumbtack.com have released a study ranking the “least” and “most” business-friendly states in the U.S.

Idaho, Texas, Oklahoma, and Utah all got an A +. New Hampshire got an ‘A.’ The only respectable grade in the Northeast. (Notice how the failing states are all shades of blue?) The next closest was Maine with a ‘D+.’ Massachusetts and Connecticut got a ‘D,’ Vermont and Rhode Island received the big ‘F.’ You have to go all the way to Pennsylvania to get a ‘C.’

The survey was completed by actual small business owners so it is encouraging but hardly definitive. But we know we have a good thing going on. Highest average income, lowest poverty, best quality of life, safest, lowest overall tax burden, and –surprise!— a business friendly climate. A business friendly climate that four years of democrat rule tried to destroy. An advantage the progressives would happily exchange, enthusiastically exchange, for what the other New England states have if given the opportunity. (D’s and F’s if you were not paying attention.)

You are reading “NH Gets Another Passing Grade” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)

New Hampshire’s SAU 21 Hooked A Double-Dipper

Steve Mac Donald — Wed, 16 May 2012 16:03:14 +0000

by Steve MacDonald

Meet Robert M. Sullivan. Mr Sullivan, at the age of 58 ( I believe), ‘retired’ as the Superintendent of the Middleboro Massachusetts School District, where he was earning 128,000.00 per year. But like many “retired” public school superintendents, he didn’t stay retired for very long. He’s currently the Superintendent for the six schools that make up SAU #21 in New Hampshire. (Hampton Falls, North and South Hampton, Seabrook and Winnacunnet Co-op.)

But he’s retired!

“Retired?” Retired, to a Superintendent means you have a new job lined up before you leave the job you retired from, which the retiring Sullivan did. But while Mr. Sullivan is working in the Granite State he isn’t moving to New Hampshire permanently. He and his wife are staying in Massachusetts. Why?

…the out-of-state job will enable Robert M. Sullivan to collect his full Massachusetts pension, estimated to be in the range of $70,000 to $85,000, while also being paid for his new position.

So Superintendent Sullivan ‘retired’ so he could double-dip, collecting a $70,000.00 to $85,000.00 per year pension from the taxpayers in Massachusetts, while collecting a generous salary in New Hampshire? (I have not identified Sullivan’s SAU 21 compensation, but the national average is around $160,000.00 per year, and the man he is replacing earned $126,000.00 so his new wage is probably…’adequate.’)

Mrs. Sullivan is probably doing rather well. She is still a teacher and coach in Middleboro, so things are probably comfortable. Comfortable enough so that when Bob says he would like a “second residence” in New Hampshire to avoid a “difficult daily commute,” that this would not be a huge burden on them. Just hope no one registers to vote from that address.

So Double-Dipping is good work if you can get it, yes? Here is a man who is probably more than qualified to do the job at SAU21. I don’t doubt that. And he is certainly young enough to do it for a number of years and probably be very effective. And yet somehow, while still in the prime of his life, at what could turn out to be his peak earning years, he could be making close to three times the national average in income per year from one school ditrict while simultaneously taking a pension almost double the national annual income on top of that from another, because he was allowed to ‘retire” from his other taxpayer funded job–and collect his substantial pension–long before he should have been able to.

Don’t you wish you could retire at 58 and start collecting $70-85K a year for the rest of your life–plus some walking around money from a side job that pays a lot more? And people wonder why public sector pensions are in distress, running deficits in the billions? People wonder why taxpayers get a bit grumpy when public sector workers cry about raises, or complain about having to pay for more of their own pensions or benefits. This is why!

Now I think everyone who is able should be Working to support themselves or their family. Earning what you are worth is between you, and your employer, and no one else. But burying taxpayers in billions in pensions and benefits package benefits that will pay out sums that most of those taxpayers will never ever see for themselves in actual wages, is a path that leads to the bursting of the public pension bubble. Sure, it may not affect most public employees well along in their careers, but someone in the not so distant future is going to get screwed.

What the up and coming career public employees need to understand is that the unions really don’t care or they’d be writing contracts that deflate the bubble now. The majority of existing public employees, union or not, don’t seem to care either because if they did, they’d be pitching a lot more into their own benefits and pensions or voting for contracts that deflate that bubble faster to secure some kind of pension for future state workers. But is not what we appear to have. While we are picking at the edges during a down economy, all but a few are hoping something happens to make the problem go away. But the only thing that will do that on this trajectory is when someone says, yeah, I know you put x number of years in, but there’s no money. That means no pensions, slash and burn layoffs, and all those people whose protection or education demanded higher wages or larger benefit plans–they’re all screwed too.

They will suffer because people who went before them took $80,000 dollar per year (or more) pensions while still more than able to earn as much or more than that, sometimes for ten, fifteen or even twenty years. That is not what the pension was meant for. And it has to stop.

This is not, by the way, the fault of Bob Sullivan. I do not begrudge him his pension windfall. He is just following the “rules.” But wouldn’t it look a lot better if he could let someone who hadn’t retired on a decent pension get a shot at improving their career instead of improving his own after he retired on a wage most Americans will never see in their lifetimes? Is there no sense of guilt at screwing taxpayers in Massachusetts out so much in a pension, for so many years, while being able bodied enough to cross the border and earn even more on top of that, doing the exact same job, someplace else?

Mr. Sullivan is not alone. There are more than a few such superintendents in New Hampshire right now, doing the same thing. And yes, we are going to talk about them as well.

You are reading “NH SAU 21 Hooks a Double Dipper” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)

Fascilitators & Organizers

Steve Mac Donald — Mon, 07 May 2012 10:10:03 +0000

by Steve MacDonald

The Foster’s (It’s Australian for Beeyah!) Daily Democrat, gave GraniteGrok some ink this morning regarding James O’Keefe’s “appearance” at a Rye Republican GOP event yesterday…(That’s Rye NH, not the grass or the spirits, though perhaps the humor.)

O’Keefe’s video appearance Sunday was facilitated by the conservative political website Granite Grok, which provided live video coverage of the Rye gala online.

Foster’s (It’s Australian for Beeyah!) also said this…

Between O’Keefe’s comments, the Granite Grok organizers showed brief clips from some of the videos created by O’Keefe and Project Veritas, the group he founded approximately two years earlier to assist his work.

Facilitators and Organizers. At least they spelled the name right. I could not, unfortunately, be there, but Skip and Mike had things well manged as always.

Here’ a link to the Grok Exclusive video of the O’Keefe appearance which, yes…without the help of GraniteGrok, would not have been possible.

You are reading “Facilitators & Organizers” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)

Smokes and Mirrors – What’s Up With Tobacco Taxes?

Steve Mac Donald — Fri, 04 May 2012 18:08:20 +0000

by Steve MacDonald

All across the the Granite State Democrats have gathered in their secret underground lairs. The unthinkable has happened. Tobacco revenues were up last month. (Audible Gasp!). That’s right. Revenues beat estimates.

This is, of course, a double edged sword for the liberal left. When their grotesque estimates (overall) were forever coming in under target, how many times did they say, “it’s just one month, wait and see. Give it time, they’ll come around. We’re not that far off.” No such quarter for Republicans. ( Typical hypocrats.) At the ugly end of the 2007 to 2010 Democrat “experiment” they were off by about a billion dollars which might suggest they have no clue what they are doing.

But when the Republican’s estimated revenues for their budget the Democrats cried and whined anyway as if they were suddenly experts; the religious left even gathered to pray for more spending. I’m not kidding. They prayed for more spending. The left claimed repeatedly that Republican estimates were purposefully low to punish people. That is what the left said.

But the overall estimates are close. Very close. This means the Democrats were wrong about Republicans underestimating revenue on purpose, which means they were themselves wrong about estimates again (no surprise there). With revenue nearly in line with spending, bitching about it makes them look petty and just reminds everyone what wretched stewards they were of our tax dollars.

So left hanging without an economic axe to grind they have bet their rhetorical money on the cigarette tax cut. But they may have lost that bet as well.

In February tobacco revenue was reported to be $900,000.00 over projections. In April, it was above projection by close to a million. (That’s $1,000,000.00). In between tobacco revenues were down. Lottery, gaming, liquor and beer, over the entire budget cycle, are all below protections. Sales on all these items are down across the board. It’s not just tobacco. The message from the secret lair however is that the tobacco tax cut was irresponsible, but given the economic climate (created by Democrats, by the way), and the poor overall performance in the sin tax sector, tobacco revenue is actually doing fairly well.

Would the Democrats like to now argue that cheaper cigarettes are costing us tax revenue in beer, liquor, lottery and gambling receipts?

“Yes, we see a pattern where, during these economically depressed times, people are flocking to higher tax states to get as little for their dwindling dollars as they can.”

How about “they are doing what people always do when they have less money”–doing with less. Oh, sorry. We’re talking to Democrats. When they have less they always spend more, or tax more, and then more, and more, and more. But outside the liberal ghetto of the left wing mind real people have to make sacrifices and driving to New Hampshire to save a few bucks might not be cost effective right now. Why? How about gas prices? Perhaps our current energy policy and a weak dollar have made the cost of traveling to and from New Hampshire to save a few bucks untenable. (See, I told you we should have lowered the gas tax.)

Let me save you some time. Democrats don’t care. They’ve got talking points to talk about. Dwindling tobacco taxes are killing unwed mothers and fatherless children and old people with brain disorders. No answers, no past experience to run on, just scare tactics.

When was the last time a New Hampshire Democrat lowered a tax or spent less on government? How about never. To a Democrat balancing spending with revenue is the equivalent of fiscal hate speech. Government can never get smaller, those bureaucrats and their unions finance their campaigns and vote for them. They need that money and those votes, so screw you. And for four years they did. Hard. And no amount of Tobacco taxes (which they raised several times) would have ever covered up the gross fiction of left wing revenue estimation, a felonious event they continue to perpetrate even when out of power.

But undeniable truths will not be silenced. Democrats were wrong about revenue estimates when they were in power, Governor Lynch was wrong as usual with his budget, and if the Democrats were still in power now they’d be wrong to the tune of a few hundred million more, heaped onto the backs of people who clearly do not have extra money for liquor, beer and cigarettes, and would have even less under the yoke of the Democrats ever rising tax burden and grow government first agenda.

New Hampshire Republicans took a very bold and responsible approach to the budget, one that people are clamoring to see in Washington. They provided relief on a dead end tax that disproportionally hits lower income earners but at least presents an opportunity to stimulate other forms of commerce, something no tax increase will ever do. The Republicans estimated revenues in a way that avoided putting additional state tax pressures on small businesses and struggling citizens, while removing others. And then only spent what they thought they’d have. So far that’s worked out pretty well, and Democrats hate that.

We cant overcome the Democrats failed economic policy and disastrous energy policy agenda overnight. New Hampshire can’t drill for its own oil. So we have to do the best we can until we can do better. And we are doing better. And Democrats hate that.

And while the progressives would like to see gas prices come down for their buddy Obama, odds are very good that this price signal could encourage people from outside the state to use those savings to save even more on cross border sales of cigarette’s, beer, liquor, and lottery tickets, and Democrats don’t want to see Republicans proved right.

If the tobacco revenues eventually come it at or above projection, at the end of this fiscal experiment, all the left will have left is that $72,000.00 dollar taxpayer funded luxury remodel of the bathroom next to former Democrat House speaker Terie Norelli’s office (in the middle of the worst recession in history™ ), and another chapter in New Hampshire politics where they were completely wrong about the budget–again!

Let the New Hampshire Democrats scream at the darkness. Everyone else, feel free to ask for a light.

You are reading “Smokes and Mirrors – What’s up with Tobacco Taxes?” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)

The Complete Gaia Comment Stream

Steve Mac Donald — Fri, 04 May 2012 17:58:39 +0000

New Hampshire Public Employee Gaia managed to read, consume, and then comment at the Concord Monitor’s web site some 1200 times in just three years, more often than not during office hours. (Just to clarify this last point, a super majority of time during office hours.)

We could guess that they were doing it during one of their “breaks.” We know that DES has a very forgiving break policy so perhaps the whole of the bureaucracy is as forgiving? But then why did Gaia stop commenting all together after we announced our investigation into who they are?

(For those unfamilair, Gaiais the handle of the second State Employee we found spending their work day online, commenting at the Concord Monitor. The first was SEIU Chapter VP, and DES employee Dick de Seve. Ed Naile, myself, and Skip Murphy are in the midst of a series of RTK’s to discover the depth and width of his abuse and internet abuse in general among public employees.)

As to who Gaia is, we are narrowing down the search, and we’ll let you know when we’ve got that figured out. (We are very close.) In the mean time, here are the links to the Scribd posting of both PDF’s which include all 1200 Gaia comments at the Concord Monitor. Links to browser versions will be available at GraniteGrok, in the next day or so.

Please feel free to crowd source this. We have also posted the comment stream of Dick de Seve, which is available in its entirty over at the Grok.

Part one of two

Part two of two

If you would like to report a Public Employee Behaving Badly, email us at grokwatch@granitegrok.com

You are reading “The Complete Gaia Comment Stream” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)

A New Front in The War on Women – Do Liberal Chicks Dig Polygamy?

Steve Mac Donald — Tue, 01 May 2012 12:37:32 +0000

by Steve MacDonald

Piggy-backing off of Tim’s post on Mark Steyn’s recent article, I think the polygamy thing (which Tim does not mention) is worth visiting–repeatedly of course–just to remind everyone of the kind of campaign this has been and will continue to be. Nothing coming from the Obama side will be relevant or substantive, everything utter nonsense. And nonsense with the same lack of sourcing on the Democrat side as we’ve seen in everything they do.

From Mark Steyn’s recent article

For their next exploding cigar, the Democrats chose polygamy. Brian Schweitzer, the Democrat governor of Montana, remarked that Romney was unlikely to appeal to women because his father was “born on a polygamy commune.” Eighty-six percent of women, noted Gov. Schweitzer with a keenly forensic demographic eye, are “not great fans of polygamy.” You can understand the 86 percent’s ickiness at the whole freaky-weirdy idea of a president descended from someone who had multiple wives. Eww.

Just for the record, Romney’s father was not a polygamist; Romney’s grandfather was not a polygamist; his great-grandfather was a polygamist. Miles Park Romney died in 1904, so one can see why this would weigh heavy on 86 percent of female voters 108 years later.

Meanwhile, back in the female-friendly party, Obama’s father was a polygamist; his grandfather was a polygamist; and his great-grandfather was a polygamist who had one more wife (five in total) than Romney’s great-grandfather. It seems President Obama is the first male in his line not to be a polygamist. So, given the “gender gap,” maybe those 86 percent of American women are way cooler with polygamy than Gov. Schweitzer thinks. Maybe these liberal chicks really dig it.

Another first for Barack Obama. Too bad about the polygamy narrative though. I imagine that could have had a lot of legs.

Which leads me to the next obvious question. Could federally funded contraception users redefine polygamy to mean multiple partners instead of just multiple wives? Or how about married men who cheat on their wives? That would make Bill Clinton and John Edwards Polygamists–mighty good company if you are the average modern day Democrat.

You are reading “…do Liberal Chicks Dig Polygamy?” by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com.(Home)