Kim Monson Featured Articles

View Details

Whenever an event happens at the border, the rote reaction of the media and political parties is almost a waste of time to repeat. The right talks about border security and the left, along with the media, talk about migrants who just want a better life. But several sinister changes at the border are elevating this discussion to a unique level bordering on dangerous: the control of Mexican cartels and the absolute chaos of large migrant groups rushing the border. Just this week over 1,000 people attempted to rush the border officials in El Paso, causing the federal authorities to close the northbound bridge. Yuma, Arizona residents are noting the extreme increase in cartel activity and have noted that the border is essentially wide open leading to an increase in drug and human trafficking activities never seen before. But beyond that, US citizens are now cautioned not to travel or go on spring break due to the violence of the now cartel-controlled land. Why is our federal government not acting and what is the proper role of the federal government in these cases?The Federalist Papers are the natural place to go to begin to understand how our federal government was constructed to deal with these border issues. When writing to the colonies, the authors noted that unity of the colonies was necessary in order to prevent foreign attacks or intrigue. But the writers were even more philosophical than just the founding or purpose of our federal government, they started with the premise of what is most necessary for any national government. What is noted in Federalist Paper No. 3 is that the primary purpose of any government is to provide security and safety to its citizens. This provision of peace and tranquility is not just to protect from the danger of foreign arms and influence, but also from similar domestic causes. Throughout the subsequent Federalist Papers, the writers note why the federal government is the proper authority for these issues: because the states have differing interests and needs. We see this in real time right now. Maine does not have to worry about the millions of illegal migrants crossing the border, whereas Texas and Arizona do. Why should New York be concerned with what is happening over a thousand miles away? The jealous or uninterested behavior of states towards one another are why the Federalists insisted on a federal government taking on the responsibility of enforcing the sovereignty of the nation, because the federal government can see the bigger picture and should be interested in the actions that provide the most good for the nation, not just for individual states.Which brings us back to the issue of border security. The issue has largely been politicized due to the government failing its main purpose which has led to border states to act out in ways to get the federal government to do its duty. The primary border with Mexico is a conservative state which has politicized the issue further instead of all the states seeing and understanding that this is a national issue. It does not matter what your moral or political beliefs are about the migrants crossing our border, the degradation of peace and tranquility within the US is an issue that the federal government is responsible for. Whether or not you label the cartels as domestic or international terrorists, the fact remains that the federal government is responsible for fixing the issues it has created. A label of terrorist does not magically give or absolve the federal government from securing the safety of its citizens. The undeniable facts are American citizens are being put in danger by the cartels either with direct or indirect violence. The utter depravity of the human trafficking should be horrific enough that all should galvanize behind federal action. And while this issue is seen as a Texas issue to many of the interior or democrat led states, the fact is that the border crisis has far reaching implications to all the states.Texas and Florida are attempting to make their issue a nuisance to other states by sending them the illegal immigrants. This again was predicted by the founders and shows a collapse of the proper role of the federal government. The purpose of the government was to prevent these disputes and jealousies between the states. But immigrants are not the only issue affecting the states. Commerce from Mexico was halted this week due to the mass entry attempted. How many legal business dealings were prevented or delayed due to the bridge to El Paso being closed down for a day? It is nearly impossible to put a number to the disruptions the cartels have caused not only with border businesses but also to the commerce with Mexico itself. Interstate commerce is critical for our entire economy and should draw the interest of all of the states. The influx of drugs has had a profound and deeply disturbing impact on especially metropolitan cities. With more federal inaction, the drug trade along the border will have a massive impact on the livelihood of every citizen in our republic. It is the federal government’s responsibility to stop this before it reaches that level and it is in the best interest of all the states to demand the federal government do its job.When will enough be enough? At what point will our congress address the issues and stop the incessant, factious demagoguery? Can we not admit to our rational selves that the border situation is hurting our country and even other countries? How many innocent humans have to be trafficked before we acknowledge that the government needs to stop its political posturing and start fulfilling its primary obligation? The drug crisis and the violence that the cartels are causing is a direct result of the federal government not fulfilling the primary obligation of any government. We the People deserve and need to demand more from our elected representatives who are more interested in their political careers than the peace and safety of our country.

View Details

It is in Elite Republican Consultant Operative’s best interests to control which candidates make the ballot, hence SB23-101. In addition to SB23-101, there is currently a big push in media by consultant operatives such as Dick Wadhams, Patrick Davis, Mario Nicholais and Eli Bremer advocating to censor and silence the vote and voice of everyday Coloradans by gutting the caucus/assembly process and controlling which candidates make the ballot. Because Elite Republican Consultant Operatives are enriching themselves, influencing politicians, and compromising principles, and radical activists are controlling the Colorado Democrat Party, Colorado is in big trouble.The first steps to reclaiming the Colorado that moderate Democrats, Unaffiliateds, Libertarians, Republicans, and Conservatives love are to preserve the caucus/assembly process and reinstitute the primary election process where Democrats vote in Democrat primaries and Republican vote in Republican primaries. When Republicans meet on March 11th at the organizational meeting of the Colorado Republican State Central Committee, it is imperative that they elect leadership that, instead of representing the interests of Elite Republican Consultant Operatives, they elect Republican leadership who will represent all Coloradans.

View Details

Federalist Paper #2 was written for a budding nation prior to adopting the Constitution to encourage the separate states to bond together into one, united federal government. So, what does an essay “Concerning Dangers From Foreign Force and Influence” have to do with California in 2023? This paper was written in a different time, by different people who knew nothing of diesel or electric cars. The author of the paper, John Jay, likely could have never even imagined a new state over 2,900 miles away. So how can the principles and ideas in this paper apply to California’s exit tax?When Federalist No. 2 was written, the states were highly autonomous. They had their own militias and were very fond of their state constitutions. The people were also highly on guard from any government that had even a whiff of becoming as tyrannical and authoritarian as the British monarchy. They fought a war to free themselves from that force of government and many within the states thought the newly proposed Constitution would lead to that over-reaching government once more. In Federalist No. 2, John Jay makes several points about state unity that still apply today. He pointed out that when push came to shove, the states all banded together. When we declared war, we did it as one country. We did because the states are connected by more than just borders: it is easy to travel between the states to provide aid and also to conduct mutually beneficial transport and trade of commodities. In other words, the states do not act like separate sovereign nations. Jay also notes that the loudest voices against the proposed united federal government were the politicians; the citizens preferred unity, but the politicians had more to gain by keeping the states separate and at odds against themselves.California is starting to project their ideology onto other states by enacting regulations on diesel semi-trucks. The state is virtually declaring an all-out war on diesel big rig operators who are just trying to peacefully deliver products to businesses and consumers in California. Starting earlier this year, any truck that has a pre-2010 motor is not allowed to operate in California. San Francisco ports and railways are phasing out non-EV trucks by 2035. California even has the temerity to tell federal agencies and other “high-priority fleets” to convert to EV by 2042. This is not beneficial transport and trade between states. California is creating a barrier to the ports that many Americans use for their businesses and livelihood. They are blackmailing other states through their transportation and economy. It is a fantasy to pretend this is beneficial to our economic system and the peacefulness of our federal system. It is damaging to businesses and states who look upon California with jealousy and discontent. The federal system depends on the parts making up the whole and the unity of all the states reflects on the national discontent.Federalist No. 2 also makes the point that the country and the people are made for each other and pleads that the states not split into separate, unsocial, jealous sovereignties. How else can jealousy be shown than to monetarily punish those who leave your state? California is trying to escape from the consequences of its own failing ideology by either preventing people from leaving the state or by taxing them for the crime of leaving. This shows both jealousy and unsocial behavior which in turn creates enmity between the states. The governor of California is buying ads in Florida asking citizens to leave Florida and come back, being openly hostile towards the Floridian governor. This is not the behavior and conduct that states in a united federal government should be exhibiting towards one another. The people should be freely able to move between the states and conduct their lives and business freely, choosing which state best serves their interests, fortunes and happiness. California is actively upsetting a peaceful balance that this republic has guaranteed citizens for centuries. It is time for them to remember that they are but one piece of a whole and to act more amicably to their fellow partners.To be fair to California, the Constitution did grant a vast number of powers to the states. But with great power comes great responsibility and the founders noted that just because states can do something does not mean that they should (a note more politicians should heed). They intended for the states to be wise, prudent and good neighbors. However, the politicians are the ones who gain the most from this discord. They can draw upon the flaming emotions and drum up support by turning us against one another. We must come together once again in this country, and this starts state by state. If we as citizens treat each other as California and Florida treat each other, how can we expect any result other than the one we are seeing? We must stop brow beating one another with our ideologies and instead be agreeable in our disagreements. We must be neighbors and embrace the model of the federal government our founders envisioned: a bunch of pieces that make up a wonderful whole.

View Details

“The world makes way for a man with an idea” - Orison Swett MardenIdeas. Where do they come from? A spark of inspiration? Perhaps. Yet I would suggest Ideas come from the source of all wealth, your mind. What then is the definition of an idea? The Oxford Dictionary defines ideas as a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action. I define ideas as observation plus opportunity equals outcome. As an example, the other day I was driving on the interstate in the number one lane. I came upon a car in front of me driving much slower than the posted speed. I checked my rear-view mirror, then my side mirror. This was the observation. The car in front of me was moving slower than the posted speed. I checked my mirrors again looking for the opportunity to change lanes once it was safe to do so. Once changing lanes, I accelerated around the vehicle that once was in front of me and then passed him by. This resulted in the outcome I wanted; driving the posted speed and moving around an obstacle in front of me thereby completing my action.Ideas like balloons float away if you don’t act on them. I recently coordinated an event for the Leadership Program of the Rockies called PLUGin. This networking event provides alumni of the program and current class members with a platform to observe a need or problem and then give a three-minute presentation. This occurs in front of fellow alumni on how they can engage in public policy or an idea to address that problem. Contestants then compete with peers for the most compelling presentation, the outcome of which is a cash prize for the winner.This year’s PLUGin ideas included education, parent’s advocacy, health care, women’s issues, the arts, media, and even comedy. Each presentation had something in common, an idea that came out of observation, plus opportunity, and provided an outcome. The winner was a colleague who was so fearful she almost dropped out of the competition, yet she faced her fear and shared her idea and won the competition. It takes courage to share an idea.Crossing ideas can cross pollenate and create something new. Think about the last time you took a road trip. Most gas station’s bathrooms resemble nuclear waste sites. However, there is Buc-ees, a chain of convenience stores and gas stations with locations in the South. Their slogan is “Potty like a Rock Star” and they mean it. Buc-ees has the cleanest public restrooms in America. In 2012, Cintas ran a nationwide restroom contest and made it official for any roadside warrior. This private company took a commonsense idea, clean bathrooms and a convenience store on steroids, and made it into the preferred pit stop location to do your business. It took observation of customers’ needs to solve a problem.My cousin has a property management company near a university. One of her biggest maintenance expenses was paying for a plumber in the middle of the night when a renter clogged their toilet. Her renters are often students living on their own for the first time and not knowing what to do when the usual substance clogs the commode. My cousin came up with a brilliant idea through observation and took the opportunity to stop making her plumber rich.She purchased dozens of toilet plungers and knocked on the doors of her renters. She explained what other renters had experienced on her properties and gave each renter a plunger and asked them to use it if their commode clogged. She reduced her maintenance expenses significantly and damage to her property was reduced because she met face to face with the people who rented from her and gave them an outcome that was practical. She even topped the plunger with a roll of toilet paper as the cherry on top. Her idea created an opportunity for a better outcome for her renters and herself.I once had a customer who was under time constraints and never available to see me when I worked in her town. I had conducted good business with her in the past, and I knew she liked to frequent the French bakery that shared the parking lot with her business. I found out when the fresh French bread was baked and had created a sticker beforehand that I placed below the bakery’s name with a corny note that read, “I just want a little slice of your time today.” As I walked into the corporate office the aroma of freshly baked bread filled the room. I handed one loaf to receptionist and said this is for you. And then I asked her to deliver the other loaf to the buyer I wanted to see. She did and 30 seconds later the buyer came around the corner laughing at the simple, yet effective, way of getting her attention. She invited me back to her office, made me a cup of coffee, and we conducted a transaction that made us both successful. I observed an opportunity at one of her store locations, shared it with her, and offered a better outcome than what she was currently experiencing.Each of these ideas provides examples of people who observed a need, studied the opportunity, and took action to create a solution to a problem. In doing so they flipped the narrative that there are no new ideas under the sun. However, if you are observant and study what’s around you, cross pollinating ideas can create new outcomes. Don’t pop your idea balloon with negative self-talk or the phrase, “one of these days I’ll take action on that idea.” My suggestion is to take action now. Study it. Read about it. Write your idea out. Concentrate on it. Create connections with it. Work hard on it. Make your idea come true. As the great Orison Swett Marden, the founder of Success Magazine wrote more than a century ago, “The world makes way for a man with an idea.”

View Details

As individual human beings, most of us pursue our own happiness, however that is measured or defined. As members of the human race, we should be thoughtful about what is best for all human beings. In order to talk about these things, we need to define and understand them. Lastly, we need to talk about how we order our society to best facilitate the furtherance of human flourishing.There are people who say they aren’t “into politics” because they aren’t interested, think that they have no power, lead busy lives, or other reasons. The problem is, one may not be into politics, but politics – or more specifically the results of public policy resulting from the political process – has profound effects on how you live your life, your ability to reach your goal of happiness, and what resources you have available to sustain your existence.For this reason, we should all, as a matter of self-interest, take an interest in politics and demand a say in public policy, especially when public policy decisions have adverse consequences for our lives. It is also important to realize that if a particular political party pursues agendas and goals that are counterproductive or threatening to the achievement of your goals or the larger objective of promoting human flourishing, then politicians of that party should not be elected to hold public office.What is Morality?In the classical Greek definition, morality is the differentiation of intentions, decisions and actions between those that are distinguished as proper (right) and those that are improper (wrong).1 What determines the proper/right and the improper/wrong are usually defined by law, religion, philosophy or common belief. For the purposes of this essay (and my personal belief), I am going to define the “proper” or “right” as “that which promotes the individual’s self-interest and/or overall human flourishing”. This means that the “improper” or “wrong” is that which is damaging to an individual’s self-interest or human flourishing.According to Objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand, “Morality, or ethics…is a “code of values to guide man’s choices and actions – the choices and actions that determine the purpose and course of his life. Ethics, as a science, deals with discovering and defining such a code.””2I prefer to use this definition as a working concept of morality because it specifically ties morality to a person’s life. A “moral” person is living a life in pursuit of his or her own self-interest and the overall promotion of human flourishing. To the extent that a “value” can be assigned to this person, it would infer that a “moral” person is also a “good” person.What is Human Flourishing?The term “human flourishing”, as far as I know originally coined by author and philosopher Alex Epstein, is what our goal as a society should be. But what does it mean?In my view, human flourishing means that:* Individual human beings live in a free society, with no undue coercion, * They have access to shelter, food and inexpensive, reliable energy, * They have the means to support their lives independently of others, * They have the ability to pursue whatever intellectual and spiritual interests they have, * They are free to worship how and when they want, * Their lifetimes approach the maximum human lifespan, * They are not subject to arbitrary, authoritarian whimsy.

Some people may have different criteria by which to measure human flourishing. There is a dominant political ideology that claims to value compassion, equity, fairness and justice, and under that framework the definition of human flourishing may be the promotion of those ideals.Compassion, as exercised by an individual human being in pursuit of personal objectives is a fine and commendable thing. But “compassion” in the form of government coercion or force is not. Under the principles discussed in the American Declaration of Independence, all people are “created equal”, but “equity” is not something that can be achieved in society because we are all different; and attempting to establish “equity” or “equality of outcome” through force of government is counter to the idea of human flourishing.Under the idea that all people are created equal, “fairness” means that the intrinsic Rights that all human beings possess are equally respected, that laws are equally applied, and that no one individual or group of individuals gets “special” or “extra” rights based on some characteristic that they possess.Justice, again, follows the concept that the laws are applied and enforced equally among all persons, regardless of their status in society, race, sex, wealth, power, or any other characteristic. The Left likes to append the word “justice” to their various agenda items (i.e. “climate justice”, “housing justice”, and everything under the broad rubric “social justice”) to lend them an air of legitimacy. Don’t be fooled. True justice is the equal application of the law to everyone.The most important aspect of human flourishing is FREEDOM. Freedom is an often used, abused, and misunderstood word. For the context of this essay, I will define “freedom” as: 3The quality or state of being free, including the absence of coercion or constraint; not being a slave or under the restraint of others and able to choose when and how to live. Freedom includes the right and the ability to choose those who would govern society. Personal freedom includes the right to pursue one’s own interests, with the limitation that one may not deprive another person of their intrinsic rights as a human being. One person’s rights end where they impact another person’s rights.The Intersection of Morality and Human FlourishingBecause moral behavior is a prerequisite for human flourishing, morality and human flourishing are inextricably linked. Indeed, one cannot have one without the other. To say something is “moral” means that it supports or promotes human flourishing.Conversely, an idea, concept, ideology or philosophy that unfavorably impacts human flourishing is immoral, wrong, even evil.This is such a simple concept, and it has large, everyday ramifications for each and every one of us and how we live our lives and the choices we can make.Human beings live in groups. These groups on a macro scale are called “civilizations”. We, in America, are part of what is known as “Western Civilization”, which means that we live in ordered groups of individuals and families that are governed under a political philosophy known loosely as “democracy”.I will be quick to point out, however, that we in the United States do not live in a true “democracy”, nor should we aspire to. We live in a “constitutional republic” where we elect “representatives” to act as our agents in the governments of our society. We elect them to “serve” us in the decision making processes that entail the day-to-day management of the government.These representatives should serve the cause of human flourishing because it is the moral thing to do. Unfortunately, and all too often, they do not. When they don’t, adverse consequences result for real people like you and me.The United States of America is the only country in history to have been founded upon the moral concept that all people are created equal and that as human beings we all have the intrinsic rights of life, liberty (or “freedom”) and the right to own property – both the products of our minds and the products of our productive efforts. The Constitution of the United States and the constitutions of the several states are based on the philosophical framework of the Declaration. And while America has never been perfect, I think we have always aspired to live up to the ideas in the Declaration.Promoting Human FlourishingThe business of government should be the promotion of human flourishing, and this should be within the overall context of the proper role of government.What is the proper role of government?That’s simple: to protect life, liberty and property.“Protecting life: this includes law enforcement and the military. Not only that, it includes protecting the right of people to be able to defend themselves and others. Which means: it is not a proper function of government to limit that ability through civilian disarmament, gun control laws, and the like.Protecting liberty: this means enacting no laws that inhibit people making the choices that best fit their lives. As long as people don’t infringe on the rights of others, they should be free to do business with whom they want, offer services and products that others are willing to buy and associate with whom they please.Protecting property: this means nobody can be deprived of their property without due process of law. It means courts to adjudicate and enforce contracts. It means protection of intellectual property via patents and trademarks.”4To this I would add: To ensure that the laws are just, and justly applied equally to all. To maintain a system of jurisprudence so that civil and criminal matters can be adjudicated within a neutral, objective framework.The business of elected officials at any level should be minimal: only those ordinances, laws and regulations which uphold the legal framework of freedom should be considered and passed.While it is easy to talk about what is the proper role of government, it’s even easier to identify those things which are NOT the proper role of government.A casual perusal of the bills currently before the Colorado General Assembly is a great example of things which are not even remotely the proper role of government. (Note, I was going to point out a few examples, but there are just too many to cite. The inmates are truly running the asylum in my native state!)We as a people have strayed far from the limited governments that were envisioned, designed and created by the founders of this country. Even people on the Right, including many elected Republicans, have inflated and incorrect ideas about what government should do.The bottom line is: governments should promote human flourishing. Those that do, are “good”. Those that do not, are “bad”. Let’s all remember this and vote accordingly in the next election.

View Details

Colorado is in trouble. KKTV reported that Colorado is #1 in car thefts. CPR reported that Colorado led the nation in bank robberies in 2021. The price of a dozen eggs in Colorado is among the highest in the nation because of Colorado’s Scrambled Egg Law. In December the St. Louis Federal Reserve reported the average price of eggs in America was $4.25. I just paid $6.99 for a dozen eggs. Because of the metro area’s homelessness industrial complex, Denver, the city that I loved, is so dirty I seldom go downtown anymore. Chalkbeat reported that our kids are falling behind in reading, writing, and math. Instead of teaching the basics so our children have the tools for life success, our kids are being groomed for social activist agendas. Homesnacks reports that Colorado is #6 in the country as most expensive states to live which makes it very difficult for young people to buy a home.Why? Public policy, Public policy that is implemented by the radical, activist Democrats that control the Colorado State House of Representatives, the Colorado State Senate, and the Colorado Governorship. The Democrats that control Colorado are not the Democrats of JFK. JFK loved America and stood for what was best for the American people. These radical activists push forward policies that hurt people. Their agenda is the agenda of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Great Reset whose goal is for everyday folks to live in apartments, work in cubicles, and travel by train, bus, bikes, or feet. It is ironic that the world’s elites fly to Davos, Switzerland for the WEF’s annual meeting on planes and ride in gas powered vehicles to get to and from their meetings. The policies they push are “good for thee, but not for me.” Under the guise of “Green” energy and climate change, this agenda is taking away your choices on how you live your life; where you work, how you travel, and where you live.But these radical, activists Democrats that control Colorado are getting help from the Republican Elite Consultant Class in Colorado. The Colorado Republican Elite Consultants have been milking donors, padding their pockets, and losing elections for years. The Republican Elite Consultant Class is complicit in the demise of Colorado and they are complicit because of the real “Green” agenda, and that is money.A perfect example is housing in Colorado. PBIs (Politicians, Bureaucrats, and Interested Parties), on both sides of the aisle, have been working together, for years, because of power, control, and money. PBIs implement policies and legislation that increase the cost of housing which makes it almost unattainable for young people to buy a home, creates homelessness, and pushes individuals into rental apartments where they cannot build equity and create wealth.American home ownership has created wealth for a mobile middle class. However, rules, regulations, initiatives, and laws are significantly increasing the cost of housing. The National Association of Home Builders recently reported that 23.8% of the cost of building a new home is due to rising regulatory costs. The National Multifamily Housing Council reports that regulations imposed by all levels of government accounts for an average of 40.5% of multifamily development costs. If we really want to get serious about “affordable” housing, we must address the regulatory cost of housing. But, if we reduce the regulatory cost of housing, PBIs lose their power over your housing choices.PBIs’ answer to affordable housing is subsidized housing. Subsidized housing takes money from one group of individuals (taxpayers) to give to others for their “affordable” housing. Subsidized housing also gives control to PBIs over housing options instead of a robust free market where everyday individuals make the choices on where to live and how to live their lives.Look no further regarding the subsidized housing industrial complex than Colorado Initiative Prop 123: Dedicate Revenue for Affordable Housing Programs. Prop 123 passed in the 2022 election by a margin of 52.61% to 47.39%. It dedicates an existing one-tenth of one percent on federal taxable income of every individual, estate, trust, and corporation for affordable housing and exempts the dedicated revenues from the Colorado Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) constitutional limitations. For the first full fiscal year, FY 2023-24, the Colorado Legislative Council Staff estimates $270 million will be transferred from the state general fund to the State Affordable Housing Fund. This is money that could be returned to everyday Coloradans who are experiencing high inflation and increasing housing costs. And of course, the PBIs involved in the State Affordable Housing Fund will not be working for free. They will take their cut as the money trickles down to the stated purpose of Prop 123.Here is my analysis of Prop 123 that was published in my 2022 Voter’s Guide:Prop 123 creates a new administrative bureaucracy. The Administrator may be selected by the Office of Economic Development without a transparent competitive procurement process; however, the selection will be announced in a public meeting with at least 72 hours’ notice. Cronyism! Subsidized housing picks winners (subsidized) and losers (those that do not want to depend on government). This proposition moves dollars from the general fund and dedicates it to an unelected, unaccountable bureaucracy while de-taboring excess revenue.Prop 123 requires local governments that seek additional affordable housing funding to expedite development approvals for affordable housing projects over private projects. And it requires local governments to commit to increasing the number of affordable housing units by 3% annually. Ultimately this will decimate private property rights and home ownership.Prop 123 codifies cronyism through its Land Banking Program, “equity” programs, and empowering bureaucrats to seek and accept gifts, grants or donations from any public or private sources, including governmental entities, that the division and the office are hereby authorized to seek and accept.Ballotpedia notes that Coloradans for Affordable Housing Now led the campaign in support of Prop 123. The committee raised $6.6 million. Gary Ventures Inc. was the lead donor in support of Prop 123. Mike Johnston, former Democrat state senator and current candidate for Denver mayor, is the CEO and President of Gary Community Ventures. Other funders in support of Prop 123 include Bohemian Companies, Caring for Colorado Foundation, Colorado Low Income Housing Campaign, Community First Foundation and the National Association of Realtors. Most of these organizations are very left leaning and in favor of government control of our individual lives.When we hear calls for unity today, Prop 123 is a perfect example of radical activist Democrats and Republican Consultant Elites coming together to undercut private property rights, home ownership, and the freedom for everyday, hardworking Coloradans to live our lives. During the 2022 election former Colorado GOP state chairman and media go-to Republican strategist Dick Wadhams was on the speaking circuit in support of Prop 123. And he was being paid to do so. The Colorado Secretary of State Tracer reports show that Dick Wadhams was paid $27,500.00 to support Prop 123 which undercuts private property rights, home ownership, and individual wealth creation.This is why Colorado is in trouble. Radical, activist Democrats are pushing big government control of every aspect of our individual lives and Republican Consultant Elites are taking money to help. It is time to say “NO” to these PBIs and their self-serving agendas. It is time for moderate Democrats, Libertarians, Unaffiliateds, Republicans, and Conservatives to unite to reclaim the Colorado we love. It is time to shrink government and empower Coloradans to live the lives we choose. It is time for Coloradans to come together and elect individuals who represent “We the People.” Together, we can do this! CSI: Colorado is #1 state in the U.S. for car theft, Pueblo ranks #9 for cities (kktv.com)Colorado led the nation in bank robberies last year — a ranking that some investigators lay at the hands of desperation and addiction | Colorado Public Radio (cpr.org)Average Price: Eggs, Grade A, Large (Cost per Dozen) in U.S. City Average (APU0000708111) | FRED | St. Louis Fed (stlouisfed.org)Colorado’s Scrambled Egg Policy - The Kim Monson ShowThe Homelessness Industrial Complex - The Kim Monson Show2019 Colorado test results: Most students not proficient but reading trends positive - Chalkbeat ColoradoWhen “Art Club” Is Child Abuse - The Kim Monson ShowMost Expensive States In The United States To Live [2023]: Living Wage By State (homesnacks.com)Microsoft Word - Costs of Regulation v5 (nahb.org)NMHC | NMHC-NAHB Cost of Regulations Report (2022)

View Details

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution insures everyday, hard-working individuals the Right to protect ourselves and our families from bad actors. With the creation of the new Office of Gun Violence Prevention, CDPHE will use rule-making to incrementally infringe on the Second Amendment using the back door of bureaucracy, while most watchdogs are focused on legislation. Many people during COVID asked “How did we give power to non-elected public health experts to make mandates and prohibitions?” and “How did we give government unrestrained power to violate the Constitution?” In short, lobbyists have become experts in incremental agendas, and lobbyists often use the Trojan Horses of non-profits or advocacy groups to promote their agendas with grant funding and the façade of public support. The general public has been very passive in policy engagement until a crisis, and subsequently the public discovers that it does not have a seat at the table or a vote in the matter. Agenda activists infiltrate boards, commissions, and advisory committees to state agencies. Private interest groups understand that they can engage as “stakeholders” in these roles to achieve their objectives, and government officials defer to these “community partners” and “experts” over their constituents. The new Office of Gun Violence Prevention at CDPHE has already triggered its first warning shots to infringe on the Second Amendment using all of these tactics.Cdphe Will Take a “Public Health Approach to Gun Violence”During COVID-19, our state government already showed us how it will handle any alleged or future “public health crisis” with their un-elected experts. At the CDPHE SMART hearing in January 2023, Sen. Rhonda Fields (D) declared that gun violence is now considered a “health crisis” in the state of Colorado. CDPHE Director Jill Hunsaker Ryan assured the joint health committee that CDPHE will take a “public health approach” to gun violence. These statements should be red flags for everyone given CDPHE’s “public health approach” to COVID-19 which included non-evidenced based policies such as mask and vaccine mandates, the invention of “social distancing,” and mass testing and isolation of healthy people. CDPHE violated federal law that prohibits any entity, including the Department of Defense, from mandating an EUA drug and EUA test. CDPHE’s public building restrictions and lockdowns violated the Constitution in the right to freedom of movement and right to engage in commerce.As of 2023, CDPHE has NOT been held accountable for promoting pseudoscience, violating federal law, and violating the Constitution. When Rep. Holtorf (R) asked CDPHE about one of the 5,290 healthcare employees who were fired after having COVID-19 vaccine exemption requests denied, Director Ryan responded, “…it was the facilities using our guidance to make those decisions, so I don’t think we collected the information…” on exemption denials, and Director Ryan dismissed the vaccine mandate as “a policy with unintended outcomes.” Director Ryan never acknowledged that her department’s “guidance” (mandate of an EUA drug) violated federal law. Furthermore, unemployment soared from 4.8% in March 2020 to 11.6% in April of 2020, and by 2021 38% of businesses closed in Colorado, due to CDPHE’s “public health approach” to COVID-19. Director Ryan has no remorse with a myopic focus on number of vaccines administered—a vaccine that does not prevent infection or stop transmission. In 77 slides briefed to the Joint Health Committee, zero slides measure the economic or mental health harms that CDPHE inflicted on the public. In response to CDPHE’s public health approach during COVID-19, Director Ryan did not provide evidence that she used proven research-based pandemic strategies, instead she responded that “COVID was such a big experiment.” That big failed COVID-19 experiment included many policies that fully embraced socialist and fascist principles: treat everyone as if they have the same risk factors, close small private businesses with preference to government backed corporations, close local public schools with a preference for online government indoctrination curriculum, and govern by executive order. And “unintended outcomes” are an acceptable part of CDPHE’s “experiment.”The development of tracking and tracing data systems was one of the most insidious projects during COVID-19, which openly reported using cell phone data to track the movements of US citizens to allegedly track a virus that allegedly could be transmitted asymptomatically. Gov. Polis also admitted to using cell phone data of citizens to monitor compliance with lockdown orders. Extrapolate how tracking and tracing data systems will be utilized in a “public health approach” to gun violence. If an individual who has not committed a crime and yet can asymptomatically “carry a virus” and thereby justify tracking and tracing, then one can foresee similar overreach for tracking and tracing of registered gun owners who are asymptomatically (without probable cause) spreading the “health crisis” of gun violence. To be clear, gun violence is a crime and should be handled by law enforcement. To give CDPHE jurisdiction over gun violence prevention after the COVID-19 “experiment” is the greatest threat to the Second Amendment that we have witnessed in our lifetimes.A Gun Owner Registry Could Become the Next State RegistryColorado step-by-step created the path for vaccine mandates starting in 1992, and with little public resistance. “Vaccines are good for public health” was the only mantra needed to drastically expand the vaccines mandated for school, legislate requirements which make exemptions nearly impossible to obtain, implement a medical board review process to punish any doctors who opposed lack of informed consent and privacy violations, and build a state tracking registry (CIIS) to enforce compliance. Similarly, the Office of Gun Violence Prevention has already embraced a similar foot-in-the-door mantra of “We can all agree on safe storage.” No one will oppose safety. The “public health approach” to any crisis is always concerned about safety. You can lose your job or school or guns, but you can always thank CDPHE for keeping you “safe.”In 1992, HB1208 created the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS) to track vaccine uptake on individuals. It started as a state grant program to track infants up to age 24 months in rural and remote areas for vaccine accessibility. No one opposed a program to ensure babies had access to vaccines. In 2001, HB1134 expanded the CIIS database to a federally funded system which tracks all children. In 2007, HB1347 expanded CIIS again with millions in CDC funding to include adults. The main function of CIIS is to monitor vaccine compliance, and send coercive reminder, recall, home visit notices to people who are out of compliance. States which use the home visit program send a CPS worker with a nurse to “targeted individuals” from the database to encourage vaccine program “compliance.” Likewise, in one of the 2023 drafted gun control bills in Colorado, a proposed requirement for gun owners to provide a receipt for their weapons to a state database is the first step of a gun owner registry to target individuals and coerce compliance with future prohibitions.Joint Health Committee Declared Gun Violence as the Highest Priority in HealthDuring the CDPHE SMART Hearing of January 2023, Dr. France, Chief Medical Officer of CDPHE, briefed an overview of the new Office of Gun Violence Prevention created by CO HB 21-1299. The experienced watchdog can connect the dots on how this office will incrementally infringe on the Second Amendment, in the same incremental expansion which the CIIS office coerces vaccine compliance. The goal to reduce gun violence-preventable deaths is analogous to the goal to reduce vaccine-preventable diseases. In gun control, the government bans weapons, and with vaccines the government bans exemptions. Gun owners hold the position of being responsible citizens who do not need CDPHE monitoring them, just as parents have been holding the line on the medical freedom front that they can make the best medical decisions for their children. CDPHE’s “public health approach” oppresses the rights of individuals, and asserts the position that captured government agencies know what is best for every individual.Red Flag 1:No other state health department has an Office of Gun Violence Prevention. This is an indicator that a new incremental agenda is being implemented, staffed, and funded. Given Gov. Polis’ series of legislation against gun ownership, every gun range owner, self-defense advocacy organization, hunting group, law enforcement group, and recreational shooting group should be requesting stakeholder involvement in this office.Red Flag 2:The Office of Gun Violence Prevention will have a permanent infrastructure and goals which reach beyond the stated education or “awareness.” The office has programs for communications, marketing and media, awareness campaigns, a resource bank at CU, a partnership with the School of Public Health, numerous data systems, and financial grants to disperse to community partners. Second Amendment supporters need input on the messaging from this office.Red Flag 3:The office’s surveillance and survey data systems are already controversial: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, and Colorado Healthy Schools Smart Source. This is an indicator that gun ownership will become a public health priority (not a public safety priority) and will be tied to mental health. Any person indicating any level of mental health symptoms in a survey is potentially “at risk” of engaging in gun violence. These surveys are designed to data mine and profile minors, which could result in a lifelong label which later disqualifies a person from gun ownership. For example, I completed the IMatter school mental health assessment in the controversial HB23-1003, and my score of 1 from reporting using CBD oil once in the past year resulted in a “medium risk for substance abuse problems” and a recommendation for six sessions counseling without parental consent. I can only conclude that these non-evidence-based mental health surveys are not intended to “help” students but to “flag” students. Parents need to opt-out their students from these surveys administered by third party data collectors acting without transparency with parents and educate their children on their right to not self-incriminate on drug and alcohol use.Red Flag 4:Sen. Fields demanded a “rapid response” with dispersing $10,000 each for 20 small grantees. Fields suggests that the COVID response modeled the response for this Office of Gun Violence Prevention. Fields makes it clear that the Office of Gun Violence Prevention dispersal of grants is the Democrat priority over ALL health and environment issues at CDPHE for Colorado. The office also has $450,000 to be dispersed in $50,000 large grants and a $4 million initial budget. Dr. France assured lawmakers there will be more “robust” funding in the future.Red Flag 5:At the CDPHE SMART Hearing, Sen. Jaquez-Lewis (D - pharmacist) expressed that she is “extremely disappointed” that “not a single dollar” has been dispersed from the office and there has been “no stakeholdering with community partners.” This is an indicator that the lobbyists already planned to have money to fund community partners to support legislation this session. (Lobbyists fund people in creative ways to show up to testify as experts or storytellers). Sen. Jaquez-Lewis also claims that people are not educated on ERPO (Extreme Risk Protection Orders) legislation. Likewise, the “people are not educated” was the basis for creating a mandatory vaccine education module for parents who exempt from any one vaccine, and the module is required to obtain a vaccine exemption certificate and also adds the family to the CIIS registry.Red Flag 6:Director Ryan suggested that the Office of Gun Violence Prevention should have an Advisory Committee, and proudly reports that the office has already hired a marketing and media firm. This is an indicator that the Advisory Committee, much like the pharma-captured Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) at CDC, will control recommendations for the public. Sen. Jaquez-Lewis expressed that she wants input on the advisory committee, the vendor for education, and the communications manager. She intends to micromanage the personnel and meetings of an office that has a director in place. We need to prod legislators who support the Second Amendment to be equally involved.Red Flag 7:Sen. Jaquez-Lewis stated that the Office of Gun Violence Prevention is her “number one priority.” She scolded Dr. France for not applying for American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) grants for COVID money for the Office of Gun Violence Prevention. Gun are the new virus, and apparently, $4 million is not enough to cover the stated “educational campaign.” According to “What to Do When Your Doctor Asks About Guns,” (DRGO 2015):“Claiming only to be concerned about ‘gun safety’, the latest code term for gun control, the AAP pushed its member doctors to advise families to get rid of their guns. One of the authors of the original AAP anti-gun policy, Dr. Katherine Christoffel, was quoted in an AMA journal as saying ‘Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.’ ”ConclusionTo answer the questions of “How did we give power to non-elected public health experts to make mandates and prohibitions?” and “How did we give government unrestrained power to violate the Constitution?” we need look no further than CDPHE. The history of CDPHE shows us that every person concerned about the Second Amendment must understand how the Office of Gun Control Prevention will incrementally erode Constitutional rights. Agenda activists are already taking their seats at the table as “stakeholders,” directing the media narratives as “community partners,” will make recommendations as “experts” at the advisory committee, and will apply for the funding to influence legislation and state agencies. To wait for prohibition legislation and spend tens of thousands of dollars and years in the judicial system is a reactive approach. To protect the Second Amendment which insures the Right to protect ourselves and our families against bad actors, we must proactively engage with the Office of Gun Violence Prevention.

View Details

Do you get ticked-off by government legislating bag fees at the grocery stores or imposing California standards for Colorado by mandating all chickens be raised in an environment that raises prices and creates shortages? Are you frustrated that everything costs more due to higher energy prices to heat your home or fill your tank with gas? At least weekly, if not daily, you could gripe, complain, or post a nasty gram about these and many more issues on social media. Big whoop. You might feel better, yet what have you accomplished? Not a darn thing. What if you took a different approach? What if you address these same irritants with a positive attitude? What if you embraced the thing which set you off by taking positive action?In the mythology of the ancient Greeks pearls were thought to be created by the tears of Aphrodite, goddess of love, beauty, and passion. It was believed wearing pearls on the wedding day would stop a bride from shedding tears. In the Western tradition pearls have symbolized purity, generosity, integrity, and loyalty. The pearl is thought to attract wealth, luck, and protection to the wearer.The idiom “a pearl of wisdom” originates from the fact a pearl takes years to develop within an oyster and wisdom takes years to develop in a person. One’s ability to think and use knowledge, experience, and insight gives understanding and prudence to an individual. Wisdom is often attributed to the belief in G_D.The myth that a grain of sand is the genesis of a pearl is incorrect. Research shows the genesis is an invading organism or a foreign object other than sand. The invading material lodges in the oyster causing it irritation. Unable to dislodge the matter through secretions, the oyster covers it with layer upon layer of a substance called nacre forming a pearl. The development of the pearl is in essence the oyster’s way of protecting itself. Over time this continued layering of nacre encapsules the foreign object. What begins as an irritation becomes a thing of beauty.Could the beauty of the pearl help teach you to better deal with the irritations of daily life? In other words, can you cover these foreign intrusions with your own nacre, or reason, or understanding, and use it to turn an irritation into something beneficial and even beautiful? We can learn to embrace the world we experience, rather than being negatively impacted by it.As an example, I abhor the welfare state. Yet it exists. I have empathy for those in hard times, are destitute, or incapable of taking care of themselves due to circumstances beyond their control. Many religious, benevolent, and community service organizations have and do take up the challenge of helping those in need. Yet, when government enters the arena, it crowds out those who can better create and resolve problems. Government routinely throws money at a problem, and the problem grows. In my experience, non-governmental organizations and non-profits focus on fixing problems, with limited funds, and the problem often diminishes. How can we encapsulate and crowd out government?One solution is to take responsibility and teach the children in our community about citizenship. One of the foundational blocks of citizenship is being self-reliant. Teaching our children and grandchildren to be dependent on others after the age of majority is corrupting for both the helped and the helper. The dependence creates the position of subservience to one and the position of power to the other, which often leads to more destitution and unhappiness. When a person can work even at the most menial of endeavors, they gain a sense of accomplishment, pride in work, and self-actualization, which leads to happiness.The welfare state is not going away anytime soon so what can a citizen do to make a difference? A commitment I make and have participated in for years is joining a community service club such as the Optimist Club which is known as the “Friend of Youth.” All our efforts are focused on youth programs in our local community. There are many organizations that do outstanding work in your community such as Rotary, Kiwanis, Boys and Girls Clubs, and the thousands of organizations which provide services and help without government intervention. Involving yourself in a volunteer organization and giving time and treasure builds stronger bonds and crowds out the need for more government assistance.Not to mention the beauty of creating and helping from an act of benevolence and virtue as opposed to the force of government altruism; the “other-ism” of government that one should live your life for others rather than for one’s self is an abomination. Government produces one thing, misery. It’s the productive and the wise that produce wealth as is stated in the classic writings of Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged by her character Francisco d'Anconia’s speech on money."So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Anconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?”If we are to rid ourselves of the over-reaching behemoth of government, we must resolve to get involved in taking back our local communities, state, and country. You don’t have to do a lot; you just must do something. Like pearls strung on a necklace, together citizens can make a thing of beauty by using our source of all wealth, our minds to solve our problems.

View Details

Most of us in the West take our modern life for granted. We enjoy the ability to live in structurally sound, aesthetically pleasing, comfortable dwellings – single family houses, condos, townhouses and apartments. In these dwellings, we enjoy on-demand heat and cooling, hot and cold running water, the ability to flush our bio-waste away and the ability to sleep securely in our comfortable beds. We enjoy (mostly) safe and effort-free transportation, whether that is driving a car to the grocery store or flying in a jet to the far side of the world.When it comes to food, we don’t have to spend our days foraging and hunting for our next meal. Unless you are one of the 1.3% of the population who works directly on a farm, you don’t have to rely on your own direct efforts to feed yourself. The quality and variety of foods we eat today are unrivalled in human history. It is worth noting that our modern food system supports a population of 8 billion human beings and while food insecurity is still too high at 9%, more people that at any time in history are able to get enough to eat, and with more variety.When it comes to energy, we don’t have to spend our days foraging and collecting bits of wood and piles of dung – as all too many people still have to do – to heat our homes and prepare food. When it comes to climate, we enjoy what writer and philosopher Alex Epstein has dubbed “climate mastery” - the ability to use fossil fuels to mitigate and manage the risks posed by the weather.When it comes to how we support our lives, instead of being serfs tied to some lord’s land, we have a rich variety of choices in vocation and income potential to suit our natural talents, interests and abilities.When it comes to how we worship the Almighty, we don’t need to fear being burned at the stake because we believe one interpretation of a particular religion. And while religious animosities exist in the modern world, they are largely non-violent and comparatively tame. We are free to worship how we want, when we want, or even not at all. We don’t have modern nations (in the West, anyway) fighting wars over religious beliefs.Women in Western society are freer than they ever have been. Not so long ago, women were considered chattel property – second class citizens who were subservient to men. By law and by culture, women were less free than men. Now, Western women have full civil and property rights, and by some measures are thriving more than their male counterparts. Women enjoy longer life expectancy as well.The ways in which we can occupy our comparatively vast leisure time are almost infinite. We can sit quietly reading a book. We can listen to almost any music we want on demand. We can watch entertainment on screens as small as 5 inches to 80 or more anywhere including in the comfort and privacy of our homes. The variety of sports to participate in or watch is amazing -from football to hockey to badminton to curling – if we can imagine it someone is probably playing it.For most of us in the West, our personal freedom – while still not as comprehensive as it should be – is greater than at any time in history. We don’t live at the pleasure of another person; we don’t live in a society that tells us what we will do to support the State. We have choices, and the lives we build are the result of those choices. All other things being equal, better choices result in better lives, but that’s up to us, not to the State or anyone else.While each individual’s circumstances may vary at a point in time or over time, taken as a whole, we in the modern day Western world live better than any cohort of human beings has ever lived on this planet. We live longer and healthier lives than others in our current world who are less fortunate, and than our ancestors did.Even people who are lower on the economic spectrum live better longer and better lives than “the rich” of previous centuries. The poor in Western civilization live better than many in Africa and the Middle East today.The circumstances that allowed for the population growth shown in the graph below is due to the confluence of three things, which I call the Pillars of Modern Life. The life we have, compared to how life was before modern times is an inestimable benefit.Unfortunately, for reasons which are quite difficult for rational people to understand, it is all at tremendous risk of being destroyed.Life ExpectancyA lot of factors play into life expectancy, including genetics, diet and geography. And while any one individual could live to well over 100 years, as of this writing, according to one source, worldwide life expectancy for both sexes combined is 73.2 years. That’s considerably higher than even 73 years ago in 1950 when it was only 47 years for both sexes combined.Back in medieval England, the average life expectancy during the Middle Ages was in the low to mid-40s. Infant mortality was much higher, and a woman had a much higher chance of dying in childbirth. Families had large numbers of children, because it was a given that some would not make it to adulthood. People married young, had children young, and died young. Life, as philosopher Thomas Hobbes put it, was “poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”Indeed, as the popular TV miniseries Game of Thrones depicted, life in pre-modern times was extremely difficult. Leaving aside the obvious fantasy elements, the series shows how people lived in hovels they built with their own bare hands or cold and dark castles that were built by others. Uncertain food supplies, dangerous and scarce energy sources, lawlessness and disease were the norm in those days.Energy PovertyIn pre-modern times, and even in some parts of today’s world, people have to forage and search for biomass fuels to burn in their homes to provide heat, light and for cooking. When we talk “biomass”, we mean wood and other plant matter (which means deforestation, long replacement times, and short-term scarcity), and animal waste, or “dung”, the euphemistic term for excrement.Imagine having to leave your hovel to scrounge for bits of wood and animal dung to carry back to your home to burn in an open fireplace for cooking, heat and light. This is how – today – over 3 billion people in our world live. In fact, as Alex Epstein points out in his excellent book Fossil Future only about 1.5 billion people live in “the empowered world”, meaning that they use at least one-third of the electricity of the average American. The majority of our world, even today, lives in some state of energy scarcity or poverty.Water and FoodWe enjoy our on-demand hot and cold running water without giving it a second thought. But it is not that way for everyone today nor was it in the past. In the past, people had to get their water from streams, rivers, lakes and wells. They had to get it themselves, it was not delivered to their homes and aside from heating it over open fires, there was no way to get warm water. Because of contamination, it was unwise and unsafe to drink water without boiling it first, which is why people in pre-modern times were susceptible to water-borne diseases.The same thing goes for food. People had to forage, grow and hunt their food themselves. Imagine how much of their time pre-modern people had to spend in acquiring food! Now, thanks to modern farming and our modern food supply chain, we can spend a miniscule amount of our time in obtaining food, leaving us free to pursue other interests. Things like the recent egg scarcity give us the barest hint of what life was like all the time for pre-modern people and for many people in today’s world.Money and EconomicsInstead of physical coins or banknotes that can easily be lost or stolen, our modern economy rests on electronic funds transfers and a sophisticated banking system. While there are still risks, and we can still lose our money (think about how the stock market has dropped since Joe Biden became president), it is safer than it was in pre-modern times.Today, we have a semi-free economy – that historically did much better when it was objectively freer – that is loosely based on free-market capitalism instead of a command and control economy where everything is run for the benefit of the king and the elites.As capitalism has expanded throughout the world, so too has gross domestic product, which is the measure of what an economy produces. The graph below shows how the global economy has grown since AD 1 through 2017. Notice a similarity to the world population graph?As our economic system improves and becomes more friction-free, we have more free time to pursue other interests. For example, now, on the rare occasion I have to deposit a check, I don’t have to physically go to a bank and hand over a couple pieces of paper. I can just take a picture of it with my iPhone and tap a button and the money is deposited to my account, giving me more time, which is the most precious gift of all.Easy, friction-free transactions is why Amazon founder Jeff Bezos was the wealthiest man in the world for a time.Why Talk About This?I wanted to talk about where we came from, i.e. what most peoples’ lives were like before our modern era, to highlight how GOOD we have it now.We live in an era when even the poor in a Western country like the United States are better off than the wealthy were as recently as 100 years ago. In fact, we have it so good that some of us feel guilty for how good we have it and are doing everything they can to tear it all down.This is best typified by how every year, global elites fly their private jets to a little town in Europe to pat themselves on the back for how “enlightened” they are, indeed, “touched” to save humanity. The problem is that their way of saving humanity and the planet have nothing to do with actual human flourishing and everything to do with eliminating all three of the pillars of modern life: fossil fuels, limited government and free-market capitalism.Fossil fuels, because they are the high clergy of the man-made climate change religion, and by their canon, fossil fuels are evil and must be eliminated. They ignore the fact that their suggested replacement technologies have proven in real life to be impractical and unsustainable. Their anti-impact agenda hinders not only more fossil fuel development, but even the development of more so-called “renewable energy” – wind and solar. Large scale hydro? Forget it. Carbon-free nuclear power, which is the safest form of commercial energy production? No way. The manic anti-impact Left will chain themselves to trees and glue themselves to floors (after trying to damage paintings they don’t understand) to prevent us from using technology to improve our lives.The global elites and their ranks of “progressive“ followers really and truly believe, deep down in their hearts, that they know what’s best for all of us. They will use any means fair or foul to gain and maintain political power over us, and they will use that power to cram their dystopian vision right down our throats, whether we want it or not. This, of course, has nothing to do with constitutionally limited government, and we can see by the plethora of laws now before state and federal legislatures that the state and federal constitutions they all swear a vow to protect are nothing more than obstacles to be gotten around.Further, in the words of climate envoy John Kerry, it will take “money, money, money, money and more money” to solve the “climate crisis”. He’s not talking about HIS unearned money either. No, he’s talking about taking YOUR money via government force in a massive wealth transfer from the developed (Western) world to the developing world. The end result of their plan, if you think about it, is that all humanity starves together, but they don’t care. In any event, taking money by force has nothing to do with free markets and capitalism.The reason I write about this is also my call to action: to stand up against the modern elites, their ”progressive” shock troops, and the Democrat Party in your state and our nation. They are, by any measure, Anti-Life. With their support of abortion on demand to their promotion of the sterilization and mutilation of children via “gender-affirming” care to their soft on crime stances, they clearly don’t stand for human flourishing and, in fact, promote the exact opposite.As I’ve written before, “you don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone.” Don’t take your modern life for granted. Don’t let the Davos elites take it away

View Details

In listening to the main stream media, it would appear that fascism is the next greatest threat to America. Fascists are popping up everywhere and seem to be approximately half the country based on their voting record (but not based on the actual definition of fascists). But according to the other side, Marxism is the greatest threat to America coming under the guise of Progressivism. And again, half the country is succumbing to this rising threat. But what if America was founded to protect us from such a threat? What if the current factious political rhetoric was predicted by the Founding Fathers? Our Founders created a system of government that was supposed to protect us from the authoritarian use of power by our government over the lives of We the People. Our Founders did not want us to fear the Tyranny of the powerful elite; instead they wanted to shackle the government to protect us from such power hungry demagogues. We now fear fascists, communists and all the tyrannies in between because we have forgotten our history and did not preserve the republic handed down to us for safe keeping.America was founded under the auspices of a monarchy and was subject to absolute tyrannical behavior. The Declaration of Independence outlines many of these extreme acts (usurpations) and we also know many of the backbreaking actions such as the Intolerable Acts. The fascinating aspect of the Declaration’s listing of tyrannical behavior is that it does not begin with the most easily identifiable and personal acts: the quartering of troops, excessive taxation, stealing private property, and a lack of trial by jury. Instead, the first tyrannical acts they mentioned are an inability to properly govern: a refusal to pass laws that were necessary, dissolving representative houses, and the complete destruction of the rule of law. The concerns regarding these authoritarian acts became the pillars upon which our country was built. The Founding Fathers saw the injustices of a Monarchy and tried to craft a system of government to counteract those injustices. In fact, their first attempt failed spectacularly. The Articles of Confederation limited the power of government to such a degree they realized that nothing would ever get done or accomplished by the new American government. In their wisdom, they realized that the pendulum had swung too far and they needed to go back to the drawing board to find a middle ground.What emerged from the Continental Congress was a system of government so brilliant that it catapulted the nation into prosperity and world prominence never seen before. But this government was not based on a utopian idea of human nature; it was instead rooted in the very realness of what people are capable of:“Have we not already seen enough of the fallacy and extravagance of those idle theories which have amused us with promises of an exemption from the imperfections, the weaknesses, and the evils incident to society in every shape? Is it not time to awake from the deceitful dream of a golden age and to adopt as a practical maxim for the direction of our political conduct that we, as well as the other inhabitants of the globe, are yet remote from the happy empire of perfect wisdom and perfect virtue?” (Hamilton, Federalist No. 6)Modern and ancient political theories and governments rely too greatly on a humanity that is perfect in virtue or wisdom. Communism would have a much greater chance of success if everyone were perfectly virtuous and if its leaders were perfectly omniscient about the present and future needs of its citizens. Fascism would have a higher chance of success if the government did not pick winners and losers. But our government faces the cold reality that human nature is fickle and that there are those among us who seek power for power’s sake. There are those among us who, despite having good intentions, will impose policies that will have dire impacts for future generations despite the short-term gain. There are politicians who seek the applause and approval of their constituents or who will try to stir up dissension and discord solely to keep their political monopoly. Our Founding Fathers built a government that was purposefully slow and difficult; dividing up the powers and specifically protected our individual rights.So why do we now fear Fascists and communists? Why is Donald Trump the greatest threat to our government only for Joe Biden to take up that mantle? It is because we have not kept our Republic and have forgotten how and why it was founded. We have handed the government too much power; all for comfort and ease. While the answer is simple, how we got here is a much more convoluted and twisting journey. As Ronald Reagan once quipped, “The nine most fearful words in the English language are, I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.” We now fear the government because we can no longer trust the institutions to have consistency. The EPA’s rules now sway and change based on the different administrations. The laws and rules are enforced differently based on the ideology of the judges, leaving citizens and businesses in a constant state of worry. We fear because we have forgotten the turmoil and hardships that our forbearers had to endure to get us here. We fight among each other because we have succumbed to utopian ideals and academic thought which no longer acknowledge the reality of human nature. We panic because we have abandoned Truth and the pursuit of it.Despite constitutional erosion, the bedrock still remains and can be saved. The politicians and media play upon our fear and anxieties but we can reclaim the surety we once had in our government. If you fear fascists taking control of the government, there is a very simple solution to your fear: remove the power of government. Take away the government’s ability to have such a profound impact on your life! This requires extreme fortitude because it will require virtuous politicians to vote themselves out of power. At the height of the power, it requires people stepping aside from their political aspirations to fix or to wield that power for “good” and instead to hand that power back to their constituents. We have a rich history in America of individuals doing just that. George Washington, at the height of his popularity, voluntarily stepped away from the presidency to show his fellow Americans and all their posterity this very lesson. Let us learn from Washington, let us again teach and remember our history, and let it lead us to action. For without that action, we will once again be forced to dissolve the political bands which connect us with one another.

View Details

We love them fried, boiled, and scrambled. We start our days with them sunny-side up or over-easy. They’re deviled for summer picnics and in a salad for lunch. Eggs have been a staple on Coloradan’s breakfast tables since before we became a state. They are delicious, nutritious, and up until the Colorado legislature passed and “Mr. Libertarian” Governor Polis signed HB20-1343 “Concerning Confinement Standards for Egg-Laying Hens Whose Eggs Are Sold,” they were affordable.Egg prices have increased significantly. A dozen eggs from my local dairy cost $2.99 on January 4th, 2022. The price is now $6.99 per dozen which is a 133% increase in about a year. The price for a dozen eggs is up 40% from just mid-November. These price increases are affecting food choices and food security for everyday, hardworking Coloradans.Government “Green” policies have increased the cost of fuel to power our cars, heat our homes and produce our food. As I continue extensive research on “Green” policies, I realize the real “Green” is the “Green” moving into the pockets of PBIs (Politicians, Bureaucrats, and Interested Parties) as their agenda raises the cost of living for Coloradans and all Americans.Government rules and regulations have increased production costs for our food producers, which is seen in rising costs at the grocery store. These policies, rules, and regulations are threatening the food security of Americans whose goal is to move up the economic ladder, be self-sufficient, and not be dependent on their neighbors thru government programs.Colorado HB20-1343 has individuals scratching their heads. The “Confinement of Egg-Laying Hens” legislation dictates that egg-laying hens are free to roam unrestricted in an indoor environment, except restricted by exterior walls or some interior fencing. Why is chicken’s indoor environment a legislative focus when we have real challenges in Colorado? KDVR-TV recently reported that Scholoroo ranks Denver as the worst place to raise a family.While we witness the tragedy of the homelessness industrial complex (a lot of people are making a lot of “Green” on the pain and suffering of others), the Colorado legislature passed and this governor signed HB20-1343 “Confinement of Egg-Laying Hens” which dictates that egg-laying hens are provided enrichments that allow them to exhibit natural behaviors, including, at a minimum, scratch areas, perches, nest boxes and dust bathing areas. What is a dust bathing area and why is it in Colorado law?Colorado HB-1343 “Confinement of Egg-Laying Hens” empowers PBIs (Politicians, Bureaucrats, and Interested Parties) to pick winners and losers. A facility that is defined to include live animal markets or official plants (big guys) … or business owners that collectively sell fewer than one hundred cases of thirty dozen shell eggs per week (small guys), are not subject to this legislation. BUT, if you are a mid-level producer and you violate HB20-1343 “Confinement of Egg-Laying Hens,” you may be hit with a civil penalty of up to $1,000.00 per violation and taken to court. Big business and big government like each other because they can collude to pass rules, regulations, and legislation to put their smaller competitors out of business. See Colorado HB-1343 “Confinement of Egg Laying Hens.” Not fair!Colorado HB-1343 “Confinement of Egg-Laying Hens” reeks of cronyism. The “Egg” commissioner may use a government or private inspection or process verification provider to ensure compliance with the “Confinement of Egg-Laying Hens” legislation.And while we have a U.S. Supreme Court Justice and college professor who cannot define what a woman is, HB20-1343 “Confinement Standards for Egg-Laying Hens” defines an “Egg-Laying Hen” as a FEMALE domesticated chicken, turkey, duck, goose, or guinea fowl kept for the purpose of commercial egg production. No trans egg laying here.To fund the bureaucracy that is increasing the cost of your eggs, the “Egg” commission (in addition to all other powers and duties conferred upon the “Egg” commission by this article) can “fix, assess, and collect fees sufficient to recover the department’s direct and indirect costs incurred in carrying out and enforcing the provisions of ….” So mid-level egg producers must fund their regulators which increases the cost of your sunny side up at your breakfast table.Bottom line is your nest is being de-feathered, feather by feather by rules, regulations, legislation, and initiatives. If you choose to purchase more expensive cage-free chicken eggs, you should have the freedom to do so. However if you are a single mom who is just trying to put food on the table for your kids or a senior citizen who is working to make ends meet when facing higher taxes, increasing costs to warm your home, and surprise pricing at the grocery store, we realize the compassionate answer is to repeal Colorado HB20-1343 so that individuals have the choice of affordable eggs.HB20-1343 was passed by the Colorado legislature in 2020 and signed by the governor on July 1, 2020, however it did not take effect until January 1, 2023 which is conveniently after the 2020 election and 2022 election. If legislators pass and the governor signs legislation that so adversely affects people, then these politicians must at least have the character to answer to the voters in their next election instead of kicking the can down the road three years later.There are solutions. First, either by legislation or the initiative process, Coloradans can repeal HB20-1343. Secondly, in the next election cycle, vote for individuals who value you and your family more than the square footage of egg-laying chickens from mid-level producers.Denver ranked worst city to raise a family | FOX31 Denver (kdvr.com)Nonprofit buys Denver hotel for $24M, plans reuse as shelter - Denver Business Journal (bizjournals.com)

View Details

Recently, a “progressive” blog ran this tweet: “Once again: Oil and gas companies are making record profits and have no interest in reducing the price of gasoline. This is not a government regulation issue, no matter how many times Republicans tell you otherwise.” Their blog then goes on to talk about how Shell plc, a major integrated oil company domiciled in the UK, had “obscene” profits and will buy back shares and increase its dividend by 15%.The obvious leftist line is that oil companies control the prices they can charge for their products, and that they are intentionally gouging the end consumers of their products and laughing all the way to the bank.If only life were so simple, and if only the minds behind “Colorado Pols” understood the economics of a very complex global industry.Oil and Gas 101The oil and gas industry is composed of hundreds if not thousands of companies, publicly and privately (and even government) owned throughout the world engaged in the business of extracting fossil fuels from the Earth, transporting and converting them into usable products, and selling those products to the end users directly – as at the gas pump; or indirectly – via a natural gas furnace or an electrical outlet.This oil and gas (O&G) industry is generally considered to consist of three segments, with most companies operating in one or two of these segments, and the “major”, or “integrated” companies operating in all three.The economics of all three are different and the cost pressures vary, but one thing that is common across the industry is the laws of economics. Another constant is fierce, unrelenting hostility from climate activists and their captive Democratic Party.UpstreamSo-called “upstream” or “exploration and production (E&P)” companies are engaged in the business of identifying oil and gas reserves on land or under the ocean, drilling exploratory and production wells, and extracting the fuels we need to power our modern life from the Earth – petroleum or “crude oil”, natural gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs).In the early days of the industry, this was an enormously risky business because the location and extent of oil and gas reserves was not always evident. Now, thanks to advanced geology and modern technology, it is easier for companies to locate and identify possible oil and gas reserves. When title to the land is obtained through leases or outright purchases, the company will drill an exploratory well to see if the field contains oil and gas reserves. Once it is determined that it does, that field (usually within a larger “play”) is considered to be a “proved reserve”.Drilling an oil or natural gas well is a highly capital-intensive construction project. Drilling rigs are expensive, and it can cost over $20,000 per day to rent one. With the number of days it takes to drill a well, the costs of the materials, casing, labor costs, sand and water add up very quickly.Over the life of a well, the company incurs lease operating costs to keep the well operating, and at the end of its life, there are costs to plug and abandon the well. Contrary to the leftist narrative, oil and gas companies reserve funds to cover these expenses and carry the liability on their balance sheets. (Look for “asset retirement obligations”).In order for these companies to be profitable, they need to sell the products for more than it costs to extract them from the ground. Obviously, the higher price they receive the better it is for them. But they don’t control the prices they can charge – that is controlled by the forces of global supply and demand. When prices are low – as they sometimes are – these companies may not be able to sell their products for enough to recover their costs. When the probable cash flows from proved reserves are lower than the asset values, companies are required by generally accepted accounting principles to record impairment losses. To my knowledge, no lefty is ever upset about oil and gas companies losing money, which they often do.The various markets for the different grades of crude oil are denoted by the indexes for light sweet crude – Brent, NYMEX WTI, Argus WTI Houston, etc. These indexes give us knowledge of what an oil company can sell a barrel of oil for. If Brent is selling for $80 per barrel, an E&P company can’t sell it for $90, and they’d be crazy to sell it for $70.But let’s be clear: without E&P companies, there would be no oil and gas extraction and no modern life as we know it. These companies require a lot of capital to operate, and they face hostile operating environments – from hostile governments to hostile climate-change zealots to who are doing everything they can to hamper, hinder and harass the industry.MidstreamThe midstream segment of the industry is where the storage, trading, and transportation of fossil fuel products takes place. Companies in this segment purchase crude oil and natural gas from E&P companies and get it to the ultimate consumers.The primary means of transporting crude oil is via tanker, truck, railroad or pipeline. Pipelines are the least expensive and safest for the environment (with fewer carbon emissions). Once the products are extracted and separated, they are transported to refineries where they are further processed for end use.Again, prices midstream companies can charge are determined by the laws of supply and demand. Companies that don’t generate enough revenue to cover their costs don’t stay in business very long.Sometimes people complain about exporting fossil fuel products. Sometimes they complain about the fact we import fossil fuels. Due to the nature of the industry, the United States does both. Imports and exports are governed by the differences between domestic and foreign supply and demand. In addition, the U.S. imports oil to the East and West coasts to provide for the consumers on those coasts. Because of the leftist opposition to fossil fuel development there is insufficient pipeline capacity to carry oil and natural gas from domestic plays like the Permian Basin and others to coastal refineries. Thus, midstream and downstream companies import oil to meet the demand from those consumers.DownstreamThe downstream segment is where the refining and transportation to end users takes place. The gasoline you put in your car came from a refinery via diesel tractor-trailer truck. The electricity you use to power your modern life is from the coal, natural gas or nuclear power generated at various facilities. The wind and solar power so beloved of the climate crowd are part of the mix too, but only a very small part – about 11% in the US and even less in the rest of the world.While there used to be dedicated “gas stations” operated by the various oil companies (where an attendant would come out and pump your gas, clean your windshield and check your tires), today most gas sales are via convenience and grocery stores. Often they are on adjacent corners, with big signs advertising their prices for various grades and types of fuel.Now, say the operator of “Jim’s Quik Stop” is a greedy guy who wants to charge as much as he can for gasoline. If he prices his gas higher than what the 7-11 across the street is charging, he won’t sell much gas and won’t make any money. In other words, the prices he can charge are governed by the market forces of supply, demand and pricing competitiveness.Pricing MechanismsAs with any other market, the laws of supply and demand will establish the prices for various products to sellers and buyers at every stage of the value chain. The price you pay at the pump for a gallon of gas is based on what it cost the retailer to bring it to you (among other things, more on that later). In turn, his cost is based on what it cost the refiner and transportation company to bring it to him. And so on. The molecules of stored energy that you put in your gas tank today were originally produced by an E&P company weeks or months ago and they’ve long been paid whatever the market rate was at that time.What you pay at the pump isn’t simply the result of the interaction of supply and demand, either. Thanks to government interference in energy markets, leftist hostility (now official US government policy since climate zealots are in control) and taxes imposed by government, your price per gallon costs you far more than it should.According to www.eia.gov, the base product in a gallon of gas – crude oil – accounts for only 54% of the price. Refining and transportation costs account for another 33% with the remainder going to taxes.In Colorado, you pay a state excise tax of $0.22 per gallon (California, who Colorado Democrats want to emulate, charges $0.6698 per gallon!) in addition to a $0.184 per gallon federal excise tax for a total of $0.404 per gallon. Those taxes are included in the price per gallon, so when your gallon of gas is, say, $3.227, 13% of the cost is going to governments in the form of taxes. When Democrats talk about raising the gas tax (and they frequently do), remember that it will directly cost you more to fill your tank. This is not a tax on “the rich”. This is a tax on everybody. And not one dime of it goes to those evil oil and gas companies.ProfitsIt should not have to be said, but the purpose of a business – any business – is to earn money (called “profits”) for its owners. If the business is efficient and effective and if the market allows for the company to charge a price for the product or service that is in excess of what it costs to provide, the business will make a profit that is available to owners in the form of distributions or dividends. If a company has to sell for less than cost, it loses money.Now take an E&P company. It costs a lot of money to extract fossil fuels from the ground. The company should be able to charge a price that will cover costs and earn a profit. But the companies in the industry can’t set those prices – markets do. So companies will enter into what are called “derivative” transactions so that they earn a target base amount of money if prices fall below a certain amount.Say it costs a company $50 to produce a barrel of oil, and oil prices are $80 a barrel today. That means the company will earn a gross profit before expenses of $30. If oil prices dip below $50, the company loses money not only on production, but likely through impairment losses as well.It needs to be said – again – that the companies in the industry have no control over what prices are. They can use derivatives to protect the downside, but they have no more control over what they can charge than you do.Capital ReturnsNow we get to the issue of dividends and capital returns. I wish the lefty bloggers I mentioned at the top had the most rudimentary understanding of business, because then they would know that paying dividends is something that most businesses normally do. It’s one reason why people buy shares of stock in them.Companies will also buy their own shares in the open market to reduce the number of shares outstanding which then increases the earnings per share and theoretically the market price of their shares. Companies in every industry do this, and oil and gas companies are no exception.When times are good, companies will increase dividends. When times are bad, companies may cut or eliminate dividends. When the market for oil is in the high $80s to low $100s E&P companies stand to earn a lot of profit. It’s normal and natural to return some portion of that money (we call it “Free Cash Flow”) to shareholders.Now let’s take a look at why oil prices are so high. One reason is the war in eastern Europe, which has disrupted oil markets considerably. But the biggest reason, I think, is the unrelenting hostility of the dominant Left to the oil and gas industry, which, since they control the federal and many state governments, makes it more difficult and expensive to extract the oil and natural gas that everybody demands. By closing off oil and gas development on federal lands, they put artificial constraints on resource availability. By imposing excessive regulations, taxes and fees, they make it more expensive to do business. And finally, with their regulatory hostility, they make it difficult to do long-range planning which – for organizations that raise and spend billions of dollars in capital investments – is crucial.Another reason for capital returns in investor pressure. As investors see the hostile environment in which the oil and gas companies operate, they prioritize return of capital over production increases. That was a difficult lesson for the industry to learn over the past several years, but it is well-ingrained now.ConclusionFossil fuels make our modern life possible – indeed they are one of the Pillars of Modern Life. The companies that make their use possible are providing an incalculable boon to humankind and deserve our thanks instead of the hatred and hostility that they receive from the climate-obsessed Left.I’m standing to defend the industry because I stand in defense of our modern life and modern business practices. Whoever wrote the tweet I referenced above should be embarrassed by their obvious ignorance of how businesses operate and how everyone, themselves included, benefit from fossil fuels.Don’t like high gas prices? Blame warmongering tyrants enabled by weak Democratic presidents. Blame the hostility of the Left to the oil and gas industry. Blame the weather. Blame OPEC. But don’t blame oil and gas companies, because they have no control over what you pay at the pump.It’s just that simple.

View Details

The dictionary defines gaslighting as manipulating someone by psychological means into questioning their own sanity. For instance, in a relationship an abusive partner might manipulate the situation and claim the other partner is irrational often enough that the other person starts to believe that their rational behavior is actually irrational. I propose that this example is most evident in the mainstream media and their blatant manipulation of the public to protect progressive ideology. Conservatives have brought up issue after issue for years only for the media to tell them that they were/are crazy conspiracy theories. When the Republicans said that Biden would do everything he could to ban oil and gas production, the media shielded Biden and said that the presidential candidate Biden would in fact do the opposite. Then day one of his presidency he did exactly what conservatives said he would. The IRS targeted conservatives, the FBI targeted Republicans, and now we have even learned that the DNC conspired with social media empires. All of these were concealed by the media and any conservative that questioned them was labeled irrational and their arguments were accused of being void of facts. These events rot away the core institutions America is based on, but perhaps even worse are the events that are corrupting the very fabric of our society: our morality. The media is yet again covering up events and telling conservatives that they are yet again irrational for paying attention to evil, let alone questioning it. The Balenciaga scandal, the Epstein and Maxwell trials, and the anti-Semitic misdirection all highlight how truly morally bankrupt our society is becoming due to the embrace of moral relativism.The recent movement towards parent’s rights in a classroom gained a lot of traction the past few years and a large part of that is due to sexual grooming of children. Parents started noticing the horrible books found in school libraries that had explicit sex acts including pedophilia. Parents noticed that many educators were pushing the sexualization of children who were not even in middle school yet. When we pushed harder at these groomers, the media stepped in and claimed it was not happening. And then the curtain was pulled back and we saw that high fashion had their own perversions with this as well. The Balenciaga photos only highlighted what we already knew: that there is a cultural rot in the moral fabric of America and when the ideology of progressivism and moral relativism is fully followed, there is no ability to call what Balenciaga did as wrong. The New York Times and Vogue are starting to push that the “Balenciaga controversy has gone too far” and that the right-wing outrage culture is making this a bigger issue than it truly is, going as far to say that it is really a conspiracy rather than fact. They are making this out to be a photo shoot that just barely crossed the line, and maybe it was a bit tasteless but art pushes lines. The New York Times is going as far as shaming their own readership in not being educated in the arts and not acknowledging that art is to push cultural bounds. They are condoning the use of sexualizing children for dollars in pockets. I will never back down from protecting the innocence of children and neither should America. It should never be deemed irrational to protect children. We are at another juncture in the cultural warfare and the media is encouraging Americans to pick the side of gaslighting, manipulation, and moral corruptness. Ask ourselves, how are we in the wrong to stand on the side of protecting children from sexual exploits?The trials for Epstein and Maxwell were highly publicized and show how abhorrently perverse our society is becoming. Recently the Maxwell trial came to a close, and the spin the media put on the case was an obvious obfuscation of all of Epstein’s words and actions. To recap: Epstein sexually trafficked minors and Maxwell helped him. Epstein had very powerful connections and those people visited Epstein often. Epstein claimed to have “dirt” on all of these very powerful people and many of the victims claimed that they were victims of not only Epstein but also his very powerful connections. Epstein got an extraordinarily suspect non-prosecution agreement that according to the Miami Herald “essentially shut down an ongoing FBI probe into whether there were more victims and other powerful people who took part in Epstein’s sex crimes.” This is where the moral gaslighting involving Maxwell comes into play. For many years people have wanted to know who Epstein was trafficking these girls to; who were his clients and powerful people that were complicit in the sexual exploitation of minors? But as the demand for this list got louder, the media manipulated the story and said that Maxwell groomed and exploited the minors for Epstein. Not anyone else, just Epstein. The media has dropped their investigation on anyone else and has focused entirely on laying the blame on Maxwell and Epstein. No justice for the victims. No justice for those who exploited those minors. Instead, we are now called conspiracy theorists because we want to know who else was involved? The search for truth is now called conspiracy theorists’ lunatic ravings. How twisted and perverted is it that those wanting to end the sexual exploitation of minors are called conspiracy theorists? I can agree and be thankful that we caught the masterminds behind the sex trafficking but why are we stopping there? Stop acting as if I am the irrational one for staking the claim that anyone who is a sex offender (and especially those towards minors) should face justice.With the decay of morality and the rise of the progressive agenda it isn’t difficult to see why there is a growing trend of anti-Semitism in this country. You would think we would learn a thing or two from history… But I digress. This anti-Semitism did not start with Nick Fuentes and Ye despite what you might be seeing in the media. Yes, their views are unacceptable and frightening to hear, but they are citizens and hold no power within our government. The media is distracting us from the anti-Semites who actually have power over policy and our government: people like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. But when confronted with their anti-Jewish beliefs and statements, the media produces puff pieces about how it is a “controversy” that is taken out of context or about how it is Islamophobia to attack them for their “pro-Palestine” views. This same media that does not routinely condemn and push for the cancellation of Tlaib and Omar over their anti-Semitic views cannot stop talking about Ye and encouraging society to cancel him. One group can actually vote on bills and budgets; the others can only wax poetic to whoever decides to actually listen to them. So please media, do not lecture me on the evils of anti-Semitism when you cannot devote any of your time to remove known anti-Semites from Congress. Do not lecture about the dangers of anti-Semitic language and propaganda when you have hung your hat on the Progressive ideal and the key players in their agenda. Agreed, Ye and Nick Fuentes should be shunned for their views, but to a much larger degree Rashida Tlaib’s and Ilhan Omar’s views should warrant even greater coverage and cancellation.The concept of a moral compass pointing towards truth and honesty is now a compass more like the one of Jack Sparrows; one that points in the direction of selfish desire and power. The media has fallen prey to turning their backs on truth and seeking justice and embraced a progressive philosophy that espouses control in the name of care, cultural correctness in the name of sexualizing children, and gaslighting in the name of educating. Our country and its foundation are on the cusp of being gaslighted to death, and unless held accountable, the media and the Progressive left will slaughter the concept of morality for society’s “common good.”

View Details

An article in The Atlantic asked America to “Declare a Pandemic Amnesty, Let’s focus on the future, and fix the problems we still need to solve.” The problem noted was that we just did not know enough and there was so much uncertainty surrounding each issue during the pandemic. We didn’t know that social distancing outdoors was unnecessary because outdoor transmission was rare, we didn’t know that the risk to children contracting COVID (and subsequently shutting down schools) was a lessor risk to the children’s mental well-being and educational progress, and we didn’t know the risks of each of the vaccines. The author then went on to say we need an amnesty because “dwelling on the mistakes of history can lead to a repetitive doom loop...” I strongly disagree with this premise. The reason we study history and fixate on it is not to endlessly opine, it is to make sure that we are learning and evolving. History is something we should seek not to repeat. The heart of the issue surrounding COVID is it does not seem that we as a society learned the lessons that we should have. Mistakes were made, and instead of acknowledging the mistakes to learn from them, we are asked to ignore, forgive and forget. We listened to the experts, locked down livelihoods, sacrificed Liberty at the altar of “For the Common Good,” and what have we learned from it? To just give a blanket “It’s alright, you had good intentions so I will forgive you?” That just will not do. In order to get my and the American people’s forgiveness, you will have to give us some conditions just like we gave you “two weeks to flatten the curve.” You will get your amnesty if you agree to give up all the power that made that amnesty necessary: a collusion of the press with government, the power of the government to suppress liberty, and to disband the morality police.Journalism and news organizations cannot look any worse as a profession than they do right now after seeing study after study invalidate their “scientific facts” regarding the pandemic. They spent the entirety of the pandemic preaching the experts opinions and relaying them as facts and suppressing those who have enquiring minds as misinformation or COVID deniers. Social media was even shown to suppress free speech at the request of the government, trampling on a bedrock institution of this country which could have prevented some of the post pandemic disasters we are seeing now. The founders wanted to ensure the freedom of the press not so they could suppress the citizenry, but rather as a check against the government. The press is supposed to be the watchdog, protecting the people from the usurpations of the government. The press is supposed to be the defender of freedom and protector against force. The founders worried about political demagogues manipulating the people, and instead of the press doing its job and questioning the demagogues, the press instead put them on a pedestal and gave them a podium. The press was supposed to be asking the questions that the people were asking during the pandemic. The press is supposed to question the experts, seeking what their financial incentives might be, and seeing what companies had the most to gain from government actions. Therefore, my condition of amnesty is this: for every article in which you defend the government’s actions, you must have a counterpoint article that questions them. Maybe start some of your articles on the premise that the government is not operating with society’s best interest at heart, no matter how vociferously they argue that they are. You will get amnesty when you start investigating government collusion and manipulation, not when you sit in the pockets of bureaucrats.This second condition of amnesty is the easiest to request but the hardest to attain. The first aspect is for those in power to relinquish their power. Health agencies need to amend their codes, so they are no longer allowed the authority to shutter schools, churches and businesses. Local and state governments need to change their emergency powers, so they are not unbridled and unlimited. Federal officials need to be held accountable for their actions so they cannot promulgate the barrage of unscientific statements like we saw Fauci make. And if these agencies and governments cannot agree to relinquish their powers, then we the people need to make them. This condition is so difficult because it requires people in a position of power to relinquish their power. The founders created our government to specifically prevent the COVID travesties, but we no longer have a populace that understands nor desires this foundational aspect of the human condition. We need a revival in the core civic knowledge of our citizenry and an adoption of the other virtues that could have prevented this pandemic travesty: self-reliance, self-restraint, and self-assertion. This condition is as much an expectation for the citizenry to rise up and regain power as it is an expectation of the powerful agencies to realize their proper roles in a Constitutional Republic.The morality police said we did not love our grandma unless we wore masks outside. We didn’t care about children or teachers if we did not shut down schools. We did not care about coworkers unless we got vaccinated. That we did not care about the common good unless we shut down “non-essential” jobs for months. They used our loved ones as cudgels for conformity, beating us over the head if we even peeped the words freedom to choose, liberty, or even why. We begged them to just see us for what we are: people who feel and love just as much as they do but those who have different opinions on how love is shown. We begged to be treated as individuals who are free to choose and instead families were ripped apart and decimated by haughtiness. This last condition is the hardest one to guarantee because it is within human nature to be divisive. This last condition requires more soul searching and a commitment to study history and get a self-education in civics. We must ask for people to check their morality and if it derives from bureaucracy or from the individual. It is never moral to use force to take away someone’s freedom even if that is what the “science” predicts. This last condition requires a rebirth of freedom in this country and a commitment to the somewhat scary principle of freedom of choice. The last condition is that we treat each other as equal humans and not rank others on a morality hierarchy.Thomas Jefferson once wrote to James Madison, “the people are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.” This was written upon the birth of a nation that stood upon the principles laid out in my conditions above. The people are to hold a press accountable, the people are to hold the elected and the government entities accountable, and the morality of freedom and individual flourishment is from within individuals not from within the government. During the pandemic, the people were taken out of the equation. And the equation will never be solved until we the people realize our rightful place.

View Details

Now is not the time to raise taxes on the everyday, hardworking citizens and businesses of Douglas County, Colorado. The people of Douglas County are not taxed too little. They are taxed too much. Property taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, income taxes, vehicle registration taxes, gas taxes, gas fees, etc. all add up. Additionally, Douglas County residents are facing higher retail grocery prices, higher gasoline prices, an economic recession, inflation at a multi-decade high, a world of destabilized relationships with global powers, and dysfunctional government.

There is a huge property tax increase on the horizon for Douglas County residents WITHOUT passage of the proposed Mill Levy Override (MLO) tax and new tax to pay off the doubling of Douglas County School District’s (DCSD) debt. Douglas County real estate is expected to be reappraised 40% to 50% upward in 2023. So, a $4,000.00 property tax bill in 2022 becomes a $6,000.00 tax bill in 2024. A $6,000.00 property tax bill becomes a $9,000.00 tax bill in 2024. Why? Because the new assessed valuations will be calculated near the top of the real estate market. This is one of the foundational points for my “Against” arguments in the Douglas County Ballot Proposals and Election Information Booklet. Vote “NO” on DCSD ballot proposals 5A and 5B.

There have been several articles in local publications and a video from the School District attempting to confuse the voter regarding my arguments “Against” the DCSD 5A and 5B property tax increases. In this essay I will restate and clarify my points for you, the taxpayer, who will pay for these increased taxes. 5A REBUTTAL - $60 MILLION PROPERTY TAX INCREASE FOR PAY INCREASES Douglas County Election Information Booklet Arguments Against 5A – DCSD Board Rebuttal and Taxpayer Response 5A Argument Against #1: There is a huge property tax increase in the store for Douglas County property owners in 2024 even without this mill levy override from the School District. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: None 5A Argument Against #2: Douglas County real estate is expected to be reappraised 40% to 50% upward in 2023, so a $4,000 property tax bill in 2022 becomes a $6,000 property tax bill in 2024 and a $6,000 property tax bill becomes a $9,000 property tax bill. This MLO property tax increase would be IN ADDITION to those reappraisal increases. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: None 5A Argument Against #3: By 2024, the School District’s proposed MLO would add an ADDITIONAL $520 to the property taxes to a home valued at $1,000,000 after the 2023 re-appraisal. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: This isn't true because the MLO is fixed. When home values go up through the 2023 appraisal process, the $1 per week per $100K in home value (what the MLO will cost taxpayers) won't change because the $60 million isn't tied to mills. It's a flat dollar amount. By 2024, the dollar impact will go down because more homes and businesses will contribute to the fixed amount. TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: Mill Levy Override property tax calculations are complicated. The DCSD Board provided their model supporting the tax increase amount of $52 per $100,000 of home value, and I calculated the $520 on a home valued at $1,000,000 using their model and assumptions. The $520.00 in additional property tax via the Mill Levy Override would be for tax year 2022. The $60 million total tax increase is fixed. DCSD has the power to adjust the mills up or down to collect this $60 million from taxpayers. If assessed values increase 50% in 2023, then a $1,000,000 home will be assessed at $1,500,000 therefore the estimated Mill Levy Override tax would decrease from $520.00 to $334.00. The key point is that this MLO property tax increase is IN ADDITION TO the 50% higher property taxes caused by the 2023 reassessment, which will be billed and paid in 2024. 5A Argument Against #4: This tax increase would be a fixed $60 million every year with no sunset. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: None 5A Argument Against #5: The District can levy whatever mill rate is necessary to collect the $60 million every year. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: None 5A Argument Against #6: The average teacher salary in DCSD is $58,000, which only looks low compared to the districts with the highest teacher salaries like Boulder (average $82,000) and Cherry Creek (average $76,000).” DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: The average salary is correct and acknowledged that comparing DougCo teacher salaries to Boulder is a fair statement. However, DCSD said, "Cherry Creek schools are our closest competition for teachers." TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: Cherry Creek may have the highest average teacher pay located geographically close to the DCSD. But that does not make Cherry Creek the leader that sets teacher salaries for the market. The market price is set by a composite of all the similar school districts in the area plus intangibles such as appreciation from senior leaders and supervisors, respect, organizational culture, work environment, relationships with peers and colleagues, safety, opportunity to lead and grow professionally, and work/life balance. Cherry Creek’s annual TEACHER TURNOVER, not staff turnover, or employee turnover, but TEACHER TURNOVER, is 15.9% compared to DCSD TEACHER TURNOVER of 16.5%, a difference of 0.6%. The DCSD Board’s marketing point that higher teacher pay is the key element for better teacher retention is misinformation. 5A Argument Against #7: For the 13 largest districts in Colorado, the average teacher salary is $63,000; so, the School District is in the normal range of market salaries although on the low side. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: DougCo is one of the most expensive places to live, so a statewide comparison isn't necessarily fair. Our teachers don't live in rural Colorado. TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL:** The DCSD Board’s statement that teachers don’t live in rural Colorado is irrelevant. My comparison was to the 13 largest school districts, of which all but one is located in the front range metro area. DCDS pay is in the normal range although on the low side compared to the thirteen. Regarding the Board’s statement that Douglas County is one of the most expensive places to live, consider home prices. Per the Zillow data base, the most expensive Colorado counties are, in order Pitkin, Eagle, San Miguel, Summit, Routt, Boulder, Elbert, then Douglas. Second, there is no correlation between housing prices and teacher pay. The more expensive counties have average teacher pay in the $55,000 to $65,000 range with just a few outliers. Throughout the metro area teachers have choices of where to live and how much to pay for housing. 5A Argument Against #8: More money spent on education does not buy better education outcomes. Here is a comparison of the School District to Cherry Creek on some key education performance measures. Based on these measures, Douglas County, with lower salaries, is outperforming the high-salary Cherry Creek school district.

DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: The School District acknowledged with pride that DougCo students scored better than Cherry Creek on the Colorado Measures of Academic Success (CMAS), but the issue is retaining teachers. "If we can't keep the amazing teachers who are doing that great work, we won't be able to keep that level of performance." TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: The DCSD Board’s statement above does not recognize the excellence of DCSD students and parents. As noted in 5A Argument Against #6: Cherry Creek’s annual TEACHER TURNOVER, not staff turnover, or employee turnover, but TEACHER TURNOVER, is 15.9% compared to DCSD TEACHER TURNOVER of 16.5%, a difference of 0.6%. The DCSD Board’s marketing point that higher teacher pay is the key element for better teacher retention is misinformation. A good tool that the DCSD board could have provided for voters would have been a full analysis of what taxpayers could expect from a $60 million property tax increase for higher teacher pay. 5A Argument Against #9: If the School District gave DCSD teachers a 10% raise, the cost would be $5,800 per teacher times, 4,400 licensed teachers which is $25.5 million not $60 million that the School District is asking for with this Mill Levy Override.” DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: The District said this isn't an accurate statement because it doesn't factor in the PERA benefits the district pays, which are part of pension benefits that aren't optional. A $10,000 raise costs the district just over $12,000 with benefits. Of $60 million, $44.5 is the district's share and $15.5 million goes to charter schools for their teacher's compensation. TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: As the DSCD noted, adding the District’s additional cost for the District’s share of the PERA (Public Employees Retirement Association) contribution, a 10% raise of $5,800 would cost the district an additional $7,018. Plus, the District acknowledged in their video that there would be additional Medicare and Medicaid premium costs as well. Per the District’s video, employees pay an additional 11% contribution to PERA. PERA is an underfunded pension plan, which means PERA’s contractual pension obligations to retirees exceed its resources to pay those obligations. Question 5A is a proposed increase for teachers and all staff salary and benefits which correlates to higher PERA costs across the board. 5A Argument Against #10: This ballot question 5A hurts Douglas County residents. Higher property taxes make it difficult for young and senior homeowners. Higher property taxes also affect renters and rents must increase to pay for landlord’s higher property taxes. Additionally, 5A is a general fund money grab by the School District and should be rejected. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: Kane took issue with the statement that 5A is a general fund money grab. She said the language of 5A limits spending to competitive compensation only. The district can't legally spend those funds on anything else. TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: This ballot question 5A hurts Douglas County residents. Higher property taxes make it difficult for young and senior homeowners. Higher property taxes also affect renters and rents must increase to pay for landlord’s higher property taxes. I am concerned that fixed and ever-increasing property taxes will tax people out of their homes and property. 5B REBUTTAL - $450 MILLION OF NEW DEBT Douglas County Election Information Booklet Arguments Against 5B – DCSD Board Rebuttal and Taxpayer Response 5B Argument Against #1: Taxpayers are facing a huge property tax increase coming in 2024 as Douglas County real estate is expected to be reappraised 40% to 50% higher, so a $4,000 property tax bill in 2022 becomes a $6,000 property tax bill, and a $6,000 property tax bill becomes a $9,000 property tax bill. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: None 5B Argument Against #2: The School District wants voters to approve $450 million of new debt with a total repayment amount including interest of $775 million, all of which will be paid by property taxes. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: None 5B Argument Against #3: All property owners, even those who have no students in the School District, will pay the property tax to repay this $775 million debt principal and interest. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: None 5B Argument Against #4: The School District now has total general obligation debt of $383 million so the $450 million of new debt would more than double the bonded debt load.” DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: None 5B Argument Against #5: The School District plans to use the new debt for: * Building three new elementary schools and expanding two middle schools: $216 million; * Investments in student programming: $54 million; * Safety and security upgrades: $16 million; * Maintenance and renewal: $139 million; * Fees, Management and Contingency: $25 million. * Some of these items are current expenses, not long-term capital projects, and borrowing money from the future to pay current expenses is not smart financial policy.

DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: "The District says that 5B is for capital investments only and not operational expenses. Those investments are not within the current capacity of the district's budget." TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL:** Investments in student programming, maintenance and renewal, fees, management and contingency, do not fit the definition of capital expenses. 5B Argument Against #6: The School District has a long history of over-estimating its future growth * The truth is the School District is not growing at all. * As recently as 2015, the School District was projecting growth in the student census from 66,900 in 2015 to 78,000 by 2025. * As of 2021, the student enrollment is 62,979, not even close to the 2025 projection of 78,000. * In 2012, the School District’s student enrollment was 63,114, so in 10 years, the School District has not grown at all. * In the last 10 years, the population of Douglas County has increased 26% from 295,000 people to 373,000 people, but the School District student enrollment has been flat in those same 10 years. * In 2021, the student enrollment declined by 4,326 students, some of which was pandemic-related; but the School District is also alienating its customers – the parents.

DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: The DCSD responded that the district covers 84 square miles or about 2/3rd the state of Rhode Island. There are areas of significant growth and areas of significant decline. They need to address both challenges, and unfortunately, they can't pick up schools from declining areas and move them to where they are more needed. TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: The DCSD did not address the long history of over-stating growth expectations, which is a fact. From 2012 to 2021 the enrollment of the DCSD grew 63,114 to 62,979, essentially 0% growth. However, the Instructional Service staff grew 20% from 3,410 in 2012 to 4,090 in 2021. All other DCSD employees (non-instructional) grew 24%, from 1,684 to 2,084. The DCSD Board has not effectively managed Instructional Staffing growth to parallel the growth in enrollment. Matching the growth of the demand for services (student enrollment) to the growth of resources (Instructional Staffing) is a fundamental task of managing a large enterprise like the DCSD. More money, more spending, more school construction are not the answers. 5B Argument Against #7: Alienated parents are a deeper challenge for the School District. While DCSD has many amazing teachers, parents are concerned about “woke” ideology indoctrination in the curriculum. Public education has lost its monopoly over the parents and students. Using technology and entrepreneurism, parents now have alternatives to government-run public schools. The School District must learn to compete for students and satisfy the parents. Until that happens, student enrollment growth will be slow or flat, even down. Vote NO on $775 million of property taxes to pay interest and principal on new debt. Vote NO on Question 5B. DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: The School District stated that it is dedicated to promoting positive partnerships between parents and teachers in our schools. The District continues that the District follows Colorado state standards, and the District administration is absolutely not pushing any woke ideology. If a parent in our district is ever concerned about something happening in their child's school or classroom, DCSD would encourage that parent to reach out to the teacher and discuss their concerns. TAXPAYER RESPONSE TO DCSD BOARD REBUTTAL: The Argument Against 5B above clearly states “parents are concerned about ‘woke’ ideology indoctrination in the curriculum.” And they are. A recent national poll revealed that school curriculum is a top concern of parents. Multiple DCSD parents have connected with me regarding their concerns about "woke ideology agendas" in DCSD classrooms and extra-curricular school activities.

The bottom line is the people and businesses of Douglas County are not taxed too little. They are taxed too much. Property taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, income taxes, vehicle registration taxes, gas taxes, gas fees, etc. all add up. Additionally, Douglas County residents are facing higher retail grocery prices, higher gasoline prices, an economic recession, inflation at a multi-decade high, a world of destabilized relationships with global powers, and dysfunctional government. Now is not the time to raise taxes on the everyday, hardworking citizens and businesses of Douglas County, Colorado.

Vote “NO” on DCSD ballot questions 5A and 5B.

View Details

“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” - Plato

“But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” – James Madison, Federalist No. 51 Why You Should Vote America is in decline. Colorado is in decline. Our nation is on the path to disaster, and the proximity and magnitude of that disaster increases with every day that the Democratic Party holds the reins of power.

Using human flourishing as our moral goal and standard of value, we have objective evidence to see how well or how poorly we are doing. That evidence is found in measures of economic performance. Energy prices reveal how much we are paying for the clean, cheap, reliable energy that powers our lives. Economic and market data show how our modern economy is performing. Labor statistics show how many people are working. Government receipts and deficits show how fast the size of government is growing.

In the table I present below, you can see that by almost every measure, things are worse today than they were the year-end before Joe Biden (D) was inaugurated, and you only need to watch the news to see that things are getting much, much worse by the day. I haven’t even addressed crime, which is especially bad in Colorado and is the direct result of policies enacted by the current ruling Democratic tyranny.

You should vote because this election gives us an opportunity to not only send Joe Biden (D) and his ruling gang a message, it also gives us a chance to put a real brake on the accelerating decline of our states and nation.

Energy Thanks to the Democrats’ war on American oil and gas, fueled by their maniacal belief that we humans cause climate change, energy prices are skyrocketing. The price most directly noticeable by the average citizen – gasoline at the pump – has increased by 75% in Colorado and 56% nationally. The cost of the natural gas you use to heat your home went up by 152%. The price of electricity – 41% of which is provided by natural gas – went up by 26% in Colorado.

These increasing costs mean that families had less purchasing power for other things – like food and clothing - after paying for the energy they need to stay alive in the modern world.

While the Biden administration and the Democrats are doing everything they can to kill the American oil and gas industry, they are sucking up to vicious foreign tyrants to increase their oil production. It defies logic and common sense. Markets The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DOW) is the measure of the health of America’s publicly traded companies. As the table shows, the value of the companies that make up the DOW declined by 6% from before Joe Biden took office to this last quarter-end. This means that everyone who holds any of their assets in the stock market is, on average, 6% poorer than they were. It’s worse for the NASDAQ, which has declined by 18%.

It's not just the uber-wealthy billionaire class who is affected by this. Everyone is – if you have investments in the stock market, you are affected. If you have an IRA or a 401K, you are affected. And, incidentally, you will be adversely affected if any of their hare-brained schemes like taxing transactions or capital gains goes into effect.

Speaking of 401K’s, the value of your 401K has declined by 14% since the end of 2020, thanks to the cumulative inflation rate of 14% during that time. Economy and Labor Force If you watch a TV that’s tuned to one of the money stations like CNBC (as I do), you are seeing a lot of red these days. That’s because markets are falling, inflation is raging and the Consumer Price Index has increased by almost 500% since December 31, 2020 – which means everything you buy is more expensive. The value of the Gross Domestic Product has only increased by $1.3 trillion during that time, with the rate of increase declining by 109% from the end of 2020.

In fact, the only good economic news is that unemployment remains low and has recovered from the post-COVID highs at the end of 2020. Government About the only thing growing in America these days is government. Local, state and the federal governments are all ballooning as they take more power and more of your property. U.S. government revenues, 92% of which came from individual, payroll and corporate income taxes in 2021, have grown by 18% to $4 billion. Individual income tax receipts increased by 27% during the same time frame.

While the budget deficit shrank, the national debt – which is the legacy we are leaving to future generations - has grown to over $24 trillion, roughly the same amount as our gross domestic product. Higher interest rates mean that ever-increasing amounts of our tax money and borrowing will be going just to cover the interest on this massive debt.

To put this in the context of the family budget, our national debt is like a family whose credit card and other debt is equal to the value of all their assets. The interest alone would be crushing, and this family would soon be declaring bankruptcy. With nations, it’s called “sovereign default” and we are surely heading there.

Between higher energy, housing, and other costs, coupled with rising inflation, working people (the people Democrats claim to be for) all over the country are facing tighter and tighter budgets, with elected Democrats clamoring for more taxes, fees and “premiums”. Instead of cutting government spending, all they talk about is exponentially increasing it. There is not enough money in the world to pay for all their silly ideas. They Crazy Why should you vote Republican? Because Democrats are insane. Is that a strong statement? Maybe. But if you define insanity as “Trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result” as Albert Einstein supposedly said, or if you define it as being disconnected from reality, as I do, it is clear that the Democratic Party and the so-called “progressives” who run the party are way out there.

I admit this is a harsh indictment. But let’s be real: today’s Democratic Party is not the same as the party of FDR, Truman, JFK or even Bill Clinton. Today’s Democrats are full-on socialists who are trying to impose their woke, reality-denying dystopian worldview on the rest of us through the coercive force of government.

Democrats are demonstrably wrong on virtually every issue facing our states and nation. Whether it is national security and America’s role in the world, the climate and energy policy, the economy, minimum wages and labor laws, which bathrooms people should use, crime and punishment, or many other issues, Democrats are EXACTLY WRONG.

At a time when our country faces rising foreign threats from China, North Korea, Russia, Iran and other bad actors on the world stage we need serious, intelligent and responsible leadership. What we have is a demented old man and a ruling party that literally cares more about killing the unborn and mutilating children via “gender-affirming care”. They care more about “the climate” than they care about protecting our modern life. They care more about driving our economy into the ground via higher taxes and regulations than about growth and prosperity. They believe that your children belong to the State. They believe that government is the answer to all of life’s problems. Warning: a government big and powerful enough to solve all of life’s problems is big and powerful enough to take everything from you - including your life. Why You Should Vote Republican Everyone who is legally qualified to do so should vote. Over time, I’ve heard reasons why people don’t vote. Below are some of those reasons and my responses. “My vote doesn’t count.” Response: Yes, it does! You as a citizen and a stakeholder in this country have a moral obligation to be informed and to participate in the government that we have established and given power to. As Plato said, those who are not “into politics” are doomed to be governed by their inferiors. “The election is rigged.” Response: The Left cries “voter suppression” and the Right cries “voter fraud”. Yes, both have existed at some time and some place throughout America and her history. But to use this as an excuse to not vote is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. If the election IS rigged, not voting won’t do anything to change that. It just further affirms the victory of the cheaters. If it isn’t, then the result is the same: the Democrat wins. “The candidate is a RINO.” I guarantee that no candidate for office will ever be 100% in agreement with you on every issue. There is room for differences of opinion and approach even between people who share the same moral views, philosophies and values. But to not vote for someone, as an example, Joe O’Dea, because he isn’t Ron Hanks is basically a vote for Michael “Do Nothing” Bennet (D). Democrats WANT you to not vote and will work to paint Republican candidates as RINOs.

With some exceptions, it’s better to vote for a person with whom you are somewhat aligned than failing to vote and allowing a person with whom you are completely not aligned to win. Follow the 80/20 rule. “They all suck. I’m voting for the Libertarian.” A variation of the RINO objection, this might as well be a vote for the Democrat. While I love the libertarian party and what they stand for, the cold reality of life in America is that we have a two-party system and voting for libertarians just gets Democrats elected. Sorry. This is just my observation from studying several close races over the years (see Sidebar). Sidebar: Reid/Franken/Obamacare/Dodd-Frank In 1998, incumbent Harry Reid (D) won re-election in Nevada by 401 votes over the Republican candidate. The libertarian in the race, Michael Cloud, received 8,129 votes. I’d argue that most of those votes came from libertarian/conservatives and John Ensign (R) would most likely have won without Cloud in the race.

In Minnesota in 2008, after a recount (where the Republican had actually won), Democrat Al Franken was certified as the winner by 225 votes. Third party “Independence” and libertarian candidates drained off 451,428 votes, likely throwing the race to Franken.

What happened in 2010? When Democrats had full control of the federal legislative and executive branches, they passed the disastrous bill known as Obamacare, along with several other bad bills including Dodd-Frank. The Progressive Advantage In Colorado and throughout the nation, the progressive Left has a permanent infrastructure devoted to winning elections and gaining/maintaining power. I wrote about this a few years ago, and it’s even worse today. Republicans, especially in Colorado, face significant headwinds because the Democrats own the mainstream media, social media and have a cadre of committed activists who are willing to donate money and knock on doors to support their candidates. For this reason, every vote for a Republican truly does count. Every dollar donated to a Republican makes a difference. Every door knocked for a Republican can turn the tide.

When it comes to money, it’s even worse. As I also wrote about, Democrats significantly outraise Republicans, and their Issue Committees rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars, much of it from out of state, to promote their agenda. It’s truly not a fair fight.

Through October 23, Republicans are at a 2.3x disadvantage when it comes to money raised. As for the Issue Committees, I’m certain that over 50% of that money is to support progressive causes and ballot initiatives, and that a significant amount of it came from a few large, out of state Democrat dark money donors. Conclusion Republicans are not perfect. Far from it. But they are generally better than Democrats because they hold to some vision of limited government and fiscal responsibility, and it’s up to us to elect them and hold them accountable.

You should vote, and vote Republican, because Republicans who stay home elect Democrats. Put differently, in any race, not voting for the Republican is effectively the same as voting for the Democrat.

Let’s face it: I don’t want anyone to vote for Democrats because they are the party of misery, suffering, identity politics, decline, and failure. Vote them all out.

Think about the kind of state and country you want to live in. Then get out and vote for Republicans up and down the ballot.

For how to vote on Colorado ballot initiatives, see the following voter guides: Kim Monson Show Voter Guide Independence Institute Colorado Voter Guide Independence Institute Denver Voter Guide

View Details

It’s Sunday morning and the doorbell rings. Two ladies walking by my house see and read the home-made sign in my yard and stop by to ask about it. I am glad they did. They said they were new to the neighborhood and wanted to know more about the issue of Home Rule regarding the Town of Erie question 3E on the November 8th ballot. It states, “Shall the Town of Erie form a Home Rule Charter Commission for the purpose of drafting a Home Rule charter”. They asked, “what is Home Rule, why do some people not want to continue as a statutory town, who is leading this initiative, who benefits, who is paying for it, what is fair about it, what are the unintended consequences of it?” These are all great questions. I answered them as best I could from my reading and facts I have found from sources as varied as the Colorado Municipal League, the “Yes, on Home Rule website”, and other towns and municipalities with their proponents for and against Home Rule all around the State of Colorado.

After a nice conversation and answering their questions I asked, “What problem do you think Home Rule is trying to fix for the town?” They shrugged. I suggested they do their own research and said, “I am voting NO on the issue.” I asked the ladies to do the same, and to vote for the individuals who did not fill out the issue committee’s questionnaire on their website. Confused, one asked, “If we vote no, why do we have to vote for nine people for the Charter Commission?” I explained, “Even if you vote no, the measure may still pass and the nine people who garner the most votes will be chosen to serve on the Charter Commission.” The other said, “They are trying to confuse people”.

I have read from those in favor of the measure that we need more local control of our town’s destiny, give the citizens what they want and raise more sources of revenue from businesses so the town can provide more services for the community. These comments are exactly why I am against this measure. The people who are for this measure say they want to help the town manage future growth. They want to provide more of the services and help people’s needs. These are all terrible ideas because they use the force government to pay for these services.

The people who are supporting the town forming a Charter Commission have said things such as, they are running to “give back to the community,” stop the “head butting contest” between the reds and the blues,” “grow in a sustainable and managed way,” “help shape Erie’s future and make sure that it continues to be an enjoyable place to live,” “regularly encountered situations where we were restricted in how we could make a decision or address a local issue,” “I want to ensure an honest voice for my community,” “to provide Old Town Erie with representation in town politics,” “we have a vested interest in Erie,” “I am passionate about the well-being of our community and the opportunities provided to all residents.” All nice sounding platitudes to run on yet not one of these folks understand the proper role of their government. No one has stated a philosophical understanding of the purpose of government. The purpose of government is to protect individual rights. Not to provide for people. Not one person who is supporting this charter has written or talked about this exceptional concept.

Those who have studied history, philosophy, and human nature see this measure for what it is, a grab at more control at a local level and adding another layer of bureaucracy into the lives of Erie citizens. We should all be involved in our government, yet when people do not understand what a citizen is, it’s easy to see why we have the sort of bloated government we currently have. As citizens, we must be self-restrained and be in control of ourselves. We should be self-assertive and not surrender our sovereignty to those in power or abdicate our personal responsibility. We should have civic-knowledge and an understand how our government should work. We should be self-reliant and use our mind to reason and create our own wealth. These things must be done to remain free and independent beings. These are the conditions of freedom in a civil society.

If this measure passes and a new charter is to be written, it should embody the recognition and protection of individual rights. I want to be part of the Charter Commission if it does pass to do just this. If citizens are to be free, they should understand that production proceeds consumption. That no amount of need is a reason to force others to do for you. The human mind is the source of all your wealth. Capitalism is the only moral system consistent with human nature. All trade should be mutually beneficial and voluntary, trading value for value. The initiation of force is evil, and that government has a monopoly on force. To understand the objective rule of law on property is critical. The proper way to champion capitalism is a moral defense based upon the unalienable rights of each individual to live their lives according to their own judgment.

The Yes on Home Rule people can’t estimate the cost of a new charter because they are saying it depends on what is written into it. I can assure you that your taxes will rise, and your life will become more complicated with more government if Home Rule passes. To sum this up and paraphrase Matte Kibbe, President of Free the People, “Leave people alone, don’t take their junk, and don’t be a jerk,” by growing government. I ask you to vote NO on Home Rule and in case this measure passes, vote for me, Bradley Beck because I will protect your individual rights if elected.

View Details

There was a joke in Nazi Germany that asked what all was “the time it takes a grade school teacher to change his political allegiance.” The fascist Nazi government understood that one of the most important institutions to change and control was education of the younger generations. They knew that if they could indoctrinate and control the youth, then their political power would be secure, and their political ideology would be cemented and never questioned. It is critical to examine history and learn from it otherwise we are doomed to repeat it. There were three trends in Nazi Germany that are beginning to show strange parallels in our education system: the injection of race teachings, the rewriting of textbooks to reflect ideology, and the banning of teachers based on race and political parties.

The most obvious and horrible change the Nazi’s made was to inject race into the education system. They used biology to explain why certain races were inferior and why others were the most superior. They injected it into history to explain why Jews were the root of all the problems in Germany (more on rewriting history later). The Nazi’s literally taught “racial awareness” and had the children create their family tree to see which children had the most “worthy” racial backgrounds. Our country was founded on an idea that all humans are born with equal rights and yet it is scary to see some of the changes our education system is making due to race. The hyper fascination of race in today’s woke education and the “racial awareness” training that we are now watching is strikingly familiar. They are fracturing our ability to come together by teaching that certain races are inferior due to slavery. Slavery was abolished in the 1800’s (something children are not responsible for and have no control over). Race is used to divide, not unite and we are starting to see the ramifications of it. School choice is about allowing parents the opportunity to remove their children from these teachers who want to solely teach about race and mirror the fascist tendencies of Nazi Germany.

One of the first things Hitler did was rewrite the textbooks, making sure to highlight the aforementioned racial awareness. But most of the changes were subtle changes. The Nazi’s made changes to the textbooks to accentuate and produce nationalism, along with highlighting the glory of Germany. Hitler had a goal, and changed the textbooks to attain that goal, and unfortunately, he was resoundingly successful at it. He knew that if they made small changes, the public outcry could be managed. The authority that is implicit in “textbooks” allows for changes to be made and then the logical fallacy of an appeal to authority can be made. The scary thing is, are we not seeing this now? Are they not rewriting the textbooks to highlight the 1619 Project and also subtly changing what is in the history textbooks? Are they not appealing to the authority of the institution of education to justify these changes? They are even changing how we are doing math! The progressive ideology is being poured into our state-run education system. Admittedly, the primary goals of Hitler and the Progressives are different, but the very fact that they both seek to change and influence the coming generations are cause for concern. The education system should be unbiased by ideology, and the only way to ensure that is to allow the free market and parents to influence the education system. This is only done through school choice.

All of these changes to the curriculum are moot unless you can be assured that the curriculum is being taught; so Hitler made sure that the teachers not only were going to teach it but that they were also ideologically aligned with the material. The most obvious and drastic change he made was to fire all the Jewish teachers. But then all the teachers that did not toe the Nazi party line slowly started getting let go or sent to mandatory training seminars and camps. Eventually, full allegiance to the Nazi party was required to be a teacher. The system stabilized when young, Nazi trained teachers started replacing the older teachers who either were putting up a silent resistance or they were fired. The ignorance of children was used in two ways: to either report on their parents to the fanatical Nazi school teachers or to report to parents which teachers were not Nazi enthusiasts who were then reported to school administrators. Shocking videos are being released of principals admitting that they will not hire republican teachers and that they are creating hostile workplaces to force them out. Teachers are being let go because they refuse to teach curriculum contrary to their moral beliefs or conscious. Teachers unions are harshly anti-school choice. School choice is a way for parents to push back on curriculum based in ideology by having a say in the people hired to educate their children. It is more in line with fascist Nazi’s to force an educator to teach ideology than it is for parents to ask for diversity of thought.

It is the greatest form of gas lighting to call someone a Fascist who is in favor of decentralizing government and state control of education. Yet that is what we are seeing out of the Regressive (because they are taking us back, not Progressing forward) left and mainstream media. Parents are attacked for caring and wanting to take control of the education of their children and being called a Nazi for doing so. But this is also how they fought back in Nazi Germany. The teachers said their “Heil Hitlers” yet still tried to teach students how to actually think and rejected the teachings of the new books. Children stood up against the teachers and chose the love of their family instead of falling to the pressure of the Nazi enthusiasts. Parents did their best to teach their children in their own homes. Today is no different because it will always be the right and responsibility of the parents to teach their children. Seeking to diversify schools by asking for charter schools, being critical of the curriculum and not supporting teachers unions who have clear ideological bias is not fascist behavior; in fact, based on history and studying what fascist actually do and believe we can clearly call school choice activists what they really are: anti-fascist.

View Details

Many people believe that medical professionals covered by their insurance work like a charity, with an ethic that promotes healing and treating the sick. Not enough thought is given to the corruption of the network that imposes drug dependence ideology and profit-based services. Some treatments and drugs completely violate the ethics of “do no harm” and “informed consent.” This profiteering triumvirate includes (1) the pharmaceutical lobbyists at your state capitol, (2) the American Medical Association (AMA) partnered with the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), and (3) the federal government with medical mandates and the new bioeconomy. This is the triad of medical fascism. California Law Punishes Doctors Who Disagree With the Medical Industrial Complex California doctors who challenge government-approved orthodoxy in medicine will now risk losing their license. According to The Defender, “California Assembly Bill 2098 (AB 2098), signed into law Sept. 30 by Gov. Gavin Newsom, defines ‘misinformation’ as ‘false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care’ and ‘disinformation’ as ‘misinformation that the licensee deliberately disseminated with malicious intent or an intent to mislead.’ ” This law specifically targets COVID-19 vaccine information but is broad enough to cover any government approved and promoted medical practice. Doctors who have written vaccine exemptions prior to the controversial COVID19 vaccine already experienced medical board reviews as the American Medical Association (AMA) and Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) have enforced their orthodoxy for the past decade while the US vaccine schedule grew to 72 doses per child. This law gives legal shield to launch state medical board witch-hunts against doctors who refuse to sell AMA endorsed drugs and treatments to people with contraindications or natural immunity. As reported in The Defender: “TheAmerican Medical Association(AMA), which strongly supports the bill, hopes other states will follow suit in ‘ensuring that licensing boards have the authority to take disciplinary action against health professionals for spreading health-related disinformation,’ according to anew policy adoptedat its mid-June annual meeting aimed at addressing public health ‘disinformation. The AMA’s adopted policy expanded on prior efforts and called for the organization to work with ‘health professional societies and other relevant organizations to implement a comprehensive strategy to address health-related disinformation disseminated by health professionals.' Language in the bill points out that theFederation of State Medical Boards(FSMB) has warned that physicians who spread misinformation or disinformation ‘risk losing their medical license, and … have a duty to provide their patients with accurate, science-based information.’ The FSMB, as previously reported by The Defender,takes money from Big Pharmaand has a history of challenging and attacking non-pharmaceutical medical approaches used by integrative doctors as falling outside the ‘standard of care’ as they define it.” The AMA will now lobby to pass this law in all 50 states. If Colorado maintains a Democrat Super Majority, then this bill could be introduced in the next session. If Rep. Kyle Mullica of SD24 gets re-elected, he will likely sponsor the bill. (His Republican opponent is Courtney Potter). The California law is currently being challenged in a federal lawsuit. The doctors’ lawyer, Daniel Suhr, of Liberty Justice Center said “Doctors enjoy the same free speech rights as other Americans. The State of California cannot define a so-called scientific consensus on an issue and then punish anyone who dares challenge it.” Regarding the passage of CA AB 2098, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. voiced his opposition along with prominent physicians: “Under the new rubric, the doctor no longer serves the best interest of the patient but acts as an agent of state policy. History is replete with nightmarish examples of what happens when doctors stop healing and act instead to advance ‘the greater good.’ Governments have variously cited that phrase to justify euthanasia of the elderly, mental defectives, homosexuals and other ‘useless eaters’ and to enforce ‘one-child’ policies. When governments start practicing medicine, the story never ends well.” The Ama Calls Gender Mutilation of Children “Dangerous Misinformation” The AMA has long abandoned evidence-based medicine in favor of profit-driven surgeries and drugs. In April 2021, the AMA urged Governors in a letter to oppose restrictions to very profitable gender re-assignment surgeries and drugs. The AMA reported: “The American Medical Association (AMA) today urged governors to oppose state legislation that would prohibit medically necessary gender transition-related care for minor patients, calling such efforts “a dangerous intrusion into the practice of medicine.” In a letter to the National Governors Association (NGA), the AMA cited evidence that trans and non-binary gender identities are normal variations of human identity and expression, and that forgoing gender-affirming care can have tragic health consequences, both mental and physical.” The Defender exposed the “gold rush” of pediatric sex change surgeries at Boston hospital in August 2022: “The recent media hoopla focused on the Boston hospital’s website promotionof ‘gender-affirming hysterectomies’ — with or without removal of the ovaries, and with the additional option of surgically constructing a penis — for girls who, as some discreetly put it, are lacking ‘a gynecologic diseasethat would traditionally indicate hysterectomy.’ In fact, Boston Children’s Hospital’s website signals it has a ‘full suite of options for transgender teens and young adults.’ After the media maelstrom drew attention to Boston Children’s Hospital’s willingness to cut off the breastsof 15-year-old girls and carry out ‘feminizing’ vaginoplastyon 17-year-old boys (the first step being the removal of the scrotum and testes), the hospital hastened to declare that for hysterectomies, at least, girls have to be 18or older.” In response to public outrage and to twenty states introducing legislation in 2021 prohibiting doctors from gender reassignment surgeries of children, the Washington Examiner reported that in October 2022 the AMA “asked the Justice Department to investigate reports about the sex-change procedures being performed on children as dangerous ‘misinformation.’ President Biden Executive Order Promotes Transhumanism & Bioeconomy The pandemic revealed how our regulatory agencies such as the FDA and CDC are captured by pharmaceutical companies, acting as salesmen for gene-altering vaccines. But in September 2022, the White House revealed that it is has all-encompassing societal goals of transhumanism. President Biden signed the “Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe and Secure American Bioeconomy.” According to the White House: “We need to develop genetic engineering technologies and techniques to be able to write circuitry for cells and predictably program biology in the same way in which we write software and program computers; unlock the power of biological data, including through computing tools and artificial intelligence; and advance the science of scale‑up production while reducing the obstacles for commercialization so that innovative technologies and products can reach markets faster.” As Dr. Joseph Mercola explains, “Basically, the goal of the transhumanist movement is to transcend biology through technology and to meld human biology with technology and artificial intelligence.” This Executive Order fast-tracks a pipeline for many more gene-altering mRNA vaccines. The FDA is already advertising transhumanism terms for people to get an “update” or “recharged.” These terms promote the belief that humans need to be enhanced with technology. The Department of Defense has been researching human augmentation for years, with goals of improving physical and cognitive performance, using both internal and external technology. But what if these augmentations come with the loss of privacy and personal control, and data is transmitted electronically to the government or from the government to directly affect the behavior or thoughts of individuals?

The “bioeconomy” ideology is even more concerning than biotechnology as it suggests data on the individual’s health, energy use, and agriculture restrictions will involve nearly every federal agency’s supervision. This is the framework for a biosurveillance government positioned to control each citizen who is connected to the interface. The Executive Order alludes to a global social credit system integrated into the biology of humans.

In conclusion, the consumer can no longer trust the medical-industrial complex in the US.

View Details

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, / And sorry I could not travel both / And be one traveler, long I stood / And looked down one as far as I could / To where it bent in the undergrowth; (The Road Less Travelled by Robert Frost) This poem has always reminded me of how I felt two decades ago when my husband and I decided to homeschool our children. Many families have dramatic testimonies of God distinctly calling them to homeschool, but our decision was not the result of any great spiritual revelations. Around the time my first child was born, my older sister and her husband decided to homeschool my niece and nephew. This decision introduced us and our extended family to the radical idea of teaching our children at home. I had always loved going to school, but my husband, who was largely self-educated, thought homeschooling was a very attractive option. When my oldest child was three years old, my husband declared we would homeschool our children as well.

Our main motivations for deciding to pursue this divergent path of education were educational freedom and the increased opportunities we would have to disciple our children and raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. We were intrigued by the freedom homeschooling offered, a freedom which would allow our kids to explore the world of knowledge without having administrators and curriculum dictate where they invested their time. While studying was not optional, I tried to give my children control over their education, feeling this was an important benefit of homeschooling. I asked my children questions like - what era of history would they like to study? what pieces of literature would they like to read and analyze? how would they like to organize their study time? what area of science would they like to investigate?

As the children got older and their aptitudes and passions became evident, we were able to tailor their education to help them develop their gifts and not burden them with excessive work in areas of study outside their giftings. My artist daughter had time to take art classes and work on complex projects. My scientist son was able to take classes beyond the normal chemistry, physics, and biology. My musicians had time to practice and develop their repertoire so they could perform full concerts out in public.

We also wanted the Word of God to permeate our children’s lives. We wanted loving each other and loving God to be the cornerstone of our parenting. Homeschooling allowed us to study and memorize God’s Word on a level that would be impossible if our kids were in classrooms 8-hours a day and their evenings were dedicated to homework. My children have thousands of verses memorized and can quote entire books of the Bible. We have had daily opportunities to have the spontaneous, organic conversations about God, life, and salvation. From a young age, we have been able to include our children in ministry opportunities. We extend hospitality so often, one of my daughters compares our house to a Medieval inn. While our children have seen their parents’ weaknesses clearly on display through our intense amounts of time together, they have also seen our faith and can have no doubt about its veracity.

While educational freedom and training our children to know God laid a firm foundation for our homeschool, I was still very insecure as we started. I was very nervous that my children would miss out if they didn’t go to school. What kind of opportunities would my kids have without cheerleading, band, yearbook, and other programs offered through school districts? What kinds of memories would they build outside of school? Most of my childhood memories center around field trips and classrooms and playgrounds. But I can say after two decades in this alternative form of education that while the opportunities that come to homeschoolers are different, they are as enriching, if not more enriching, than those offered within a traditional school. Some of these opportunities and benefits are hard to quantify. My children know each other and enjoy each other’s company. I know if each were pursuing individual paths through their teen years, their comradery could have been lost. But homeschooling allowed us to maintain a family culture through high school. My youngest was born in September, the month her oldest sister would have been a freshman in high school. I am grateful my high schooler was able to enjoy her sister’s infancy and not be away from home for 8 to 12 hours a day during her little sister’s first nine months of life.

While rich family relationships are one huge benefit of home education, there were other amazing opportunities that also came our way. One daughter began performing harp music professionally as a teenager. Her younger sister joined her Irish fiddle playing to her sister’s harp a few years later, and they have performed together regularly. Another daughter became an award-winning nature photographer at 14-years of age. Three of my kids spent two weeks participating in a Bible centered TV show that was viewed by over a million people around the world. Together, two of my kids won over fifty thousand dollars in a Bible memory contest. My science-oriented son has won scores of regional and state level science medals and quite a few national level medals. And while preparing our kids for heaven rather than Harvard was our primary goal, Ivy League schools have recruited my son after he scored in the 99th percentile on the SAT.

As I reflect on the last amazing 20-years of homeschooling, there are many things I would do differently. Decisions made out of fear rather than faith tend to be destructive and if I could do things over, I would pray more and trust God more. And I don’t want to paint an unrealistic, rosy picture of homeschooling. There have been unexpected and sometimes tragic twists and turns on this journey, just like there are for every other family living in this fallen world. But I have no regrets about our decision to homeschool our children. When I stood at that crossroad when my kids were young, I could not have imagined the amazing places to which this journey would lead. The rewards have been rich and beautiful and worth all the efforts I’ve invested. Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - / I took the one less traveled by, / And that has made all the difference. (Robert Frost)

View Details

Watching the news on any channel is an opportunity to talk back to the TV. The president of the United States demonizes 76 million of his fellow Americans as “semi-fascists.” He speaks about unity, yet his rhetoric divides. He constantly speaks about “our democracy,” purposely misleading his fellow citizens into believing we live in one. Our president unconstitutionally transfers wealth from people who took out student loans to those who did not and expects responsible people to help in paying those loans back. The U.S. sends billions of taxpayer dollars to foreign countries with no expectation of oversight or repayment, yet if you miss one quarterly payment to the IRS, one of 87,000 new armed agents may soon show up at your door.

State government is getting even worse. One governor mandates no internal combustion vehicles can be sold in his state by a certain date, yet his fellow citizens can’t keep the air-conditioning on after 4:00 PM for fear of having rolling black-outs after two weeks of 100+-degree temperatures. Oh, and don’t charge your electric vehicles during this time. The energy of unreliable solar and wind does not work if the sun does not shine or the wind does not blow. Never mind that coal, natural gas, and nuclear power run his state with available, affordable, and abundant energy, not the mythical energy of the “green new deal”.

I could go on and on griping and complaining yet the real problem is not them, it is us. Before you jump on me as an apologist for those on the opposite political spectrum let me explain. For far too long we have abdicated our responsibility to be active and engaged citizens at any level of government. As scholar Dr. Thomas Krannawitter has written, there are four aspects to citizenship, “Self-restraint, self-assertiveness, civic-knowledge, and self-reliance.” Those of us who believe in these ideas have used the excuse, “I am too busy making a living, raising my kids, or I have no time,” to be active in local government. We the people have caused this problem because we thought others would stand on the vanguard and protect those individual rights that our constitutional republic was founded on. We thought that if we leave people alone, not take their stuff, and not be an idiot we could live and let live. In theory that sounds nice, yet the opposition has filled the void by seeping into every aspect of our lives including government, education, media, and entertainment. Every institution we once respected and held with reverence we now see corrupted by the ever-growing state.

The question is what do we do about our current situation? Many of my friends are about to “Go Galt”. They are done with our mixed-up comingling of economy and state. I can only speak for myself when I say I am tired of using the excuse of “I am too busy” only to let the usual suspects continue to take over while the frog in a pot, boils into oblivion. The time to act is long overdue. This is why I have decided to run for a public office as a charter commissioner in my Town of Erie, Colorado.

I have been working behind the scenes in local politics since 2008 to advance the ideas of liberty. This is the responsible exercise of freedom, a definition patriotic historian Ben Martin uses. I find by using logic and reason to influence and persuade others to think and reflect, we can find a common ground. I have helped hundreds of people find their voice in public speaking and improve their oral communication and leadership skills. I have invested my time in my local community in youth programs to enhance young people’s lives with activities and opportunities which help them grow and excel. Yet, as much as I would like to think I made a small difference in my sphere of influence, it does not seem to be enough.

The town in which I live is attempting to go from a statutory to a home rule town. According to the Legislative Council Staff Nonpartisan Services for Colorado’s Legislature, “Home rule is a form or structure of governing defined by the citizens of a municipality or county that allows for more control over matters of local significance. Voters can decide to adopt home rule, and through a charter, detail the structure and powers of the local government.” It continues, “Home rule empowers local governments to act and legislate on local matters. In general, home rule ordinances addressing local matters supersede state law. However, in matters of statewide or mixed concern, state laws may take precedence over conflicting home rule ordinances. Without a home rule charter, local governments are strictly subject to the laws of the state.” This all sounds wonderful until you read and understand that it also gives local governments more power to tax, zone, create public health ordinances, public safety and gives the administrators of our town more control and no fiscal plan to pay for it.

In theory, why wouldn’t a citizen want more local control? To be blunt, if your elected officials and town administration was inept and wanted more power to effect change in a way that does not protect individual rights, one would most likely vote “NO” on such a measure. Having spent two years to flatten the curve, I have little trust in the majority elected officials and bureaucrats. They do not understand that the proper role of all government is to protect universal, equal, natural rights given by our Creator. Nothing more.

The rather innocuous language of the ballot measure for the municipal election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 reads as follows. “Shall the Town of Erie form a Home Rule Charter Commission for the purpose of drafting a home rule charter? Yes/ For, No/ Against. Section 2. The following candidates shall appear on the ballot in the following order. Vote for not more than nine ( 9) candidates to serve on the Town of Erie' s Home Rule Charter Commission. The measure continues to name the randomly selected individuals who have all been verified by the town clerk to qualify to run for the position. (I am number 14 on the ballot in case you know someone who lives in Erie). By state statute, the elected commissioners will have 180 days to construct a charter. Then, if approved by the town trustees it goes back to the citizens for a vote. Here’s the rub, you may think as a voter you are done by voting “NO” on home rule. However, you still must select nine of the eighteen candidates in case the ballot measure passes. The measure is constructed to be confusing, and at best misunderstood.

I was reluctant to run. I do not want this charter commission measure to pass. However, if the measure does pass, I want to be part of a deliberative conversation to construct as many safeguards to protect individual rights into the document. The charter needs to be written in concise, and clear language for every citizen to easily understand. I can no longer stand by and do nothing. I have taken up the challenge and so here is my challenge to you. Find a local board or commission and serve. If I can stand to partake in the “sausage making”, perhaps you can too. Kathleen Chandler, at the Independence Institute states, “Don’t waste your time talking to like-minded friends…make a real difference! Change the politically correct culture to the American Culture!”

View Details

One of the dominant themes of my writing over the past couple of years has been how Democrats – whose party has been completely taken over by the so-called “progressives” – are objectively, clearly, and completely unfit to govern in 21st century America.

If you hold human flourishing as your goal and standard of moral value, it is clear that Democratic policies stemming from the progressive ideology are failures. By “failure”, I mean that their government programs cost more than they were projected to and not only fail to help those they intended to help, but often actually cause demonstrable harm to their intended beneficiaries as well as the rest of society.

As I talked about in You Don’t Know What You Got ‘Til It’s Gone, America is in crisis, and virtually all the problems we are experiencing today as a nation were engineered by elected Democrats. Nowhere is this more evident than in the epidemic of homelessness, drug abuse and rising crime that is now reaching epic proportions in Democratic-run cities and states.

In San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities, self-confessed progressive author Michael Shellenberger talks about the roots of the homelessness crisis in San Francisco and other progressive-run cities, how the policies intended to help the homeless actually hurt them and how despite ever increasing amounts of money (taken by force by governments) being thrown at the problem, it continues to get worse.

Before we begin, let me tell you that if I had read the author’s bio before I bought the book, I would never have bought it.

While Mr. Shellenberger wrote the book with the best of intentions – as a “…positive proposal for how to restore human dignity, not just law and order, to progressive West Coast cities,”1, I have written this review of his work to bolster my case that electing Democrats to run our governments is the path to disaster at the local, state and national levels. About the Author In the Introduction, Shellenberger establishes the framework from which he approaches the writing of this book: “I am not unfamiliar with radical politics. As a socialist youth in the late 1980s I had read books by America’s most famous anarchist, Noam Chomsky, excoriating US imperialism in Latin America. From 1996 to 1999, I worked with eco-anarchists seeking to save old-growth forests in California and the Pacific Northwest. And in 1999, I protested along-side so-called black bloc anarchists against economic globalization in the streets of Seattle.”2

According to the book jacket, Shellenberger is “…a Time magazine “Hero of the Environment”, the winner of the 2008 Green Book Award…an invited expert reviewer of the Assessment Report for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)…He is the founder and president of Environmental Progress, an independent, nonpartisan research organization based in Berkeley, California.”

In other words: a complete lefty. This is why I found this book so surprising, and I have to give the man credit for writing honestly about how people on his side of the ideological divide are not achieving their desired results with their policies and agenda. Overview San Fransicko consists of nineteen short chapters and an Epilogue. The book starts with a look at how the problem of dog feces on the sidewalks of San Francisco was solved by passing a “Scoop the Poop” act, only to be replaced years later by the much worse problem of human feces on the streets. The reason for this, of course, is a massive increase in homelessness in the city of San Francisco. And while Shellenberger focuses most of his discussion on the city of San Francisco, the points he makes can be applied equally to Seattle, Portland, Chicago, Austin, Denver, and other cities run by progressive Democrats. Causes of Homelessness The first six chapters focus on the causes of homelessness, which can be reduced simply to five broad areas: drug and alcohol addiction, mental illness, life choices, government incentives and lack of affordable housing.

In Chapter One, Shellenberger introduces the problem and reviews how a coalition of San Francisco’s business, philanthropic and media communities formed with a goal of halving the homelessness problem in 5 years. The San Francisco Coalition on Homelessness “…led a campaign to fund housing and services with a special tax on San Francisco businesses that gross more than $50 million annually.”3 (Of course, a tax on successful businesses!)

Chapters Two reviews the problems of drug and alcohol. In the beginning of Chapter Two, the author notes that “Progressives have long defended the right of the homeless to camp in public places.”4

This is another reason why homelessness is such a problem in Democrat-run cities: because the people in charge believe that people have a “right” to camp in public places. Sometimes they even give the homeless the equipment they need (like tents) to live on sidewalks. One San Francisco business purchased and gave away $15,000 worth of camping tents.5

There is a significant disagreement among homelessness advocates as to whether a better solution to the problem is more shelters vs. more permanent housing. While many homeless people refuse to stay in shelters for various reasons, among them fear of violence and sexual battery, the level of homelessness doesn’t seem to be affected by how many shelter beds are available. In addition, many shelters require sobriety and have limits to how long a person can stay.

A significant factor of the homeless problem in Democrat-run cities is that they pay lots of money to people for being homeless. San Francisco, Shellenberger notes, “…remains significantly more generous in its cash payments to homeless, and other spending to serve them, than other cities. For example, San Francisco’s maximum General Assistance cash welfare monthly benefit for the poor is $588, as compared to $449, $221, and $183 for individuals in San Diego, Los Angeles, and New York City.”5 San Francisco spends 6% if its budget on the homeless, compared to New York City, Chicago, Phoenix and San Diego which spend 3.5%, 1.1%, 0.9% and 2.5% respectively.5

When you incentivize something, you get more of it. It’s that simple. Studies show that the majority of San Francisco’s homeless came from somewhere else.

Starting with Chapter Four, Shellenberger dives into criminal justice issues and debunks the myth of how the “war on drugs” has resulted in the United States having such a high prison population, noting that “…over half of all prisoners in state prisons are there for violent offenses like murder, rape and robbery.” 6

Drug addiction and the resulting drug overdoses are the number one cause of accidental death in the United States.7 A large cause of the problem, in my opinion, is that progressive-run cities and states (like Colorado) have decriminalized many drug offenses, including possession of fentanyl, the highly toxic synthetic opioid that is the cause of so many drug overdoses today. This “soft on crime” approach is a result of their “victimization” ideology as opposed to the personal responsibility views that many conservatives hold.

After reviewing the results of how cities in Europe, notably Amsterdam, dealt with the problem of drug addiction, the author discusses how an approach that combines law enforcement and social services can reduce the problem of drug addiction in American cities.

Chapters Six through Nine go over one of the other significant problems that causes homelessness: mental illness. In Chapter Six, Shellenberger debunks another myth so beloved of the Left: the one where Governor Ronald Reagan (later President Reagan) was responsible for shutting down the state’s mental institutions.

Not so, says Shellenberger: “While it is true that…Reagan oversaw the closure of mental hospitals, he didn’t start deinstitutionalization. It began nationally in the 1930s, mostly to save money. The closure of California’s mental hospitals began in earnest in the 1950s, more than a decade before Reagan became governor.”7 He discusses how the bill that aimed to reduce the involuntary hospitalization of the mentally ill was “...a creation of civil libertarians, mental health professionals, and anti-psychiatry activists, sponsored by two Democrats…[and] would have passed even had Reagan vetoed it.”7

Nationwide, it was another Democrat - John F. Kennedy - who “…got the deinstitutionalization of psychiatric hospitals rolling.”7

A large number of the homeless are mentally ill, and their homelessness is the result of their mental illness – they cannot hold steady jobs, they lack family and other social support, and they often have drug and alcohol addictions as well as adverse health issues. Social Spending and Life Choices In Chapter Ten, Shellenberger reviews the “successes” of social spending and income redistribution. A detailed analysis and discussion of his research, assertions and conclusions is beyond the scope of this book review. But he also points out that many people can become homeless as the result of poor life choices and tells the story of one African American youth who got caught in a cycle of homelessness and incarceration as the result of the choice he made to use alcohol and drugs.

In Chapter Eleven Shellenberger talks about the “Heroism of Recovery”. In this chapter he also takes a look at the,“long-standing philosophical debate over whether we have free will or are just the products of our environments…”8, an interesting discussion where he also introduces the writing of French philosopher Michael Foucault, who “…felt that individual responsibility was a myth used by powerful people to punish and discipline others for things they could not control.” 8

I found this relevant because it illuminates why progressives embrace the “victim” ideology – because we have no “free will” we are not responsible for our life choices. This means that the things that happen to us are due to factors and events beyond our control. I guess in their view the proper role of government in this context is to lift us up and take care of us, since we are incapable of caring for ourselves.

To open Chapter Fifteen, Shellenberger includes this highly revealing quote: “In 2004, a man named Joel John Roberts published a plaintive book called How to Increase Homelessness. In it he pointed out that, for more than thirty years, a large and financially motivated lobby of homeless service providers, homeless housing developers, labor unions, for-profit consultants, and advocacy groups have lobbied at the federal, state, and local level to increase funding for themselves. During that time, homelessness only grew worse. One might be tempted to dismiss Roberts’s book as yet another diatribe against the “homeless industrial complex” were it not for the fact that…he…is the CEO of PATH, an integrated housing and services homelessness agency in Los Angeles.”9 His discussion of how progressives fail to see that one cause of homelessness may be the amount of money governments are throwing at the problem is well worth reading. He concludes the chapter with this observation, which to my mind is the essence of the problem with the entire approach progressives take to governance: “The problem is when compassion acts as cover for darker motivations. Throughout history people who appear to have the Dark Triad personality traits of psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism, most famously Stalin and Mao, have successfully manipulated compassionate, idealistic people to support them, even after evidence of their barbarism came to light. What is notable is that they have often done so not by pretending to be altruistic but by being genuinely altruistic. If we are to understand why progressives ruin cities, we need to understand how and why compassion, altruism, and love have created a blind spot, and not just in relationship to foreign despots but also to homegrown ones.”10 [Emphasis mine] In the last four chapters, Shellenberger covers several areas that relate to the ideas of free will, compassion, leadership and responsibility. I found his tale of how the West Coast states of California and Washington went from Republican strongholds to the Democratic disasters they are today to be very interesting (and cautionary). Conclusion While Mr. Shellenberger may disagree with some of the conclusions I have drawn from his book and my recommendation below, I will state outright that it is a highly readable book and it should be read by anybody who might be thinking about how they want their major cities, states and country to be run.

Amply sourced and referenced, Shellenberger doesn’t shy away from stating the facts, even when they are at odds with the prevailing progressive ideology. For this, I commend him and thank him for his honesty.

I first read this book several months ago and I wanted to bring it to the attention of people who might be thinking about how they are going to vote in this coming election. I believe, and I hope you read the book to see if you agree, that voting for Democrats is not a wise choice if your goal is to increase human flourishing and our overall quality of life. Every pathology we see in Democrat-run Denver is exactly the same as what’s happening in San Francisco, and for the same reasons.

One last observation. I now live in Oklahoma City, which is run by Republicans in a Republican-governed state. And while there are homeless people here, there are not nearly as many as I’ve seen in Denver, Austin and other cities, and the problem seems to be much less here than in those other cities.

Read the book. Then vote Republican in November. It’s the only sane choice.

___________________________________________________

1 Shellenberger, Michael (2021) San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities. HarperCollins, page xvii

2 Ibid, page xiii

3 Ibid, page 4

4 Ibid, page 15

5 Ibid, page 18

6 Ibid, page 27

7 Ibid, page 86

8 Ibid, page 141

9 Ibid, page 209

10 Ibid, page 218

San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities

View Details

When our founding fathers convened to create a new government, they had just bested one of the mightiest empires in history. Britain not only had the military strength, but they had also created global trade and one of the mightiest economies in the world. It was amid this global superpower that 13 small colonies banded together to try and create a new country. When this country was founded, was it founded with the aim of becoming a global superpower? Or was it a superpower within an audacious ideal that Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness are at the forefront of success? How did this country rise to such prominence so quickly? And what should our goals be for the future?

Even a brief reading of the Federalist Papers shows how deeply the founding fathers drew upon the history of the world’s governments and the ancient republics. From bantering around the idea of the executive branch being made into a consul to borrowing the relatively new idea of English common law, the founders had no problem borrowing from ideas that worked and ideas that did not. The backbone of our nation was an ideal they did not borrow; the idea that our natural rights should be protected from and by the government. Through the process of essentially cutting and pasting concepts from other governing nations and institutions and weaving those concepts into the most audacious ideal of individual liberty, the founders created a government meant to stand the test of time. By using these ancient and current political, economic and miliarial superpowers as a guide and sometimes a warning, America was destined to eventually become a superpower.

But this destiny with greatness was not the goal of the government. We have seen other ancient empires reach loftier heights more quickly than America did. Napoleon, Genghis Khan, and the Pharaohs all created vast and efficient empires, but the founders clearly did not want to borrow from them because becoming a superpower was not their goal; Liberty was. This goal of becoming a world superpower has even been tested in modern history by Germany under the leadership of Hitler. When ultimate power is the supreme goal, atrocities and human abuses follow. When power is more important than individual liberty-a nation cannot stand strong. America becoming a superpower was due to the unlimited potential and vast power that we would unleash via the free market and liberty.

This should be the lesson to our politicians today: unleash our superpower in order to become one. Our economy has stagnated and fallen, not because government has been pulling the wrong levers but rather because government has gotten involved in the first place. Political figureheads have become more important than liberty. Through regulations and modern monetary theory in action, we have made ourselves susceptible to the growing powers of China. Through government intervention such as bailing out banks, mandating prices, and governing banks into making bad loans, we have seen our prestigious place as the number one economy in the world slip. The way to regain this is through Liberty, not through the goal of being an economic superpower.

There is also the danger of being a military superpower for the sake of having the power across the world. The reason Reagan sought to build our military was because we needed the military might to protect our citizens and their interests across the world. We need to have a military to protect the rights of our citizens, not to be the world’s police. We need massive military might to protect against foreign threats and to dissuade foreign countries from violating the natural rights of our citizens. These goals are strategically and principally different from having a strong military because we want to be a military superpower. In fact, the innovation and creativity of a free market led to military might through technological advances.

The United States of America has the superpower. The founders created this superpower with the concept of individual liberty, Laissez faire capitalism, and a constitutional republic. The idea of forcing America to become a superpower is one that the founders did not copy and paste from other dictating governments, so why the sudden buddying up to force instead of embracing the natural superpower within our nation? America rose from the revolutionary ashes as a place to travel to live the dream. It was a place where the individual could flourish. Today, our nation seems to be falling, images of our Lady Liberty drowning used as memes. In these daunting times, I beg us to unite through our superpower not with the desire to become one. As the wise Uncle Ben told Spiderman, “With great power comes great responsibility.” I urge our nation to heed the words we were founded on, to see the great effort and detail the founders took in piecing together a whole new government-one that could be powerful but only through strengthening the individual and allowing liberty to prosper first.

View Details

As a decade-long watchdog of CDPHE, the most corrupt state agency in Colorado, this article intends to update the public on the prior attempts and current attempt of this rogue agency in its long term, incremental plan to obtain citizen’s personally identifying data (PII) under the guise of “health and safety” to strong arm vaccine uptake. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974, has been the unyielding obstacle of this rogue agency. CDPHE seeks to abolish privacy to implement a medical surveillance state, with coercive tactics triggered in the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS) database. Once an adult or student is included in the registry, with recently added data fields for employer and school information, CDPHE has the power to send individualized reminder notices on vaccine boosters, recall notices to quarantine, and to conduct home visits with social workers, nurses, and law enforcement. The unpublished strategic plan has always been to steal medical records, to kill medical privacy, and to destroy medical choice. This CDPHE pilot program of a public vaccine compliance dashboard currently targets students by an Executive Order of Gov. Polis, but it is aimed and ready to include all adults in Colorado, with easy additions of government and private sector reporting if it goes unchallenged in the courts. CDPHE’s prior attempts to bypass the FERPA obstacle Since 1978, local schools have collected immunization and exemption records for students. CDPHE data has consistently reported near 95% compliance with all recommended vaccines for school attendance, with only 2% of students utilizing exemptions for medical, religious, or philosophical reasons. The 3% unaccounted for was determined to be caused by administrative processing time or a lag in parents to turn in records at fall enrollment (“in-process” and “non-compliant”). By CDC standards, these numbers indicate vaccine program success, but it became clear to all who attended hearings at the Capitol in recent years that “zero exemptions” is CDPHE’s heavy-handed end goal. In 2016, CDPHE attempted to become a state approval agency for vaccine exemptions in HB16-1164, Transfer Immunization Exemption Duties To CDPHE. This bill attempted to create two types of citizens: the compliant and the outcasts. The bill would maintain the local school immunization record process for students who consented to every vaccine, but brazenly created a new state approval process for any student who chose to submit an exemption for any one vaccine. The “experts” at bill hearings testified in transparency that exemptions would not actually be approved by the state. (I have actually heard doctors testify that they have NEVER and will NEVER support a vaccine exemption for any reason, thus indicating the decision is strongly influenced by ideology and not medical contraindications.). This bill died because the sponsor, Rep. Dan Pabon (D), who advocated for our “health and safety” was arrested for a DUI and caught on police video attempting to use his position to avoid arrest, after installing his legislator’s license plates on his wife’s vehicle. CDPHE continued for over a year to pretend that this bill became law and instructed schools to have parents submit vaccine exemptions to the state for approval. HSLDA threatened a lawsuit to finally end this CDPHE policy, which forced schools to correct their exemption process to be in accordance with state law in 2017-2018.

In 2018, CDPHE replaced their legislative mule Rep. Pabon with newly elected Rep. Kyle Mullica (D). In January 2019, Mullica introduced HB19-1312, School Immunization Requirements. This bill aimed to “modernize” and “standardize” the vaccine exemption process. This was double-speak to create an electronic state exemption form that bypassed the FERPA privacy protections at the local schools, and thereby directly uploaded exemption records to CIIS, the state vaccine tracking registry. It also gave power to the state board of health to adopt the ACIP recommendations on exemptions (double-speak for zero exemption policy) and to mandate vaccines which are currently only recommended (hepatitis A, rotavirus, and meningococcal). Furthermore, it required physicians to submit all immunization and exemption data to CIIS, when no requirement existed for CIIS participation. This bill died because hundreds of parents showed up weekly in Denver, causing so much disruption in the Capitol on a daily basis that the Democrats let it die begrudgingly in the final hours of session.

Because rookie Rep. Mullica failed in his first bill attempt, CDPHE reintroduced their bill in 2020 in the Senate with co-sponsors Sen. Kevin Priola (who recently admitted he has actually been voting as Democrat for years while portraying himself as a Republican) and Sen. Julie Gonzalez (Democratic abortion activist). Because Mullica had reported to the media that he had been the victim of a death threat (despite neither Northglenn police nor Colorado State Patrol were able to produce evidence of this death threat to the public), his Democrat peers told parents that they were out for “revenge.” (Yes, this unhinged vindictiveness is the state of affairs in the Colorado Capitol under a Democratic supermajority). SB20-163, School Entry Immunization, created a state exemption certificate, and new requirements that make obtaining a vaccine exemption nearly impossible.

SB163 legislated three ways to achieve “zero exemptions:” (1) create a certificate that doctors will refuse to sign, (2) create an education module that captures all exempting students in the CIIS tracking registry (resulting in parent refusal and leaving public schools), and (3) create a public reporting requirement for schools that shames administrators into pressuring parents to vaccinate (especially in small, rural schools where only a few unvaccinated students can put the school in CDPHE’s “red” status). SB163 doubled down on the threat to medical freedom with an additional threat to religious freedom, as many of the vocally opposed parents were homeschool parents. This law created the term “nonmedical exemption” to replace a religious or personal belief exemption, and to undermine the protections in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. First, SB163 created a state exemption certificate that would place doctors under CDPHE’s scrutiny and threat to their medical license for signing a valid medical exemption, and doctors would also refuse to sign to approve someone’s religious beliefs in a “nonmedical” exemption. Second, SB163 created CDPHE’s online education module on vaccines, which does not provide informed consent on the associated risks but does capture personally identifying information for inclusion in CIIS. Third, SB163 created a 95% vaccination standard for all schools and a CDPHE school-shaming dashboard to coerce vaccine uptake on parents. Prior to SB163, since 1978, parents provided a doctor’s letter or statement of exemption to their local school and medical privacy was upheld, with no evidence of demonstrated risk to public health. This bill was passed during February to June in 2020, with many COVID restrictions to public participation in the legislative process. Despite an unprecedented Sunday hearing with a time limit of 90 minutes on public testimony, thousands of people protested outside during the House Health & Insurance Committee hearing. Gov. Polis’ amended Executive Order is a violation of FERPA protections A student’s health records, including information related to immunizations received and exemptions, are considered part of the educational record and are protected from disclosure in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974.

In October 2021, Gov. Polis amended an Executive Order with the requirement that CDE share personally identifying information of students with CDPHE without the prior, written parental consent required by FERPA: “I direct the Colorado Department of Education to share with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) student information necessary for public health purposes of ongoing COVID-19 investigation and disease mitigation, including information identifying the student’s school of attendance and sufficient information about students to match their information to records in CDPHE immunization and disease control databases. This data sharing is necessary in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic to protect the health and safety of our student population and is permissible pursuant to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g(b)(1)(I), which permits such data sharing with appropriate persons in connection with an emergency if the information is necessary to protect the health or safety of the student or other persons.” A basic understanding of FERPA would justify a legal challenge to Polis’ Executive Order.If FERPA allowed the sharing of student PII, then why is the Executive Order necessary? FERPA allows the sharing of aggregate data, not PII, but that fact is not clarified in the Executive Order to the public. CDE understood that FERPA prohibited the sharing of the student data with PII and refused to share the student data with CDPHE, which resulted in Polis issuing the Executive Order. Moreover, can Polis use the health and safety emergency exceptions of FERPA to request student PII two months after he declared the emergency phase of the pandemic had ended? Furthermore, how has this sensitive data sharing demonstrated that it protects health or safety? The COVID vaccine does not prevent transmission, so what evidence is there that any disease mitigation has resulted from this data sharing? CDPHE launched the dashboard in March 2022, eight months after Polis declared the emergency phase of the pandemic had ended. Who will hold Polis and CDPHE accountable?

This is a short list of FERPA violations that should be challenged legally in this EO: 1. Are schools recording this sharing of PII in the student record as required by law? Can CDE and CDPHE justify that COVID is a significant threat to daycares, K-12, and college students?

“When an educational agency or institution makes a disclosure under the health or safety exception, it must record in the student’s education records the articulable and significant threat that formed the basis for the disclosure, and the parties to whom the information was disclosed. See § 99.32(a)(5).” Source: US DOE 2. FERPA requires a case-by-case request of PII, and blanket requests like Gov. Polis’ EO are prohibited.

“An educational agency or institution must make this determination on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the totality of the circumstances pertaining to a threat to the health or safety of a student or others. If the school determines that there is an articulable and significant threat to the health or safety of a student or other individuals and that a third party needs personally identifiable information (PII) from education records to protect the health or safety of the student or other individuals, it may disclose that information to appropriate parties without consent.” Source: US DOE 3. FERPA also requires an actual or imminent emergency to be in place for release of PII. A COVID epidemic, by the epidemic definition of case numbers, does not currently exist and has never occurred among students in daycares, K-12 schools, and college students.

“FERPA’s health or safety emergency provision permits such disclosures when the disclosure is necessary to protect the health or safety of the student or other individuals. See 34 CFR §§ 99.31(a)(10) and 99.36. This exception to FERPA’s general consent requirement is limited to the period of the emergency and generally does not allow for a blanket release of PII from a student’s education records. Rather, these disclosures must be related to an actual, impending, or imminent emergency, such as a natural disaster, a terrorist attack, a campus shooting, or the outbreak of an epidemic disease.” Source: US DOE 4. Schools may NOT release PII for emergency preparedness for the future.

“Disclosures made under the health or safety emergency provision must be ‘in connection with an emergency,’ which means it must be related to an actual, impending, or imminent emergency, such as a natural disaster, a terrorist attack, a campus shooting, or the outbreak of an epidemic disease.” Source: US DOE 5. CDPHE must destroy the data after the period of the emergency ends, and when the purpose for the PII request is no longer valid. There is no provision in FERPA that allows Polis or CDPHE to make a statewide blanket request for student PII and store it in a database forever. CDE & CDPHE are required to publish when the data will be destroyed.

“FERPA requires that PII from education records be destroyed when no longer needed for the specific purpose for which it was disclosed, and that the written agreement specify the time period for destruction.” Source: US DOE Freedom supporters recognize the threat of this data collection Senator Paul Lundeen and State Board of Education Vice Chair Steve Durham articulately expressed the many concerns about this data theft in The Gazette: “The data dashboard was created using sensitive student data from both the Colorado Department of Education (CDE) and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. In particular, data shared with CDPHE included student personally identifiable information like names, dates of birth, gender, district of parents’ residence, grade level, and more. These personally identifiable data points were then overlaid with state-held medical records related to COVID-19 vaccination status — also extremely sensitive information for many families, especially in the politically charged atmosphere surrounding COVID-19 — to determine whether individual students had been vaccinated. Once matched, CDPHE used the data to calculate school- and grade-level vaccination rates and build the associated public dashboard.” A parent at Falcon School District, Jeff Kemp, expressed his valid concerns about the student data sharing to KOAA: "I think it is unnecessary, overreaches, and problematic because it sets precedent for the next version," said Jeff Kemp, Falcon School District 49 parent. He doesn't see the purpose in the new directive. "Wasn't necessary two months when we all thought we were going to die, wasn't necessary six months ago when there was another surge, and it's clearly not necessary now. Are people getting sick? Sure. Are they getting seriously ill? No. Percentages are roughly the same, if not better," said Kemp. Kemp also believes the new tool will do more harm than good. "They are putting our schoolhouses in this uncomfortable position of being mandatory reporters on things that don't affect kids, don't matter to kids. It is certainly not the role of our government, I've never asked to help me manage my health, I will never ask them to manage my health. I will not ask the government permission to educate my children, and I'm certainly not asking the government's help in managing my children's health," said Kemp. He says state health officials should not have access to student information, and that it raises concerns over privacy. "What are they going to do with it in ten, fifteen years from now. That's what we don't know, we don't know how it's going to be used but we know it builds profiles and a mechanism for the government to be more intrusive," said Kemp. For people who support this data sharing, they might think it provides a false security by health enforcement (contact tracing) or safety in schools (zero COVID mitigation measures). Those who are apathetic might even think this personally identifying information has always been shared. But in reality, the state notifying the public that a named person is unvaccinated only serves to make the person a target. It does not “guide local response” in any responsible way. The unvaccinated are not disease carriers, and the vaccinated are not immune to disease. This article illustrates that the state government officials who make these decisions are not morally guided people, not genuinely concerned about public health and safety, and not held accountable for violating state and federal law to reach their goal of zero exemptions. If this Executive Order remains unchallenged in the courts for illegal data sharing, we can expect that employers and state agencies will be under the same reporting requirements and coercive tactics in the near future which will threaten employment and benefits for those who have exemptions or are bringing down the 95% compliance rate for any given public or private entity.

View Details

The months of fiery race riots of 2020 revealed an unholy fire in the minds of many Americans—Americans who no longer believed in America, but wanted to burn it down. They have not gone away. Many hold high office and their ideas are part of the curricula of state schools. To counter this unholy fire, let us consider what America is truly about. The American Creed America is as much a set of principles as it is a place. There is a reason why the ill-fated but heroic demonstrators at China’s Tiananmen Square in 1989 raised American flags. We will thus speak of the American creed. Americans are not catechized into this creed in the formal manner done by a church (although we need that). However, America has a creed of a certain kind. It has been put in several ways, but essentially states that: 1. America is a republic, affirming that government only legitimately constituted upon “the consent of the governed.” 2. America recognizes the potential and weaknesses of human nature, so it does not concentrate power in any single branch of government. 3. America affirms and promotes religious and political freedom, equality, and opportunity. 4. America allows for and encourages upward mobility through individual initiative—the “rags to riches” story or attaining “the American dream”—not through state action. 5. America is a beacon for the nations, or a “city set on a hill,” as Cotton Mather said in a famous sermon. We are a sacred trust between God and “we the people.” 6. America endeavors to honor and hold true to its founding documents. Thus, calling something “unconstitutional” is a reproach. 7. America is a place where moral and political reform is possible within the founding ideals and without violence. 8. America is a land that welcomes legal immigrants who want to become Americans and find a better life. The creed is shaped by our founding documents—the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution—as well as by salient aspects of our history, such as the Revolutionary War (freedom from England), the Civil War (freedom for African Americans), World War II (the victory over fascism), and the Cold War (the victory over Communism).

America as a nation began in 1776, but long before that, settlers came with a mission to the New World—such as those on board the Mayflower, which arrived in 1620. Before arriving, most of the male passengers signed the Mayflower Compact, which captures the American spirit of fearing God and wanting

to covenant… into a civil body politic; for our better ordering, and… hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony.

The American creed has freedom or liberty for its backbone, but not license. It is a freedom ordered by law and guided by conscience. It is freedom from tyranny and freedom for virtue. This is a creed to live up to, not an excuse to fail. It allows us to look at America’s failings—whether its treatment of Native Americans, African Americans, women, etc.—with neither excuse nor defeatism. It is no accident that in his 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech, Martin Luther King Jr. called for America to “rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’ ” America and Religious Belief While America is not a Christian nation by official creed, it has been a God-fearing nation informed by, at its best, a Christian conscience. The American form of civil government is unlike other forms of civil government because it is essentially covenantal in its origin and constitution. A covenant, in the theological sense, is more than a contract. A covenant is made with a sense of honor and obligation before a transcendent reality. It stipulates a binding moral relationship among the people of the covenant who consent to it. A contract, by comparison, is a contingent arrangement made between parties for mutual financial benefit. It is a business transaction, not a sacred trust or moral responsibility.

The Founders articulated a covenant by declaring the United States’ moral right, under God, to separate from England and to begin a new nation, which would secure God-given rights through government. Its inspiration was, ironically, the traditions of liberty developed in England over centuries. As Winston Churchill said, “The Declaration of Independence is not only an American document. It follows on the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights as the third great title-deed in which the liberties of the English-speaking people are founded.” It is a republic in that its government is directed by the will of the people according to set principles and procedures, as opposed to any one person or one class of elites controlling the nation. The Declaration of Independence rejected not only the king’s right over his colony, but the divine right of kings in favor of a republican government. Consider the majestic Preamble to the Constitution, which is made by “we the people,” not by any sovereign.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

America fought for its freedom from England and declared its distinctive identity in the Declaration (the why of America) and later through the Constitution (the how of America). Just as the Hebrew republic could fail through disobedience to God, the American republic could be lost through the negligence of its citizens. When Elizabeth Willing Powel asked Benjamin Franklin what the Constitutional Congress of 1787 had given America, he replied to this politically savvy woman, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” In a letter dated January 9, 1790, George Washington wrote, “The establishment of our new Government seemed to be the last great experiment, for promoting human happiness, by reasonable compact, in civil Society.” It was a well-conceived, though imperfect, experiment—one that could be improved upon or that could fail entirely.

Abraham Lincoln reflected on his place in the meaning of America in light of his reading of a book about George Washington and the Revolutionary War. “I shall be most happy indeed if I shall be a humble instrument in the hands of the Almighty, and of this, his almost chosen people, for perpetuating the object of that great struggle.”

Consider Lincoln’s lapidary phrase— “his almost chosen people.” America was not the new Israel, but it was a new nation with a self-reflective creed which began with a Declaration. In 1862, Lincoln sent a message to members of congress encouraging them to prevail in preserving the Union. He said, “We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth.” The Great Seal of America indicates this sense of call and destiny as well. The first act of Congress after the signing of the Declaration of Independence was to create a Great Seal that would, through image and words, distill the essence of the nation. On it was written Annuit Coeptis, which means “undertaking favored by Providence.” Below that was written Novus Ordo Seclorum, which means “a new order of the ages.” Patriotism A qualified patriotism is in order for the common good, given the good of the American Creed and in the providence of God. The Lord placed us where we are for a reason: as actors who shape history (Acts 17:26–27). We live in nations, but the nation is a poor excuse for the church, since it alone has received the promise of Jesus Christ that “the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18). No nation is eternally secure before a holy God (Isaiah 40:15–17) but seeking the welfare of one’s country and appreciating its unique benefits is the measure of wisdom (Jeremiah 29:1–7; Matthew 5:16–18). That is what I mean by “qualified patriotism.”

The notion of “My country, right or wrong” is wrong. A patriot in this sense thinks their nation has a messianic role in world history. However, to recognize that America has a unique and salutary role in the world, given its natural resources, beauty, history, and creed, need not be idolatrous. The American system lays a strong foundation for preserving liberty, ensuring basic rights, and allowing for constructive change in national life. Appreciation for America as a nation and a commitment to American ideals is commendable and does not require that anyone turn a blind eye to America’s racial sins such as slavery and Jim Crow. Whatever injustices still exist—racial or otherwise—are best addressed by the best of the American creed and its founding documents, not by condemning it all and trying to burn it down.

This essay is excerpted from Fire in the Streets: How You Can Confidently Respond to Incendiary Cultural Topics (Salem Books, 2022).

View Details

The Student Loan Forgiveness Program is purposely misnamed.

Consider: the student received money and signed a note indicating their promise to repay. Under Biden’s give-away program, the student will not have to pay the money back. Their debt will be forgiven.

Money changed hands. The student spent it. So, who will pay for the money lent? We taxpayers will. The SLFOP is a debt transfer program. Biden just transferred up to a trillion dollars to all taxpayers, according to economist Brian Westbury’s estimate of the true cost.

This is a transfer of debt from a person who took the money and benefitted from the money to taxpayers who received no benefit. We pay through future taxes.

This act, in itself, is morally reprehensible. It clearly articulates the irrational “thinking” of the Left. They have absolutely no problem taking, through taxation, from a person who earned property and giving that property to the undeserving.

The left believes with an intensity unknown to rational people, that government control is proper and correct. The Left’s action goes against the Natural Law defined in our Declaration: the inalienable rights to life, liberty and the ownership of property.

The other moral argument: The student took the money in the form of a loan and obligated themselves to pay it back. When the government edicts that they don’t have to pay their obligation, like any handout, it demoralizes the borrower because they are incapable of meeting their obligations. The student borrower benefited, but in allowing another to pay their debt, they shirk their responsibility. This is catastrophic for the soul.

What is seen is the short-term forgiveness of debt. What is not seen is the defeatist effect on the victim’s psyche. They are deemed unworthy. So, far from helping the student, the Lefts “generosity” destroys them. These are the unintended consequences of the philosophy of victimhood.

Rights always come with Responsibility. They are inseparable. If we have a right to life, we also have a responsibility to protect our life. If we have liberty, it is our responsibility to protect liberty. Same with property.

Don’t be misled by the collusion between the Left, MSM and Academia. They are a minority among us. We the people have the right, and responsibility, to stand against their dangerous ideology.

View Details

My second oldest son thrust us into the world of public school IEPs. He was labeled both “highly gifted” and “special needs” half-way through second grade at our neighborhood elementary school. The principal, who knew our family very well from my time serving on the PTA, suggested we consider homeschooling him. That was a very rare educational choice back in the mid-1990’s. She encouraged my late-husband and I that “homeschooling would be good for him” due to its inherent one-on-one nature. She recommended we investigate home-based education then come back in a year to follow-up on his IEP.

Knowing nothing about homeschooling, how to educate a “twice exceptional” child, and not yet having the internet easily accessible, we purchased some resources at our local bookstore and jumped into a totally unknown future. Despite our lack of educational training and limited understanding of how to homeschool, our efforts paid off when his IEP was closed out by the school the following year due to his overall academic improvement. With him as our home-education guinea pig, we went on to eventually homeschool eight more of our children. He is now a happily married family man. Before he became a highly successful entrepreneur, after home high school he earned — with honors — both a Bachelor of Science in Industrial Design and a Master of Business Administration in Marketing.

Is your student’s existing IEP holding you back from considering homeschooling? Let me encourage you that if we could do it, you can, too! Even if your child does not have an IEP, homeschooling works well for all children regardless of their learning strengths and weaknesses. Home education can be successfully accomplished by any parent who chooses to do so, whether tag-teaming as a married couple, alone as a single parent (I was widowed with five children still in homeschool for nine more years), or a working parent (I was that, too). Here are basic reasons why I believe homeschooling can provide an effective education for your child: 1. A family works out their own convenient daily routine, not fitting into a mandatory schedule. 2. Enrichment activities like art, music, and nature walks complete a well-rounded school day. 3. Fewer distractions allow for greater focus on what is being learned. 4. Grocery shopping, medical appointments, and other life needs integrate into holistic learning. 5. Hands-on, small group experiences in other subjects with siblings or friends create a fun, social environment where learning retention is higher compared to classroom reading or lecturing. 6. Legally, you can withdraw a child from a public school where he/she has an open IEP. 7. Mom or dad teaching their children at home means less bullying and increased safety. 8. One-on-one tutorials for math and English can help both gifted and struggling learners advance. 9. Schoolwork time is reduced to four hours per day, allowing for other meaningful activities. 10. Special needs services are available through private therapies you contract directly for. 11. Specific family practices such as diet restrictions and faith can be incorporated. 12. Time can be consciously spent on developing close and respectful family relationships. 13. With limited structure, the home environment can be less chaotic and stressful.

Families new to homeschooling quickly discover the benefit of a lifestyle that is enjoyable and promotes life-long learning. Moms and dads can both be involved with teaching in their subjects of interest. In our family’s homeschool on our rural Colorado farm, my husband helped our children learn animal husbandry, auto mechanics, electricity, home remodeling, horsemanship, and shooting sports. He also was in-charge of bedtime preparation with read-aloud literature and goodnight prayers. My domain with our children was daily schoolwork, gardening, home economics and management. In addition to job-sharing in our home businesses, we both enjoyed helping our children with their 4H projects and playing recreational sports after lunch or supper. These relationship-based activities were a blessing to all of us, even more so for our children with learning disability labels.

Further considerations for you to begin a positive homeschool experience include: * Be an encouraging, joy-filled teacher with at least seven compliments to one correction. * Be consistent — “slow and steady wins the race”. * Begin at their ability level, not their ‘grade’ level, particularly with gifted or struggling students. * Discover your child’s struggles and gifts then search out curriculum based on their learning style(s) to help them progress in their weak areas and soar in their strengths. * For struggling students, be realistic with expectations and build confidence by starting simply. * Start slowly, adding in subjects and activities over time, leaving wide margins for trial and error. * Try short teaching times interspersed with exercise, hands-on learning, and a snack with water. * Use alternative evaluation methods for a more accurate snapshot of your child’s abilities versus only what standardized testing examines. * Your child’s current IEP (or standardized test or report card) becomes the baseline to go up from.

Yes, there are some hard homeschool days when even the most loving and patient parent wants to give up. I experienced many through the years! On those days I recommend you close the books, hit the ice cream shop, and start over again the next morning. The days are often long but the years do fly by. Homeschooling is well worth the consideration regardless of your student’s current situation. An unexpected outcome I currently enjoy is that my now adult children became my best friends and a vital part of my inner circle. Our homeschool journey was one of the grandest adventures of our mutual lifetimes and well worth any sacrifices as a family or individuals we had to make along the way.

Need more information about homeschooling in general or for an IEP student? I hope you will take time to check out these resources online:

https://chec.org/intro https://chec.org/faq https://chec.org/how-to-homeschool-in-colorado/unique-learners/ https://chec.org/resources/guidebook/ https://chec.org/tag/unique-learners-column/ https://homeschoolsummits.com/ https://hslda.org/teaching-my-kids/special-needs https://spedhomeschool.com/

View Details

Today everyday American parents and teachers look to their federal and state departments of education to determine what is going to be taught in public schools. Today, politicians of left and right alike have stakeholder meetings regarding curriculum. There is a scary stranglehold on our American education system and it is woke and void of civic knowledge and real-life application; it is void of parents, intentional educators and selfless intent. The past several years have seen the pendulum swing sharply to the right when it comes to public education. School boards across America have been flipping and parents have been keeping closer tabs on the curriculum taught their children. Governor Ron DeSantis banned critical race theory in Florida and many others have been championing the same in other cities, states and school boards. Wokeness has been creeping into our education for decades and we are just now starting to reap the terrible rewards that it brings. But merely being against the woke and blatantly racist teachings is not enough, we as conservatives also need to have a vision of what we want public schools to teach. I have read that we need to get back to “readin’, writin, and arithmetic,” but is that truly all we want schools to teach? Do we want our schools to have a more classical education and what comes with that? When it comes to government force, what should schools teach?

The core of reading, writing and arithmetic is basic communication skills and math. While I understand the reaction to pull schools back from their “progressive” education, I do not necessarily agree that we should pull that far back. There is a plethora of subjects that many could benefit from. High schools have largely turned into higher education feeder schools and have turned away from the model of preparing kids to become productive additions to society. If kids are going to be forced to attend school, why can’t basic life skills be taught so they can thrive when they reach adult society? We should be teaching them how to budget, file taxes, write a business plan, create resumes, cook, clean, how to do the laundry, and basic workplace etiquette. Teaching personal responsibility can only help our society and create a benefit to everyone.

But there is also a place beyond preparing children for life that is beneficial: science, foreign languages, technology, sports and physical education. The list is not exhaustive and certainly the curriculum would need much more extensive vetting, but these subjects can be very useful. Giving parents and kids the opportunity to learn these subjects should be offered (but not required). Would it be beneficial for kids to learn a different language and be exposed to different cultures? For some, of course! For others who struggle with just learning English (i before e is clearly not a rule if it is broken so often), of course not! For some, learning about biology would be incredibly helpful, for most trigonometry might not be. While basic math is necessary, even I, as an engineer and math geek, don’t use Algebra every day and can see how some do not need to take it. With all this flexibility, it is worth inputting that having the ability to try different trades, to get a head start on a career right out of high school, seems like a prudent and wise option for kids. Why shouldn’t they be able to try different vocations, learn of the different careers available, shadow a professional for a day and start to see what they are adept to? College is not and should not be for everyone and high schools need to better equip those who choose not to go to college.

What about those who say we need to offer a more classical education and a return to the “great books” and Western history? The great problem with classical education is it requires unbiased, excellent teachers. Unbiased because to teach a student how to think and how to learn, students must be allowed to question and explore principles and ideas. We have clearly seen a lack of unbiased teachers through the pandemic, so would we want these teachers passing on their biases to students? Would reading Shakespeare, Plato’s Republic, Keats and Dickens truly be of help when given through the lens of a virtue signaling leftist ideology? If we are to give our children a classical education, then we have to acknowledge that there is a trust between the educator and the parent; that the educator will be passing on morality and virtue onto the kids. Are you ok with public schools teaching morality? What virtues should be forced onto children by the government?

At the end of the day, I can truthfully tell you that my situation may be different than yours. My wife and I will have a different priority on different educational standards, and we will enroll our children accordingly. That should be the brilliance of the free market system: schools who provide the most benefit to children will be in the highest demand. Teachers who provide the most to their students should be compensated accordingly. But for me to sit here and write what the government should force kids to learn would be hypocritical to all the principles I hold so dear. The government should not force any educational material on our children that the parents do not consent to. I do believe that our country will not last without the most basic of civic knowledge of our government, and we have been living in the generations that prove this is the case. I trust the parents to decide whether schools need to offer more trade programs or higher education opportunities. I trust parents to decide whether a school should offer classical education or not. This requires schools be open and transparent about the curriculum offered, and that parents treat educators with respect and quit acting as if their children can do no wrong. This requires the government to take a step back and for parents to remember that the education of their child is their responsibility. This requires all of America to wake up and realize the stakeholders in the education system are not politicians or bureaucrats, but rather parents, teachers and the children.

View Details

Cherry Creek School District has School-Based, Community Health Care Centers, and We Have Questions

This year, Cherry Creek School District (CCSD) has opened two school-based, community health care centers. One is located on the Overland High School campus, and the other is on the Horizon Middle School property. Both these schools and health care centers are in lower income neighborhoods. The rationale behind creating these clinics is to serve CCSD students who need health care during school, so their parents don’t need to take time off of work to take them to their doctor. They were created to provide quality and equitable healthcare and offer the opportunity for patients to self-advocate for their own health and wellness in a way that is racially and culturally responsive and equitable, according the CCSD website. Michelle Weinraub, Director of Health Services for CCSD is also quoted, “According to the CDC, racism is a serious threat to public health … These centers will remove barriers, provide direct access to quality care, and help address these disparities.” The clinics were also created to serve the community members who live near Overland and Horizon who may not have access to free health care, not just students and their families. However, a quick google search reveals there are free health clinics within walking distance of each school.

The services provided at these clinics are for all ages, and they include: behavioral management services, chronic disease management, dental screenings, developmental screenings, immunizations, minor injuries, newborn care and well child checks, physicals, sick visits, sports physicals, and sexual and reproductive health and education.

These clinics are run by providers hired by STRIDE, a health care company that helped CCSD during the pandemic with testing and vaccine distribution and has been a partner with CCSD since 2018. STRIDE provides medical staff, supplies, health education and counseling for students and families, and CCSD provides architectural and design implementation, health education, marketing support, tech and health services support and meaningful community connections.

We, at the Cherry Creek Parent Advocacy Network (CCPAN), have gathered questions from parents about these health care centers. We are worried about how the new legislation around mental and reproductive health will affect our children if they are treated at these centers. Since children ages 12 and above do not require parental consent to receive mental health care, who is accountable if the treatment goes awry? Since minor girls can receive an abortion without parental consent, what type of “reproductive education” will they receive at the clinics, and what if that education does not represent the values of that minor’s family? How are parents supposed to adequately care for their children if they aren’t aware to look for side effects or possible adverse reactions from treatments given without their consent and knowledge? And again, who is responsible for continued care and follow up if the parents have not consented to treatment, and there are resulting complications? Could parents be accused of neglect?

We are also concerned about safety of our students. If the greater community is invited to these school-based clinics for free health care, who is responsible for the safety of our children attending the high schools and middle schools on that shared property?

Parents have many questions regarding the financing of the clinics. Since the clinics are free to those who cannot afford medical care, who is covering their expenses? Will the financial reports be available to the public and be under the same Sunshine Law rules as CCSD finances? At the June CCSD Board of Education (BOE) meeting, the Chief Financial Officer and Operations Officer, Scott Smith presented his report on the CCSD 2022 budget. During his presentation, Mr. Smith remarked several times that CCSD requires more funding from the state in order to properly finance school programs and operations. Moments later during the budget presentations, Mr. Smith also announced that CCSD would be using their “own money” (as opposed to adding a bond issue to the ballot) to fund the building of a third STRIDE community, school-based health care center at Smoky Hill High School.

Somehow, in a district where less than 50% of its students are performing at academic proficiency levels, CCSD has enough money to build a third health care clinic, but not enough money for basic programs and operations. We are confused by the focus on health care vs academics. We rely on our schools to teach our children the necessary academic content for success, so why is CCSD offering free well baby visits and dental care to the community rather than offering our students the necessary tutoring and academic support to help our students thrive in this post-pandemic environment?

The CCPAN leadership has requested a meeting with Michelle Weinraub, CCSD Chief Health Officer, to address these questions. We have been denied a meeting, but Ms. Weinraub has agreed to answer our questions in writing. We have submitted the above questions and more via email, and we are waiting on a response. When we receive a response, we will post it on our website; www.cherrycreekparents.org. Readers are welcome to subscribe to receive regular information about CCSD and learn how to be involved. We need families to become more actively involved in advocating for their students if we want to see needed changes in our district. Please join us!

View Details

A Jewish farmer in the old country goes to the town rabbi and complains that his house is too small. The farmer can’t stand all the noise at home of the children playing and screaming and his wife cooking, cleaning, and singing, while taking care of the household.

The rabbi tells the farmer to bring his chickens to live in the house with him. The farmer is baffled, but he does it. The next day, the farmer goes back to the rabbi to complain that the situation is worse. The rabbi tells him to bring his goat into his house. The farmer does and things get even worse. The third day the farmer goes back to the rabbi and complains things are terrible and the noise continues all night. The rabbi insists the farmer bring his cow into the house. The farmer does, and now the farmer is beside himself. This is not working. The noise is unbearable, so the farmer goes back to the rabbi to complain. Finally, the rabbi tells the farmer to return all the animals to the yard. The farmer does as he is told. The next day the farmer returns to the rabbi to report that life is great, and he slept better than he can ever remember.

The point of the story is we should focus on the gifts we have instead of what we want. And most importantly, things can get worse. Instead of complaining the farmer could be thankful that he had a house, small that it may be. The farmer could have looked at his screaming children and thought,” I am lucky to have healthy and happy children playing loudly.” The farmer could have been more grateful that he had a wife who cheerfully made clanking noises with her pots and pans and cooked wonderful meals for him and his children. The farmer could have been more grateful that his wife sang while she did her household cleaning and was happy to do so to support her family. The farmer could have been more grateful to open his eyes every morning and get to live another day.

This story can be helpful in business as we tend to dread Monday mornings and the beginning of the work week. In a previous job my co-workers could not wait for the start of the weekend and eagerly welcomed Friday. They thought I was crazy when I told them I couldn’t wait for Mondays since I was grateful to have a job I enjoyed. Of all the mementos I have collected in forty years of being in business, I cherish the Thank You cards that customers and industry friends have sent me. I started working in my father’s business as a manufacturer’s representative selling florist supplies. My father taught and instilled in me a work ethic that would earn me praise from customers when I would stock their shelves, organize their back stock, take an inventory, attend their trade shows and help the customer promote and sell what they had purchased from me to their end user.

Early in my career, I would receive “Thank You” cards from customers for helping them with their success. My father was amazed. In his many years of working with these same customers he would rarely get a “Thank You,” let alone a card. He said to me, “Keep those cards in a file and bring them out and reread them when things aren’t going so well. It will remind you of your past successes.” My father was right. I have had some rough spots in my business career and taking those “Thank You” cards out to read from time to time reminds me how lucky I am to have customers that would take the time to send a heartfelt acknowledgment of gratitude.

My father was grateful to have established customers and help them make a profit so he could as well. Overtime, this created a mutually benefitted trust for their business interactions. I, too, was thankful for these relationships, the recognition by those customers that took the time to write their gratitude down on a piece of paper and affix a stamp and mail it to me was an affirmation that made the extra efforts worthwhile and satisfying to do.

Think about all the little things people do for you every day without expecting any reward. A stranger opens a door for you. Another driver lets you edge out of a driveway allowing you to enter into traffic. A pedestrian picks up a piece of trash in front of your business and throws it in the can even though they did not drop it. These little acts of civility deserve our thanks. They are reminders of how one should act in public and with each other. I am thankful I was taught manners and to be polite.

You might not remember all the times your parent told you to say, “Thank You” when someone did something nice for you. Your parents had to repeat this over and over to you until it became a habit. The habit was expeditated when you didn’t say “Thank You” and you received a whack on top of your head for not saying it automatically. The point being, it took the constant reminder by your parents to say “Thank You” for you to get it and make it routine. You may have experienced this with your own children. It takes practice.

When my wife sends a gift to one of our grandchildren for their birthday, the reward she receives back is the illegible writing of a “Thank You” card. These treasures are cherished as if they are to be saved in a safety deposit box. A civil society should cherish the timeless aspect of such etiquette which needs to be taught, nurtured, and reinforced. Stand out of the crowd by being a writer of “Thank You” cards. Write one a day to someone you care about or someone you do business with. Let others receive your gratitude and you will solidify your relationships and make the receiver of your gratitude feel great.

“Thank You” for reading my essay.

View Details

Recently, a senior friend told me her Colorado doctor not only asked her if she had a will but asked for a copy of it. This friend was already skeptical of how doctors share immunization records with state government databases (CIIS) and state health information exchanges (CORHIO) for paid subscribers. She wisely did not provide a copy of her will. (The “P” in HIPAA stands for Portability, not Privacy). I informed her about the most profitable criminal scheme aimed at our elders that starts with doctors as screeners of valuable estates and then declaring the patient mentally incompetent and unable to manage his/her own estate. A doctor asking for a copy of a will is a red flag for exploitation of seniors. Guardianship Fraud This elder asset theft is best portrayed in the movie “I Care A Lot.” Although the movie is not a true story, it was based on actual criminal activity reported in the news. The scheme involves a network of organized crime posing as helpful, caring people. First, a doctor screens patients for considerable estates and usually targets seniors without a spouse or adult children and declares the wealthy patient mentally incompetent. Next, the doctor refers the patient’s file to a professional guardian, without the patient’s consent or knowledge. The guardian convinces a colluding judge to appoint him or her as the legal guardian, then relocates the patient to a long-term care facility, and swiftly sells off the possessions of the patient to pay for the facility fees and the guardian’s “services.” Lastly, an administrator at the long-term care facility works in collusion to drug the uncooperative patient and limit the patient’s communications and visitors. The patient is robbed of both wealth and autonomy, without access to money and without choices in medical care. The guardian makes all decisions for the ward, without any disclosures to the family, while racketeering with the others in the network.

One estimate reports that over $273 billion in assets are controlled by guardians in the United States. The Victims and the Guardians Esquire reported on one real-life guardianship victim and how it is worse than prison: In a report on legal guardianship by The New York Times, Phyllis Funke, a 77-year-old retired journalist with a master’s degree, a pilot’s license, and several hundred thousand dollars in investments, spoke about how desolate her life became after being declared an “incapacitated person” by the state of New York.

“I’ve been bullied, blackmailed and stripped of the things I need to live, including my money,” Funke said. “Everything has been taken away from me. I have no access to my bank accounts. I don’t have the money to pay for the medications that I’m prescribed. I don’t get mail. I can’t choose my own doctors.”

Funke went on to compare her situation to incarceration, though she then walked that statement back, saying, “It’s worse than incarceration. At least in prison you have rights.” Professional guardians are only required to attend a one-day certification, which does not include a background check. These guardians will liquidate the assets of the patient as quickly as possible in over-priced care and while billing hourly service fees for hundreds of dollars, and later relocate the patient to low quality nursing homes with government funds when the patient’s assets are drained. The guardians also bill the patient for the legal fees.

In 2018, April Parks of Nevada was charged and later convicted of elder exploitation as a guardian for 400 wards. A county guardian commissioner awarded Parks a ward on average once a week for years, and a judge consistently disqualified family members as guardians with unsubstantiated accusations of being unsuitable, neglectful, drug addicts, gamblers, and exploiters. The laws in Nevada allowed any professionally licensed guardian to file an Ex Parte motion for temporary guardianship, meaning they did not even have to serve their motion on the adult they wished to be guardian over, nor their family. All that was needed was verification from a physician that the proposed ward was mentally or physically incapable of handling their affairs.

What Ms. Parks had going was a Physicians Assistant who would sign off on reports saying the elderly person was incompetent and not well enough to even appear at the hearing. Then, the motion would claim the elderly person’s family was either out of state or incompetent to serve due to drug/alcohol problems.

So, she’d get appointed as a temporary guardian. Then she’d move the person to an assisted living facility, where they’d be heavily medicated.

After this, Ms. Parks would apply for full guardianship, knowing the court had a distrust of family members serving as guardians and taking their parents’ money. Then, ironically, she’d drain their bank accounts to pay her crazy invoices, often billing for 25 hours of services in 1 day. She’d sell their property and generally ruin them. If you are over 60, read the full-length article “How the Elderly Lose their Rights” with details from the victims and their families on how April Parks, a judge, and medical professionals ran this guardian fraud operation. To add insult to injury, family members who were justifiable outraged were accused of being unstable, and removed from court rooms, and sometimes arrested for trespassing at senior care facilities where their parents were held against their will. Ways to Prevent Guardianship Fraud 1. Don’t disclose. Medical personnel and social workers at hospitals and rehabilitation centers were the main source of leads to screen seniors for having a large estate and if the senior had in-state relatives who would intervene. Be guarded about “small talk” about your assets and relatives with seemingly caring people at routine medical appointments. It is best to convey that you have nothing of value but your large extended and involved family! 2. Don’t go alone. The guardians use bully tactics to convince seniors to leave their homes quickly without even a phone call to a friend or relative. The guardian presents a court order, alleges that refusal to cooperate will result in the police coming to arrest them, and gives the false assurance that any misunderstanding will be quickly resolved. In reality, many of the victims were in facilities for 18 months or more. Many victims in facilities died of despair and being over medicated. Do not leave your home out of compliance. Call a relative, friend, attorney, or trusted doctor who can validate your competence. This might be enough deterrent for the perpetrator to move on to find an easier target with less resistance. 3. Don’t let the court decide who represents you. It often takes days for relatives to realize that their parents have been medically kidnapped. When relatives try to become guardians in court, a corrupt judge will dismiss them with false allegations. Family members who live out of state are often disqualified from serving as guardians. The best defense is to appoint a trusted family member as a guardian or medical power of attorney in the event you are incapacitated BEFORE an opportunist guardian requests a court ordered appointment.

Americans Against Abusive Probate Guardianship have identified “hot spots” or cities where guardianship abuse is prevalent with a high number of retirees: Palm Beach, Sarasota, Naples, Albuquerque, and San Antonio. But right here in Colorado, we also have doctors requesting copies of wills. Every senior group should be discussing this fraud and how to implement safeguards.

View Details

In my essay The Pillars of Modern Life, I talked about how we in America are living at the pinnacle of the pinnacle of human existence on this planet. I wrote about how the amazing modern life we enjoy is enabled by three things: limited government, free-market capitalism, and fossil fuels. Philosopher and energy commentator Alex Epstein gives us an in-depth look at just how much our modern world relies on fossil fuels, and how the world needs more fossil fuel development and use.

This book is immensely important and should be read by anyone who is interested not only in continuing to live a comfortable, modern life, but also in helping the billions of “unempowered” people to rise to the levels of living that we take for granted.

The book starts with a note to the readers of his previous book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, published in 2014. Honestly, when I saw that title, I was taken a bit aback – after all, our current culture views fossil fuels as intrinsically bad, and my vision of them was tainted by this at the time. Upon reading the book, however, I realized that there is indeed a strongly moral case for fossil fuels, and this has strongly influenced my thinking on energy, the environment and human flourishing ever since.

If you haven’t yet read The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, I encourage you to do so…after reading Fossil Future. Overview Fossil Future consists of 4 parts divided into 11 chapters. In Part One, Epstein establishes the framework for future discussions throughout the book. He reviews how our “knowledge system” (see definition below) ignores the massive and unique benefits we derive from fossil fuels and focuses on the “catastrophic” side effects of using fossil fuels.

In the chapter on the “anti-impact framework” he discusses how our knowledge system is operating on a framework that holds zero human impact on the Earth as the highest moral value. Our moral values define the frameworks through which we view the world, how we evaluate choices and make decisions. We all have a moral framework, but we are not taught to think about them.

In answering the question of why our mainstream knowledge system consistently ignores the benefits of fossil fuels while exaggerating the side effects, Epstein concludes that the mainstream knowledge system is operating on a framework whose “…primary moral goal is anti-human.1 Let me repeat that: anti-human, or as I’ve stated elsewhere: Anti-Life.

The distinguishing characteristic of the anti-impact framework is opposition to anything that humans do that impacts nature. The believers in this framework object to fossil fuels because of CO2 emissions. They object to large-scale hydroelectric because it interferes with free-flowing rivers. They object to nuclear power because of radiation and long-term waste. They even object to solar and wind because of the significant impacts that the mining, land use and harm to various species involved with wind and solar have on nature.

The dominant view in our society today is a “…false assumption that leads anyone holding it to expect that all forms of significant impact on nature will inevitably be self-destructive”. Epstein calls this the “delicate nurturer” assumption. “The delicate nurturer assumption is the assumption that Earth, absent human impact, exists in an optimal, nurturing “delicate balance” that is as stable, sufficient, and safe as we can hope to expect.”2

The bottom line is, our dominant knowledge system assumes that any human impacts on the Earth are ultimately harmful, and that the Earth, without our being here, would be a safe, nurturing place. This knowledge system holds that any human impacts on the Earth are intrinsically immoral – hence their opposition to development, energy use and other ways we use our environment.

As Epstein demonstrates throughout the book, our dominant knowledge system is exactly 180 degrees wrong when it comes to fossil fuels and the climate impacts of rising CO2.

In Part Two – Benefits, Epstein goes on to catalog at length the benefits of fossil fuels to our modern way of life.

Imagine that you are dropped in the middle of nowhere – a desert, a mountain range, a prairie, a tropical island. With only the labor that you yourself using your body can produce, and in the absence of fossil fuels or any other modern technologies, how long do you think you would live, and how much of your time would be taken up in securing life’s bare essentials? This thought experiment should be enough to put the “delicate nurturer” assumption to rest once and for all. Except in certain places at certain times, Earth is largely hostile to unassisted human life, and fossil fuels make our world more livable in countless ways.

Chapter Four lists many of the ways that fossil fuels – which he categorizes as “ultra-cost-effective, on-demand, versatile, global-scale energy” – transform our world from unlivable to very livable.

Starting with a review of human weakness on a “naturally deficient and dangerous planet”, Epstein analyzes how human life has exponentially improved using a variety of metrics including life expectancy, GDP, and population.

Key sections of this chapter include a review of “Humanity’s Unprecedented, Fossil-Fueled Productivity and Progress”, and how fossil fuels: * Power ultra-cost-effective machine labor, which frees up human mental labor, * Allows for super-specialization and rapid innovation, * Provides for an unnaturally nourishing world, * An unnaturally safe world through improved shelter, sanitation and health care.

The later part of the chapter reviews how the benefits of fossil fuels – ignored by the mainstream knowledge system – completely overwhelm the side-effects.

Part Two is rounded out by a discussion of the unique and expanding cost-effectiveness of fossil fuels including the “secret sauce” that makes fossil fuels so impactful to our modern way of living, followed by an extensive discussion of the realities of alternative energy sources – including solar and wind – as opposed to the distortions and lies about them.

In Part Three Epstein talks about the climate side effects of fossil fuels. One thing that stands out is that he totally concedes that fossil fuels contribute to rising CO2 levels and “climate change”. He freely states up front that he is not a “climate denier”. (By contrast, I believe that the Earth’s climate is changing, but that the change is due to natural causes, and that human impacts are only a minor factor.)

In Chapter Seven Epstein discusses how our modern “empowered” world uses fossil fuels to establish “climate mastery” – using fossil fuels to create strong, insulated structures, heating machines for when it’s cold and cooling machines for when it’s hot.

He also talks about how more historical climate deaths over time have been attributed to cold, not heat, and how warming primarily affects the already colder parts of the planet, not the planet as a whole.

Consider the City of Chicago: “For example, a 2 ℉ warming in a place like Chicago, with a hundred-plus-degree range of temperatures during the year, doesn’t mean that Chicago is now “warm”. It means that, if the warming were uniformly distributed, the city’s temperature range would go from a climate of -20 ℉ to 95 ℉ to a climate of -18 ℉ to 97 ℉.”3

One of the key ideas here is that as fossil fuel use has increased over the last century, climate disaster deaths have plummeted – quite dramatically. That is what he means by “climate mastery”.

Through this chapter, Epstein discusses various climate-related disasters through recent history, and how such death tolls are unimaginable in today’s world.

In chapters Eight and Nine, Epstein discusses “systemic climate distortion” and the full context of rising CO2 levels. I’ve summarized some points from these chapters below. Throughout the book, Epstein documents his assertions with exhaustive and thorough references. Needless to say, he compels us to think about climate, CO2 and the history of our planet in completely different ways than we’ve been taught by the mainstream knowledge system.

The final two chapters in Part Four focus on how energy freedom is related to overall freedom, and governments that fulfill their proper roles: protecting private property rights and enforcing contracts. Alex Epstein, as a former fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute, is very conversant about the issues of freedom and the proper role of government, and he discusses these at length in the penultimate chapter.

In the final chapter, Epstein discusses why he’s optimistic about the future, despite overwhelming odds, and how to frame the positive, human flourishing framework in a convincing, non-confrontational way. He encourages his readers to share his work widely, which I am attempting to do with this book review. Key Takeaways and Definitions One thing that I really like about Alex Epstein’s writing is that he is a very clear thinker. He writes what he wants to convey, then he proceeds to support it. His writing style follows this clarity and is very easy to follow and to read.

Here I will identify some key takeaways and definitions, because I think doing so will illustrate some of the most powerful points in this book.

Knowledge System – Epstein notes that “Whenever we hear about what the “experts” think, we need to keep in mind that most of us have no direct access to what most expert researchers in a field think. We are being told what experts think through a system of institutions and people that performs four crucial functions: (1) engage in expert research about the world, (2) synthesize the essentials from expert research, (3) disseminate essential expert knowledge to the rest of us, and (4) help us evaluate what actions to take on the basis of expert knowledge.”4

After defining this framework, Epstein discusses what makes up each part and how each can (and does) go wrong.

On the Anti-Impact Framework: “…eliminating human impact, not advancing human flourishing, is the primary moral goal driving our knowledge system in the realm of energy – and, as we will see, in many other areas.

Let’s be clear: eliminating human impact is an anti-human moral goal.

Human beings survive and flourish by impacting nature. To live at anywhere near our current level, we need to massively transform – impact – nature.”5

The “Human Flourishing” Framework: “The fundamental principle of the human flourishing framework is that advancing human flourishing should be our primary moral goal and therefore our standard of evaluation. When we evaluate continuing fossil fuel use, including both its benefits and its side-effects, our standard should be advancing human flourishing.”6

The Empowered World: About 1.5 billion people who use at least 1/3rd electricity as the average American. The U.S., Canada and Western Europe are primarily the “empowered world”.

The Unempowered World: The over 3 billion people who use almost no energy, including electricity. According to energy expert Robert Bryce, the average person in the unempowered world uses less electricity than a typical American refrigerator.”7 Of these 3 billion people, almost 800 million, or 2.4 times the number of people who live in the United States, are classified by the International Energy Agency (IEA) as having no access to electricity. 7 About 2.4 billion people, mostly in the unempowered world, use mostly wood and animal waste to cook and heat their homes.7 (Can you imagine?)

CO2, Average Temperatures, and History: I did not know this, but in our current era, global CO2 levels and temperatures are far lower than they have been throughout most of history.8

“Since 1850, all of our fossil-fueled civilization has increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from just under 0.03 percent – 280 parts per million – to just over 0.04 percent – 420 parts per million.

By many estimates the height of CO2 levels was above 6,000 parts per million [or 0.6 percent] – almost fifteen times today’s level.”9 [Emphasis mine. Additional calculation mine]

In other words, we are currently near the estimated lows for both temperatures and CO2 levels and if it were any colder we’d be in an ice age. Our planet has gone through multiple cooling and warming cycles before now, all in the absence of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions. As Epstein says: “…there are enormous historical changes in climate, including shifts in CO2 and temperature – often going in opposite directions – demonstrating that CO2 is not the overriding driver of climate that it is portrayed as.”9

The fact is, life thrived on Earth at higher CO2 and temperature levels than we have now, so rising CO2 levels is not a harbinger of “climate apocalypse” nor of the end of our civilization as we know it. What does endanger our civilization is the anti-impact framework and the misguided desire to eliminate fossil fuels. Conclusion and Call to Action In Alex Epstein’s words: “Climate emergency” and “climate crisis” are no longer treated as predictions about the future. They are treated as descriptions of the present – even though in the present we are safer from climate than any human population has ever been.

Given that I regard continuing, expanding fossil fuel use as essential to global human flourishing, I regard “net-zero” proposals as apocalyptically as others regard fossil-fueled climate change. Net-zero policy, if actually implemented, would certainly be the most significant act of mass murder since the killings of one hundred million people by communist regimes in the twentieth century – and it would likely be far greater.

Because net-zero policies are so apocalyptic, I believe they will never be implemented consistently. In particular, China, Russia and India have given every indication that they will not adopt such policies.”10 [Emphasis mine]

I agree completely with Epstein’s observations and conclusion above. While he is primarily focused on fossil fuels, I am concerned that our current knowledge system is attacking not just fossil fuels, but all three pillars of modern life. We are in an existential battle for our future.

I urge everyone to read this book, and to engage in being a champion for fossil fuels…and for capitalism and limited government.

As of this writing, the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” (a complete lie) has been passed and is awaiting Joe Biden’s signature. This terrible bill represents another all-out assault on oil and gas companies and will make inflation even worse.

How can you fight back? Register to vote, and then vote all Democrats out of office this coming November. They are manifestly unfit to govern, provably anti-life, and have put our country on a path to disaster.

Stand up and fight for your modern life. Never take it for granted. For the vast majority of us, being in the “empowered world” is an accident of birth. To earn it, we must fight for it.

By Richard D. Turnquist

August 18, 2022

________________________________________________________________

1Epstein, Alex (2022) Fossil Future: Why Human Flourishing Requires More Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas – Not less. Penguin, page 75

2 Ibid, pages 90-91

3 Ibid, page 257

4 Ibid, page 9

5 Ibid, page 80

6 Ibid, page 97

7 Ibid, page 27

8 Ibid, page 322-323

9 Ibid, page 322

Fossil Future: Why Global Human Flourishing Requires More Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas--Not Less

View Details

Education in America Education, noun:

The bringing up, as of a child, instruction; formation of manners. education comprehends all that series of instruction and discipline which is intended to enlighten the understanding, correct the temper, and form the manners and habits of youth, and fit them for usefulness in their future stations. To give children a good education in manners, arts and science, is important; to give them a religious education is indispensable; and an immense responsibility rests on parents and guardians who neglect these duties.

1828 Webster’s Dictionary The founding generation of our country would be astonished and marvel at the innovations that have taken place over the past 250 years. From steam engine trains to motor cars to airplanes to space rockets. From electricity to telegraphs to wired telephones to personal computers to phones on your wrist. And the list could go on and on. But when it comes to education and its development into an industrialized system, the reaction would probably be one of shock and dismay.

The transformation of how Americans educate their children into what we know today as the public education system began with men who desired to bring socialism to our country.[1] As we’ve ushered in the 21st century, it is the United Nations (UN) that provides the vision for the continued development of the education system. Since the mid-twentieth century, the UN has been telling the world that education is a human right for all throughout life.[2] Through the UN Agenda 2030’s Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4)[3], the UN pushes education for sustainable development and global citizenship. Despite its altruistic sounding goals, Agenda 2030 is a roadmap to global socialism.[4] Our children’s hearts and minds are being molded to adapt the beliefs, values, and attitudes that will enable the UN’s vision to become reality. State Standards Though state standards in Colorado began in 1993, it wasn’t until Common Core State Standards (CCSS) hit the scene that standards began to be the driving force behind universalizing education across the nation. Colorado adopted CCSS, which covers math and English language arts, in 2010.[5] Since then, Colorado has adopted additional standards that should be of concern to all parents because of their effect to bring division into the family and to promote a socialist worldview. * Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE): The aim is to sexualize children as young as they can and make what is perverse for older generations, normal.[6] * Social Emotional Learning (SEL): This curriculum teaches things like mindfulness, grit, and resiliency.[7][8] It is also bringing Critical Race Theory (CRT) and socialist constructs into the classroom.[9] Note that bullying and suicide prevention programs heavily tie themselves into SEL. See below how SEL assessment data will be used in the future. * Media Literacy Education (MLE): Teaches children to distinguish between what is true and what is “fake news”. The state recommended resources[10] clearly push one viewpoint, one set of values, and one truth. * Action Civics: The Constitution and Declaration of Independence are taught from a perspective lacking historic rigor with the ultimate goal of making activists for their socialist cause and undermining our founding principles.[11] * Restorative Justice: Turns teachers into psychotherapists who attempt to transform the culture of the classroom rather than bringing discipline and justice.[12] Heavily based in critical theory and social justice.

All these state standards are mandated for every public school in Colorado. Every one of these programs takes time in the school day away from teaching the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic. Other state or federally mandated programs require public schools to hire additional personnel like social workers and counselors whose actions place wedges between children and their parents. Local Control The Colorado Constitution states that school boards “shall have control of instruction in the public schools of their respective districts.”[13] The hope has been that local communities would set the standard of instruction for their students based on their unique community needs. But, with the advent of state and federal standards which are tied to massive amounts of funding, school districts would have to take a pass on gobs of money in order to exercise their authority. Currently, total state funding for school districts ranges from $8,489 to $19,536 per student[14], depending on where you live. Data Collection Connected to those monies are not only standards but assessments and data collection. This legislative session a bill was passed into law to administer the Colorado Universal Preschool Program and move all early childhood programs into the Colorado Department of Early Childhood (CDEC).[15] It gives CDEC the authority to collect data “to monitor early childhood outcomes throughout the state, which must include outcomes in health, including physical, social-emotional, and dental; learning; and overall well-being” with the goal of evaluating “long-term outcomes.”

During the debate on the bill, it became clear that the bill gives the state the authority to begin collecting data on every child beginning at preschool age in the state. It won’t happen right away because they lack the infrastructure or the money for such a program. The most coveted data will come from the SEL programs which are included in every level of education. SEL assesses each student’s beliefs, values, and attitudes and will eventually feed into the destructive Environmental Social and Governance (ESG) scores used to control everyone’s behavior.[16] Government Funded “School Choice” Being able to direct your child’s education is essential if indeed you believe as our founders did that the responsibility and the duty to educate children falls squarely on the shoulders of parents. However, advocates who are pushing for government funding to “follow the students” instead of funding the schools through school choice initiatives are ignoring the clear goals of those driving the education industrial complex. Their goal is to have the government fund all education through public schools and Public Private Partnerships (PPPs), whether it be with private non-profit organizations or families themselves, thereby controlling all forms of education through government regulation.

Currently, parents can choose to educate their children through public schools, private schools, or homeschools. Charter schools are essentially public schools. All the things that make charter schools different and attractive to parents depend on the benevolence of elected officials – state board of education members can grant waivers from standards and legislators have passed laws to give more autonomy in how these schools operate. Private schools are not immune from government regulations. They get pulled into federal mandates when they accept federal grant money through the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).[17] Homeschools can get pulled into government oversight when families choose to participate in part-time public-school programs.

“School choice” advocates would have parents believe government money will bring freedom. They conveniently ignore the fact that accepting government money always brings government control. What Can Parents Do? Bring their children home to educate them. - www.CHEC.org/start

Keep homeschooling free from government funds and control.

Educate themselves and others about the dangers and influences in our American education system. - chec.org/freedom

Work to regain local control of the education system (funding, laws, standards, regulations).

Footnotes: [1] https://archive.org/details/TheUndergroundHistoryOfAmericanEducation_758/page/n1/mode/2up

[2] https://www.unesco.org/en/education

[3] https://en.unesco.org/education2030-sdg4/targets

SDG 4.7 Education for sustainable development and global citizenship

By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development

[4] https://thenewamerican.com/un-agenda-2030-a-recipe-for-global-socialism/

[5] https://www.cde.state.co.us/standardsandinstruction/ccss_in_the_colorado_standards

[6] https://www.comprehensivesexualityeducation.org/

[7] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/streams-of-consciousness/how-social-emotional-learning-could-harm-our-kids/

[8] https://nancyebailey.com/2018/03/19/social-emotional-learning-the-dark-side/

[9] https://parentsforamerica.com/2021/11/how-and-when-critical-race-theory-infected-social-emotional-learning-culturally-responsive-teaching/

[10] CDE Legislative Report, see the resources listed: https://www.cde.state.co.us/standardsandinstruction/mlaclegislativereport2020

Leading MLE Supplier: https://namle.net/

[11] See this research report: https://www.nas.org/reports/making-citizens-how-american-universities-teach-civics

And this report: https://www.nas.org/reports/skewed-history

[12] https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/restorative-circles-are-unethical-and-have-no-place-schools

[13] Colorado Constitution Article IX, Section 15: https://advance.lexis.com/documentprint/documentprintclick/?pdmfid=1000516&crid=4d0750fa-fb61-4051-8663-054becc24576&ecomp=p3vckkk&prid=6b0526fb-c431-4a6a-a7fe-b82c58e19d9a

[14] See page 9. https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/final_2022_booklet_with_cover.pdf

[15] https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb22-1295

[16] https://lisalogan.substack.com/p/school-choicesocial-credit-system

[17] https://www.ed.gov/essa?src%3Drn

View Details

People around the world are finally waking up to the consequences of excessive government intervention in private lives. They are upset with their respective governments and with themselves for believing a controlling entity can help them. Normally docile citizens are acting out, protesting, and getting violent. Government spending on green energy or anti-fossil fuel programs impede individual efforts to build and grow earnings and businesses. Cronyism, or government subsidies in select industries, further impedes natural market choice. Further, government’s excessive regulation depresses the private economy.

It is a foregone conclusion you will not hear about it in our biased media. Because the pain that motivates these protestors is due solely to their government’s control over individual lives and livelihood.

And it is the individual’s fault for not getting involved earlier nor staying informed.

However, if it is my fault, I can fix it.

Realize that political tendencies toward Socialism and Communism inexorably grow central government control over the individual. The basic tenant of these Leftist programs is that it is OK to take from one group and give to another; they call it Entitlements, we call it Welfare.

In other words, the Left is perfectly willing to tax or fine one individual, so that another can receive the benefit. Therefore, the Left does not respect any person’s rights to ownership of property (including personal possessions like money). The right to ownership is a core principle in our Constitutional Republic. The right to ownership supports another basic tenant which is the right of the individual. In fact, the issue of ownership was so pivotal that the Founding Fathers originally required that only landowners could vote, because the owner of land had a personal stake in protecting his freedom and thereby the nation.

Presidents Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson started the modern Progressive (Socialist) movement in the early 1900’s. Like Lenin and Marx, they started out innocuously. Their mantra was that the people are incompetent and incapable, so we (Elites) need experts telling them (the Individual) what to do. These “experts” morphed into bureaucrats and became the Administrative (Deep) State. They are the henchmen of the Administration, the President. Their mode of control is regulation and fines.

The solution is simple, but difficult: Stop doing what they did to get into this mess. Federal spending on Entitlement programs does far more harm than any good. In fact, there is a strong moral argument that giving subsistence to the unwilling-to-work harms the recipient far more than it helps.

In the case of government control via regulation through the Administrative State, demand that all government employees adhere to our Constitution, which limits the power and control of the Administrative State. The Supreme Court just recognized and restated the legal authority to limit bureaucracy in West Virginia vs. EPA.

Protests arise from the pain caused by devaluation of purchasing power. Inflation is devaluation of currency. To stop inflation, stop printing currency and stop spending that currency on questionable government programs. Entitlement programs demotivate citizens from engaging in productive work and these programs take money from productive citizens, which demotivates them. It is a negative feedback loop leading to destruction of individual work ethic. The individual has rights (The Natural Rights) that are recognized in the Declaration. We also have responsibilities along with those rights. Our responsibility is to preserve our tenuous freedom for future generations. It is all laid out in the Constitution, our roadmap for individual freedom and prosperity.

The underlying principle is that what the government spends, it first takes from the individual. It is a fact that you will spend your money more wisely than any government bureaucrat. You worked for it; the bureaucrat just took it.

View Details

Scrolling through social media I stopped on a photo of a dad holding his baby son and they were both laughing. I smiled and clicked on the start button of the video. It was a compilation of babies who were laughing at the actions their parents were performing. For four short minutes I smiled, laughed, and was temporarily relieved of the craziness of the world. It made me feel better to laugh.

It's hard to change the world but I can change my world by looking for humor in life every day. Searching for reasons to smile or laugh in this time of division and disillusionment can be difficult. We need to seek humor as we emerge from the mandated restrictions created by an overreaching government. As human beings we need to look for the funny in things even when times are serious.

Smiles are infectious. Humor is infectious. And given we just went through this infectious CCP Virus, I am reminded of the wonderful poem by Spike Milligan, the British-Irish actor, comedian, writer, musician, poet, and playwright.

He wrote, “Smiling is infectious; you catch it like the flu. When someone smiled at me today, I started smiling, too. I passed around the corner, and someone saw my grin, when he smiled, I realized, I’d passed it on to him. I thought about that smile, then I realized its worth. A single smile, just like mine, could travel round the earth. So, if you feel a smile begin, don’t leave it undetected – Let’s start an epidemic quick and get the world infected!”

Are you smiling now? I am and you should too. Laughter helps you feel good even if its temporally. You use less muscles in your face when you smile than when you frown. Smiling improves your disposition and laughter which releases endorphins that help you relax. Laughter reduces stress and anxiety. My business guru, Jeffrey Gitomer once said, “At the end of humor is the height of listening. People want to hear what’s next.” This is why I often will start a presentation with a funny quip or a self-effacing story. The shared experience of laughter gives people a wonderful sense of common ground. In our divided world, humor brings people together. Laughter heals the broken spirit and helps expose a truth most people would not say out-loud in public, yet a comedian often does.

On my work desk is a round, yellow, smiley face stress ball. It makes me smile. I have photographs of family, and friends on my bookcases with meaningful trinkets and mementos that bring back warm memories and good times that make me smile while I work. I have books on many subjects, yet when I need a pick me up, the books I have on humor and jokes give me a mental respite from a hectic day.

One of our Toastmasters Clubs that I co-founded celebrated our ten-year anniversary of helping people find their voice and leadership skills. The president of the club wanted to commemorate the event with a roast of me as their target of mirth and humor. I consented to being the object of entertainment that day and I was not disappointed. In fact, I was honored to be made light of with folly and laughter. The jokes, presentations, and laughter were all done at my expense, and I enjoyed every moment of it. The adage of, “if you can’t laugh at yourself, you’re taking yourself too seriously” rang true. By allowing oneself to hear others talk about you in a humorous way is humbling and endearing. I laughed so hard I cried at the truths that were lovingly thrown my way. I only hope the eulogies at my funeral will be as funny.

The world is filled with complainers, controllers, and cabooses. Don’t let them in to command your day. Don’t dwell in their darkness. Find the light in humor and laughter. My suggestion for getting more laughter in your day, is to study the art of comedians and funny people. Listen to their use of words, their story delivery, and the use of surprise to make others laugh.

As I have said, “Be a student of observation and find the funny in every situation. There will be times when you’re down or may wish to cry, yet a good bit of laughter is a better way to moisten the eye. Look in the mirror, that always makes me laugh. Our maker has a sense of humor; just study the giraffe. Laugh, smile, and find the humor in your day. The wrinkles in my face tell everyone, laughter is here to stay.”

Here are some favorite quotes on laughter.

“A day without laughter is a day wasted” – Charlie Chaplin

“The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter” – Mark Twain

“Laughter is an instant vacation” – Milton Berle

“Trouble knocked at the door, but hearing laughter hurried away” – Benjamin Franklin

“Laugh often, long and loud. Laugh until you gasp for breath” – George Carlin

“Laughter is the sun that drives winter from the human face” - Victor Hugo

“Laughter connects you with people. It’s almost impossible to maintain any kind of distance of any sense of social hierarchy when you’re just howling with laughter. Laughter is a force for democracy” John Cleese

View Details

"Come to Art Club” With these innocent words, one family’s nightmare began.

On May 4, 2021, when “Amanda” (not her real name), was a sixth grader at Poudre School District in Wellington, CO, her homeroom/art teacher invited her to stay after school one day in May 2021 for what she was told was “art club”. Amanda, 12 years old, was a new student at the school, and it had been a rough year for everyone. Between COVID protocols, not knowing anyone, being shy and not having the chance to build friendships, she was particularly vulnerable.

On May 4, she texted her mother, Erin, to let her know that she had been invited to “art club” and was going to stay late. Later, she texted her mother again to let her know that the meeting was running long and she wouldn’t be ready to pick up for another hour.

When Amanda got in the car afterward, she was clearly agitated. What was purportedly an “art club” meeting was actually a LGTBQ indoctrination session, run by an outside presenter named Kimberly Chambers who had instructed the kids NOT to tell their parents what had been discussed in the meeting. Ms. Chambers was there at the invitation of the art teacher.

Chambers, the facilitator, presented the children with the concept of being transgender, telling them that if they were not comfortable in their bodies and unsure of their sexuality that they were “queer”. The children were also presented with items including a “trans pride” flag, a lesbian flag and bracelets that said “Sounds gay, I’m In!”.

What’s more, Chambers gave the children her personal contact information and told them to contact her if they had questions or “felt unsafe”.

Needless to say, Erin and her husband were in shock at these revelations. For the next few weeks, Amanda’s relationship with her parents became strained. Concerned for their child, her parents took her to a therapist, who, unfortunately, turned out to be a “gender affirming” therapist. This made the problem worse.

A couple of days later, the principal of the school visited the family, ostensibly to see how the family was handling this traumatic event. As it turns out the purpose of the visit was actually more sinister - it was actually an investigation to determine whether or not the Lees were “affirming” their daughter. Because Colorado law requires “affirmation”, i.e. It is against the law to counsel a child that he or she may just be confused about their sexuality and not actually transgender. If Amanda had complained about her parents or if the school had determined that they were not supporting their daughter as a transgender person, they would have been at risk of losing her to Child Protective Services.

Four months later, because of this visit to “art club”, Amanda became suicidal. She wrote a letter to her parents – which they took seriously – that she was thinking about killing herself. Fortunately, Erin and her husband were able to get their daughter to a medical professional who was able to successfully treat her and she is now past the suicidal ideations.

Shockingly, the Lees learned that they could not opt their daughter out of “art club”, that indeed they had no say in the matter. These meetings apparently take place at lunch time and after school. Parents are not allowed to attend or to review materials beforehand. Nefarious Intent Through Colorado Open Records Act (“CORA”) requests, Erin learned that Ms. Chambers is indeed associated with the school district and that the school board members are pushing the LGBTQ+ agenda. According to Chambers, up to 50% of children are LGTBQ (a significantly higher percentage than in the population at large, where transgender people account for a miniscule 0.3% - 0.6%).

Through surveys, teachers identify children who may be lonely, confused, or having difficulty coping with the changes brought on by puberty. The Lees believe that Amanda was recruited for this LGBT grooming session because she was new to the school and didn’t have many friends.

The Lees have also learned through CORA requests that the school has three paid staff members whose sole responsibilities are the fostering and support of LGBTQ students – coaching them with “gender support plans”.

Not only are the school board members linked to various “social justice” organizations, they are also heavily supported by the teacher’s unions.

There are also ties between the school board, certain teachers and organizations such as SPLASH Youth Group of Northern Colorado, a 501(c)(3) organization whose mission statement is to “support LGBTQIA+ youth and their families to enrich and affirm their identities…”. SPLASH also runs a program called “Skittles” targeting children 5-11 for transgender “support”. SPLASH, not coincidentally, is run by the very same Kimberly Chambers who facilitated “art club”. When Do We Call Child Abuse “Child Abuse”? I’ll be honest – the whole leftist gender ideology morass is one I’d be just as happy to avoid. My regular readers know I focus on other topics. But when I heard Erin Lee’s story on Kim Monson’s radio show, I was horrified. Unable to find any written articles about it, I decided to write my own.

When any adult tells a child “What you hear in here stays in here”, as Ms. Chambers allegedly told Amanda, or when any adult tells a child to keep some incident, words or activity secret from their parents, it is a glaring warning sign that something inappropriate is taking place.

A publicly funded school would not allow children to be groomed by pedophiles, inviting them under false pretenses to a “club” meeting, yet they are allowing a different type of grooming activity to take place in promotion of the LGTBQ agenda.

Regardless of where one stands on these issues, I think we can all agree that this is any parents’ nightmare: to have their children indoctrinated in a damaging belief system against their will and without their knowledge.

In my view, what happened to Amanda was child abuse, plain and simple, perpetrated by a publicly funded school system. It is unconscionable, and I hope that the voters in those districts elect a new slate of school board directors next year.

What did the Lees do? They took their daughter out of that school system the very next day. She is now thriving at a private school.

After watching Matt Walsh’s What is A Woman? documentary film, I have to say that I find the entire LGTBQ agenda disturbing insofar as perfectly healthy children are being coached and encouraged to believe they are something they are not. What’s worse, “progressive” legislation prevents parents from helping their children navigate the difficulties of sexual awakening or even having a say in life-changing choices like “gender affirmation” surgery, hormone treatments and the like.

It's child abuse. Let’s call it what it is and demand a stop to the promotion of this dangerous ideology in our publicly funded institutions.

View Details

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” When you look at society today, it would not appear these truths are self-evident at all. Colorado has a civil rights commission that expects you to be treated differently based on your skin color or sexual preference. Government bureaucracies have exploded and seek to regulate every aspect of our lives. People and even some elected officials are openly advocating for communism and for the removal of private property rights. These truths are still every bit as self-evident; they are just being repressed by those who advocate against them. These people show their true self-evident core, and they expose their accidental conservatism through actions that support the tenants of conservatism: rule of law, intellectual & individual property rights, school choice, and free market capitalism. This accidental conservatism is often and easily seen in the actions of our celebrities and movies, but each and every one of us shows it because Liberty is engrained in every human being.

At the height of the Me-Too movement, the phrase “believe all women” became a popular tag line. This line was adamantly used against Brett Kavanaugh to defend the complete lack of evidence against the Supreme Court nominee. Many conservatives pointed out how we should instead have better rule of law and advocated for policies and positions to help women who have been wronged get their justice. Many were also fearful that this dangerous idea would lead to women lying about their situation to the detriment of the institution of justice for women who have been wronged. Enter Jonny Depp and Amber Heard and a trial that momentarily gripped the nation. We heard of the plagued relationship between the two Hollywood stars, and it was interesting to watch as conservatives slowly started siding with Depp. Conservatives rallied for Depp who openly joked about a Trump assassination many years ago. But conservatives saw this as an excellent opportunity to highlight that there should be such a thing as truth, and that truth is not dependent on a person’s gender, age, net worth, or any other variable. Johnny Depp also believed that it was wrong to be accused of something he did not do. When the cards were on the table, he abandoned the progressive ideology of relativism and became a figurehead of the conservative’s belief in what rule of law should be.

When Taylor Swift was a relatively obscure 15-year-old, she signed a record deal that gave the record label ownership of her masters (the ability to control how or when a song is used). This typical deal turned out to be incredibly lucrative for Taylor and for the record company and for many years there was little issue. Then in 2019, Taylor claimed the record label was preventing her from using her own songs at the American Music Awards and from using her old music in a documentary. She offered to buy back her masters, but the record label refused, and she signed with another company that would allow her to own her own masters for any new music recorded. She was very upset that they would not sell her back her own music, songs that she wrote and created herself. Since she wrote her own music, she found a convenient loophole that allowed her to give herself publishing rights to those songs. So, she decided to re-record those songs and regain her right to do with her intellectual property as she pleases. She saw the importance of being able to own her property, her work, and the product of her mind. She saw in a very tangible way, the importance of individual property rights and why those rights are the bedrock of the American Idea.

In the wake of the Uvalde shooting, it was no surprise to see the celebrities and progressive left advocate for gun legislation. One in particular, Kim Kardashian, tweeted “Yesterday 19 children were murdered by an 18-year-old, and I find myself heartbroken, disgusted and furious about how little has been done by lawmakers to enact gun laws that protect our children.” But Kim does not leave the security of her children up to lawmakers; she takes control of the security of her children. She sends her children to a private school that hires its own personal, onsite security personnel. She unknowingly champions a policy that conservatives have been advocating for a long time: school choice. Parents should be able to send their child to where they think is best. Parents should be able to demand that their schools take more active measures to protect their children and if the schools do not comply, the parents should be able to move their children wherever the parents see fit. But even beyond the school choice Kim unwittingly supports, she also hires her own armed, personal security team. Thank you, Kim for advocating with your actions what most responsible gun owners have been advocating for years!

I recently re-watched a movie that I have avoided since it came out, due to its overt political ideologies: WALL-E. Watching it under a principled microscope actually revealed a huge issue conservatives have been talking about for years: cronyism. In the movie, they flash back or show the megacorporation Buy n Large (BnL) as being in charge of everything. While the point they were trying to convey was anti-consumerism, what they actually showed is how powerful a corporation can get when it has a monopoly on the market and is able to control the politicians. It is not ironic at all that an apocalyptic world was brought about by a weak government run by a megacorporation, an antithesis to the free market that conservatives believe in! This is why having a free market is actually better for the planet. Look at the difference in pollution between communist China and America. One has free market factors at play that encourage environmental stewardship of our planet based on the demand from individuals and who they choose to do business with, and the other does not. It is obvious when you walk into a business and see them making their case of environmentalism, whether it is recycled paper bags or even packaging that has seeds in it that we have a society that cares deeply about the planet we are leaving for posterity. WALL-E would be an entirely different movie had there been a free market to turn to even after the damage had been done and the planet needed cleaning.

These are all very public cases of accidental conservatism, but I have found that even more cases abound in everyday life. It is easy when complaining with others in the line at the DMV to talk about the inefficiencies of government bureaucracy. Even the most socialist Uber driver in America would likely dissent if asked to give their car to you. If the group took a vote and voted that the next round of drinks should be free, do you think the bartender would think absolute democracy is the best way to run a business much less the country? I implore you to go and find all the accidental conservatives that you can, relate to their inner self-evident truths and show them why the American Idea is worth choosing and defending.

View Details

Families who have school-age children typically choose to live within the boundaries of the Cherry Creek School District (CCSD) because of its reputation for being the best school district in the state. Over time, CCSD has lost focus of its vision and mission, becoming distracted by social justice and political rhetoric under the guise of equity. As a result, the students in CCSD are failing academically. According to the Colorado Department of Education, in 2014, 75.72% of the children in CCSD were performing at or above grade level in reading. In 2019, the percentage of kids performing at or above grade level dropped to 50% and even lower after the pandemic. The disparity between our white students and students of color maintained about 20% throughout the years. The academic gaps between our white students and students of color, and the gaps created from the pandemic need to be addressed, yet in district meeting after meeting, CCSD does not address the academic gap plaguing our district and has not communicated a plan to do so.

Social Emotional Learning (SEL) is a system used by schools to gain information about your child’s attitudes, morals, values and beliefs. There has been a push from the CCSD teacher’s union to embed SEL into every subject taught at school. According to Harvard economist R. Fryer and numerous other sources (just google it), children need more instructional minutes in order to close gaps in learning. CCSD has chosen to use valuable instructional minutes to push its SEL agenda, which includes questionable surveys given to school children as young as 10-years-old with bating language regarding race and sexual identity. Children ages 10-16 are asked questions like, “Some people describe themselves as transgender when their sex at birth does not match the way they think or feel about their gender, are you transgender?” Many parents feel that these discussions should only occur in the home environment, and many teachers agree.

Equitable Grading is a theory based on the book Grading for Equity, by Joe Feldman, where students are graded on mastery of the subject and not on completed assignments and other “soft skills” such as class participation, handing in assignments, and being on time, which typically affect minority and under supported students. This will allow a student to earn some credit on assignments rather than no credit since it makes students feel like they cannot achieve, and they are less likely to try. Equitable grading has been proven to help some students, but its implementation in CCSD has been problematic. In a district study session presentation, CCSD reported that “Under guidance from the Colorado Department of Education, students who are waived from meeting graduation guideline requirements will be counted as completers, not graduates,” but they will still receive a diploma. CCSD has recently announced it is eliminating the Valedictorian distinction, so it is no longer a goal for students graduating in 2026 and beyond. In some schools, if assignments are not turned in, there is no penalty to the student, but in other schools this is not the case. The combination of all these factors is a general decrease in expectations of our students and the long-term effects could be catastrophic. Our students deserve as many opportunities as possible to achieve that we can afford. We need to keep these opportunities available, but our school district is taking them away and threatens to continue to do more. In recent board meetings, CCSD board members alluded to taking away our upper level (AP, IB, honors) classes, asking, “Do we really need trigonometry?” and “How much are AP and IB classes costing the district?”

Teach our children academics! This is the cry of parents in CCSD. We want our children to go to school to learn core academic subjects and learn how to work well with others. We don’t want our kids to explore their sexuality, or to define their gender identity pronouns, or be put into a group based on their race and culture. We must refocus our district on its vision and mission “To inspire every student to think, to learn, to achieve, to care.” There is a growing movement to bring academics back to the forefront of our district’s vision. Please join us at www.cherrycreekparents.org.

View Details

In the beginning was the Word;

The Word was in God’s presence,

And the Word was God.

He was present to God in the beginning.

Through him all things came into being,

And apart from him nothing came to be.

Whatever came to be in him, found life,

life for the light of men,

The light shines on in darkness,

A darkness that did not overcome it.

John 1:4-5 In the Gospel according to John we read of light and darkness symbolizing the struggle between good and evil. God is the light in contrast to the devil that prowls through the world seeking the ruin of souls. God is the Truth, and the devil is falsehood. God brings us up to the heights of life in contrast to the darkness of the devil that brings us into the depths of destruction. We as Christians must be attentive and alert to prevent ourselves from falling prey to the untruth.

Half-truths, intentional erroneous statements, inaccurate data and deception plague us on a daily basis. Social media and the onslaught of continual news and entertainment have many believing that their own good comes first. Some believe man is above God. Others do not even believe God exists. The world we live in is divisive. We argue with our friends and family over abortion and politics, we witness the breakup of the nuclear family, we debate religious beliefs, emphasis is placed on the acquisition of material goods, and the society we live in today is full of temptations that interfere with our moral standing. The chasm between people grows.

The devil plans his attacks on the human soul, there are no coincidences. The devil opposes God’s goodness and seeps into a man’s conscience when he is fragile. It is at the moment when we are lukewarm and take our faith for granted that the devil sees an easy way into the corruption of our soul. It is when we waiver and compromise on our beliefs given to us by God that the devil strikes. We cannot compromise on our beliefs as it will only lead to a downward spiral that will dissipate the moral teachings we have been living. The devil whispers in our ears, evil is good and good is evil. The devil wants to steal the graces that God has given us. Do not let him succeed for if we do our spirituality will become null and void.

How do we resist this secular movement and deflect the evil assault on Catholicism?

Concentrating our attention on God our Father and Jesus our Savior deepens our faith. When we enter a state of sin, God offers us forgiveness in the confessional. Interacting with others who are faith-based maintains our faith, and we become more relaxed and willing to share our faith with others. Taking time to pray, our personal conversation with God, brings peace as we feel the strength of God’s presence. We are in a living relationship with God, the most important relationship we can ever experience. Catholics are blessed to receive the sacrament of the Eucharist. We are also able to humbly present ourselves to Christ in Adoration. We cannot be concerned with the society as a whole and instead we must concentrate on the goodness that God extends to us.

When you are in doubt, turn to God for strength, as proclaimed in Ephesians 6:10-13: Finally, draw your strength from the Lord and his might power.

Put on the armor of God so that you may be able to stand firm against the tactics of the devil.

Our battle is not against human forces but against the principalities and powers, the rulers of this world of darkness, the evil spirits in regions above.

You must put on the armor of God if you are to resist on the evil day; do all that your duty requires, and hold your ground. Focus on the end. We all know God wins, and we can live with God for all of eternity.

View Details

Informed consent for every medical procedure should include the benefits and risks. Often risks are minimized because drugs and surgeries are very profitable, especially drugs designed in a treatment plan to be given over a lifetime until the person dies. The gender reassignment transition counseling should include the financial costs and health costs. The discussion should also protect minors from consenting to a lifetime of medical treatment dependency. The Financial Costs of Gender Transition There is a “soft transition” that precedes a hormone and surgical transition. Gender dysphoria counseling at $120 per visit, once a week for four years is a cost of $24,960. Facial hair removal at $120 an hour for 90 hours over four years costs $10,800. Transitioning people report additional expenses in binding undergarments to hide breasts, custom shoes for large masculine feet, and daily makeup application.

Hormone treatment for individuals will need to be calculated for the rest of their lives, starting at the age when transition begins. “Transgender Patients: Calculating the Actual Costs” (2017 figures) reports:

“Approximately 75% to 78% of individuals seeking gender dysphoria care will pursue hormone treatments, which are generally continued for the duration of a transgender patient’s life, Dr. Hopwood said. The prices for these will vary by delivery method, he continued, with oral estrogen costing $20 monthly, injectable estrogen roughly $150 to $200 monthly, and accompanying spironolactone $10 to $20 monthly. For transgender men’s hormone therapies, testosterone injections typically cost $80 monthly (but may vary based on state supply regulations), testosterone patches more than $300 monthly, and testosterone gels between $300 to $350 monthly.”

Patients pay up to $1,500 a month for prescription drugs for hormones, and additional drugs like spironolactone to reduce the risk of heart attacks associated with synthetic hormone therapy.

Surgery costs vary depending on external and internal procedures, use of prosthetics and implants, and the extent of plastic surgery. However, $100,000 is an average estimated initial cost. These surgeries are often over simplified in terms of “bottom surgery” or “top surgery,” but most often are a series of successive surgeries. “Transgender Patients: Calculating the Actual Costs” (2017 figures) reports: “Surgeries, on the other hand, are characterized by a larger one-time cost. These procedures are most often sought by transgender males, Dr. Hopwood said, with the most common being chest reconstructions costing between $9000 and $10,000. Whereas survey data cited by Dr. Hopwood suggest that 40% of transgender males have already had this procedure, only 3% reported undergoing a metoidioplasty ($50,000-$60,000) and 2% reported having a phalloplasty ($50,000-$300,000). Hysterectomies ($10,000) were also reported by 20% of transgender men…”

“Breast augmentation surgeries can cost anywhere from $5000 to $10,000 and are sought by more than half of transgender women, he said. Facial feminization surgeries could be as expensive as $40,000 or as little as $3000 depending on the patient’s preexisting facial bone structure. For sexual organ surgeries, vaginoplasties ($30,000 to $50,000) were reported among approximately one-fifth of transgender women, while labioplasties ($4,000 to $5,000; sometimes included with vaginoplasty) and orchiectomies ($4000 to $6000) alone were less common. Dr. Hopwood noted that some transgender women will also seek hair removal, non-breast implants, tracheal shaves or liposuction to better fit in with the general population, although these surgeries are much less likely to be covered by insurance policies.” Other surgeries include gluteoplasty to increase the volume in buttocks and chondrolaryngoplasty to minimize the appearance of the Adam’s apple. All of these surgeries include risks and complications, in addition to the financial cost. Surgical reconstruction of a vagina or penis can take up to 12 hours under anesthesia in an operating room and require a year of recovery time with intense pain. These procedures result in lost income from not working during transition.

Lastly, there are legal fees to change name and gender on documents that average $1200. The Health Costs of Gender Transition Psychological care is an additional cost of transition, in terms of finances, time, and mental health. Transgender people report ongoing stress, exhaustion, and hyper-focus on how they are perceived in public. Current Urology (2021) reports, “Of note, these patients are unique in that they are at an increased risk for suicide, mental health issues, HIV predisposition, and surgical complications specific and related to the procedures performed.”

Scott Newgent in “Forget What Gender Activists Tell You. Here’s What Medical Transition Looks Like,” warns parents against making a life altering decision for children: “During my own transition, I had seven surgeries. I also had a massive pulmonary embolism, a helicopter life-flight ride, an emergency ambulance ride, a stress-induced heart attack, sepsis, a 17-month recurring infection due to using the wrong skin during a (failed) phalloplasty, 16 rounds of antibiotics, three weeks of daily IV antibiotics, the loss of all my hair, (only partially successful) arm reconstructive surgery, permanent lung and heart damage, a cut bladder, insomnia-induced hallucinations—oh and frequent loss of consciousness due to pain from the hair on the inside of my urethra. All this led to a form of PTSD that made me a prisoner in my apartment for a year. Between me and my insurance company, medical expenses exceeded $900,000.”

“During these 17 months of agony, I couldn’t get a urologist to help me. They didn’t feel comfortable taking me on as a patient—since the phalloplasty, like much of the transition process, is experimental. ‘Could you go back to the original surgeon?’ they suggested.”

“Here is what we do know: The long-term use of synthetic hormone therapy shortens lives. Specifically, these medications are associated with an increased risk of heart attacks, pulmonary embolisms, bone damage, liver and kidney failure, mental-health complications, and more. Almost a quarter of hormone-therapy patients on high-dose anabolic steroids (such as the testosterone taken by female-to-male transitioners) exhibit major mood-syndrome symptoms. Between three and 12 percent go on to develop symptoms of psychosis.”

Other reported side effects are loss of sexual drive, loss of sensation, and incontinence. Who promotes and profits from transgender surgeries? There has been a dramatic rise in genital change surgeries from 500 reported in 2015 since they have been partially funded by some health insurance companies. As of 2021, Current Urology reports “There are about 9000 transgender surgeries being performed annually across the United States (US). The latest statistics indicate that 0.6% of the US population identifies as transgender.”

In most cases, health insurance does not cover the bulk of the costs, and individuals must acquire loans for gender surgeries.

Since 2014 when the Obama administration ended a 33-year ban on sex change surgeries, Medicare, the US government health program for the elderly and people with disabilities, and Medicaid, the program for people with low incomes, cover gender change surgeries. According to John Hopkins, “When determining cost-effectiveness of medical services in the U.S., policymakers consider something cost-effective if the price is below $100,000 per year of quality of life.” This exorbitant figure indicates that policy makers are captured by a profiteering medical industrial complex.

The Federalist, in an overview of the Pharma and Tech Giants who fund the transgenderism lobby with $424 million to promote a new medical and lifestyle market, provides this perspective on experimental and non- reversible medical procedures across the lifespan: “It behooves us all to look at what the real investment is in prioritizing a lifetime of anti-body medical treatments for a miniscule part of the population. Melding this manufactured medical issue with civil rights frame entails the continuance and growth of the problem. Transgenderism is framed as both a medical problem, for the gender dysphoria of children who need puberty blockers and are being groomed for a lifetime of medicalization, and as a brave and original lifestyle choice for adults. Martine Rothblatt suggests we are all transhuman, that changing our bodies by removing healthy tissue and organs and ingesting cross-sex hormones over the course of a lifetime can be likened to wearing make-up, dying our hair, or getting a tattoo. If we are all transhuman, expressing that could be a never-ending saga of body-related consumerism.” Minors in Colorado can consent to gender reassignment therapies and medications Under Governor Polis, minor consent for medical treatment has passed in several areas, summarized in detail in the legislative issue brief titled “Minors' Medical Records and Consent to Care.”

In 2019, HB19-1120 “Youth Mental Health Education And Suicide Prevention” lowered the age of consent for out-patient psychotherapy to 12 years old. Parents are not permitted to obtain their child’s mental health records without the child’s permission. This bill was presented as suicide prevention, but psychotherapy is not prohibited from counseling minors on gender dysphoria.

In 2021, the Colorado LGBTQ caucus advanced a Trojan Horse bill to erode parental rights called “Protecting Preventative Health Care Coverage.” SB21-016 was a multi-year legislative effort. Crowds of parents showed up at the Capitol in opposition to this legislation that gives minors consent for counseling, prevention, screening, and treatment for sexual health. In 2021, opposing parents were limited to online testimony. This law gives medical providers the right to “administer, dispense, and prescribe preventative measures or medications, including appropriate therapies” to minors. “Information related to care must not be divulged to any person other than the minor.” “Family planning services” and “family-planning-related services” are not clearly defined in the bill, but the bill does explicitly include STD treatment, cervical cancer screenings, contraception, sterilization services, and fertility services. Medical providers may choose to consult with parents or guardians when clients are 13 years or younger, but they are not required to consult, not even for allergic reactions or drug contraindications. Furthermore, SB016 removed the requirement that these services be provided by a certified family clinic, so minors could receive these services without parental consent or knowledge in a school-based clinic or in clinics that schools refer students to. Conclusion Minor consent for experimental and pharmaceutical medical treatment is irresponsible and unethical. It violates the principles of informed consent by giving treatment to a child who does not have the cognitive competence to understand the risks, and it omits screening for the medical history that only a parent or guardian would be able to provide. Parents are advised to set up notifications with their health insurance companies for newly prescribed drugs for their children, and to discuss this issue with administrators at their schools who may not be aware of the recent changes to minor consent. Ultimately, families assume all of the risks and costs of these treatments.

View Details

“The American dream is shrinking because some of our leaders want it to shrink. Decline, in other words, has become a policy objective. And if this decline continues at the current pace, America as we know it will cease to exist. In effect, we will have committed national suicide” – Dinesh D’Souza America is in crisis. We see and hear about it every day on the news, our social media feeds and from our friends. High gas prices. Record inflation. Rolling blackouts. Surging violent and property crime. Racial unrest. War in Ukraine. Supply chain disruptions. Homelessness. Shortages. Rising threats from antagonistic nations. Political intimidation and outright violence. Leftist riots in major cities. Soft on crime district attorneys. Mass shootings. Declining stock markets. Loss of confidence in elections and public institutions. And…a worsening divide over what America means and the role of government in our lives.

Why is this happening and is there hope for the future? We’ll look at the reasons and talk about how we can reclaim our country and its future. It’s All Intentional While some bad things, adverse consequences and disasters can be attributed simply to the evil that exists in human beings or natural causes, many of the bad results we are currently seeing in America are by design. As I wrote about in my essay The Pillars of Modern Life, we are at the pinnacle of human existence on this planet, and the three things that make this prosperity possible are free-market capitalism, limited government and fossil fuels. The Left, for reasons I can’t understand, hates all three and wants to tear them down, imposing some sort of undefined dystopian society.

Driven by their deeply held, quasi-religious belief that mankind is causing the Earth’s climate to change (first cooling, then warming, then “changing”), the Left has declared war on one of the pillars of modern life: fossil fuels. The reason gas prices are surging is simple: elected Democrats and their bureaucratic minions are doing everything they can to put American oil and gas companies out of business.

The Democrats and their radical progressive base want to “keep it in the ground”. They don’t want drilling on federal lands or off our coasts. They don’t want people to drive gasoline powered cars even though electric cars are environmentally unfriendly and not as practical or reliable themselves, not to mention too expensive. They want us to use public transportation or walk or ride bicycles.

Then, when their foreign policy failures create the conditions for a European land war and supply chains are further disrupted, they ask hostile foreign countries (Venezuela and Iran) to boost oil production and attack American oil companies for not boosting production.

As a recent commentary in the Wall Street Journal points out, “President Biden has urged oil and natural-gas companies to ramp up production, and you’d think, given the current high prices, that it would be in their interest to do so. But the industry has been slow to respond, with some justification. Companies expect that as the current turmoil subsides, the Biden administration will shift back to hostile rhetoric, anti-energy legislative proposals, and oppositional regulatory policies”. It’s been my observation, however, that the administration’s hostility has been evident from Day One and has not let up at all.

In fact, the article continues, last year 20 House Democrats introduces the so-called “Fossil Free Finance Act”, “…which would require the Federal Reserve Bank to take steps to stop investing in fossil-fuel production. The bill’s goal was “no financing of new or expanded fossil fuel projects after 2022”. Oil and gas companies do more business with banks than simply taking out loans. Banks also provide checking accounts and other money services including derivative transactions. A government mandate to stop doing business with oil and gas companies would cripple the industry and throw us into a new Dark Age.

One of the disadvantages of living in a Third World country is unreliable and expensive energy, especially electricity. Thanks to Democrats’ energy policy, some parts of America are going to be experiencing electricity shortages and rolling blackouts this summer. Another article in the Wall Street Journal points out that “The risk of electricity shortages is rising throughout the U.S. as traditional power plants are being retired more quickly than they can be replaced by renewable energy and battery storage.”

Because prices are going higher, oil and gas companies are earning higher profits. Displaying their usual lack of understanding of even the most basic laws of economics, Democrats led by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) are clamoring for energy companies to be hit with new taxes to punish them for providing a product that people want and literally cannot live without.

The only reason Democrats are even thinking about trying to lower gas prices is so that they don’t pay at the polls in November. But make no mistake: the progressives’ war on fossil fuel energy is real, it is intense, and it is fueled by an uncompromising belief system that is completely disconnected from the reality of life on earth. And…it will continue until people stand up against them and say: “Enough!”

Because our economy – like it or not – is based on fossil fuels, restricting supply causes prices to go up. It’s that simple. Petroleum is not used just for fuels. It is a feedstock for virtually everything we use in our modern world from fertilizers to plastics to, yes, baby formula. This list points out over 100 products made from petroleum. When the cost of oil goes up for extended periods of time, the cost of everything else will go up too.

The vision of a “fossil-free” future is a childish, unrealistic fantasy. Before our modern society, people were able to live without the wide scale use of fossil fuels, but their way of life was nothing we should aspire to and we cannot, nor should we want to go back.

It isn’t only the rising cost of petroleum that is causing the record high inflation that we are experiencing now. Because of all the COVID spending since 2020 and the “American Rescue Plan”, the money supply is growing at a 13% annual rate, which is the fastest growth since the 1970s (which were an economic disaster). The war in Ukraine (started by a despot encouraged by American weakness) is another contributing factor. Disruptions in the employment market caused by the pandemic and government incentives are also to blame for runaway inflation.

When it comes to the crime surge, there is a level of intention to be seen as well. Across the country, soft-on-crime Democrat district attorneys – many of them funded by billionaire George Soros – have presided over massive increases in crime and homelessness in their cities. These DAs and their progressive allies in state legislatures are looking to abolish cash bail, reduce sentences and defund police departments. With a progressive DA in office, if you’re a “security guard” who murders a peaceful conservative demonstrator at a rally you’re good to go. But God help you if you’re a legal law-abiding gun owner – they’re coming after you!

If defunding the police may not be politically feasible, they look to hamstring police departments by adding new restrictions and regulations. We see it in Colorado and in other blue states. One sign of hope: voters in San Francisco recently recalled District Attorney Chesa Boudin by a significant margin. Voters in Democrat-run San Francisco and Los Angeles are saying loud and clear: “We’ve had enough”. The Path to Ruin On the eve of the Civil War in the 1850s the great divide in America was over the question of human slavery. One region, governed by the Democratic Party, fought to maintain this abhorrent practice. The rest of the country, led by courageous abolitionists and the newly formed Republican Party (which was founded to prevent the spread of slavery) was working tirelessly to not only stop the spread but to eliminate slavery from our nation.

The great divide today is over the question of what America means and the role of government in our lives. Our “conservative” movement seeks to “conserve” the values of the American founding. Coupled with our “libertarian” views, we seek a return to constitutionally limited government at every level and maximize the freedom and opportunity available to every person and maximize human flourishing.

The ”progressive” Left seeks to have government involved in every aspect of our lives. They don’t believe in limits on government, they abhor success in a capitalistic world and they want the coercive power of government to force their views and their values on the rest of us.

Sidebar: the “progressives”, which they call themselves, believe themselves to be working for human progress. They are not. Nor are they “liberals” in the classical sense of the word. What they truly are: adult children (and actual children) who seek to “regress” our society to a time when the few rule over the many, and where all suffer together in equal misery.

I have concluded that the Left is more politically active than we are for one simple reason: they truly do believe that they know what’s best for society and that they have not only the right but the duty to force it on the rest of us by the force of government. They are MOTIVATED to boss us around. Our side just wants to live and let live – and to be left alone.

Every aspect of their cultural domination is designed for one thing: to gain and maintain political power. They divide us along racial and ethnic lines. They divide us by gender, and as if that weren’t enough, they seek to destroy the very science of human biology by blurring the distinction between male and female. They pit the “rich” against the “poor”, and never mind that most of the “rich” big businesses of today are run by billionaires who use the power of government to protect themselves from competition and promote the leftist agenda.

They use the power of media to tell their side of the story and suppress the other side. Remember all the leftist riots over the summer of 2020? When was the last time antifa violence was reported as headline news? But the January 6 Capitol riot is headline news all day every day because it promotes their lies about a right-wing “insurrection”. Foreign Threats While the first European land war in 80 years rages, I recently sat in a seminar on national security. One speaker talked about the foreign policy failures of the Biden administration, and another talked about the growing threats to our country from countries like China, North Korea and Iran.

I remember sitting there and thinking despondently of these threats and the fact that America needs strong leadership in these troubling times. I became even more despondent when I realized that the ruling Democratic Party is more worried about climate change and making sure men can compete in women’s sports. The people in charge are unserious and will ultimately lead us to disaster if they are not replaced. What Can We Do? Times are troubled, but fortunately we do have one way to turn the ship of state around. That way is the coming November election.

At this point in our nation’s life, the ONLY viable choice is to vote for Republican candidates up and down the ballot for state and national offices, and to vote all Democrats out of power.

Hopefully, a lifelong Democrat who proudly voted for Clinton or Obama must surely realize by now that today’s Democratic Party has gone from left to insane. Democrat policies are demonstrably, provably wrong on virtually every issue, from energy policy to economic policy to foreign policy to education, criminal justice and cultural issues. Put another way, Democrat policies are completely disconnected from reality, human nature, and the laws of economics.

The Republican candidate may not be 100% in agreement with you on every issue. And in Colorado, nobody fights among themselves better (or worse) than Republicans. The key is: Republicans at least, as a party, understand the founding principles of this country and can be held accountable. Democrats, even so-called “moderates”, cannot. As Peggy Noonan wrote recently in her weekly column: “A final characteristic of progressive politicians is they tend to be high-IQ stupid people. They…can’t understand the implications of policy.” Pretty strong stuff from Ronald Reagan’s former speechwriter.

You have some good candidates in Colorado. I encourage everyone to vote for candidates in the primary who will have a good chance of being elected in the general. Remember, it’s one thing to win straw polls and party caucuses, and quite another to win a general election where unaffiliated voters make up the largest voting bloc. You should vote for someone who may not be your perfect candidate, because I guarantee they will be better than the candidate with a (D) next to their name. Happy Birthday, America! The 246th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence is coming up in a couple of weeks. As an optimist by nature, I wanted to write a hopeful, celebratory essay this month. Unfortunately, as Joni Mitchell sang “You don’t know what you got ‘til it’s gone”, we are in danger of losing our country, the best and brightest nation ever to exist on planet Earth. The promise of America is in danger of being lost under an avalanche of progressive failures.

It is incumbent upon each and every one of us to remember and reinforce the promise of America, the principles of the American Founding, and the pillars of modern life. Stand up for your modern life and vote like your life depends on it. Because it does.

View Details

Colorado is broken. We are living the consequences of bad public policy driven by radical, activist, ideologues who have taken over the Democrat party and squishy big government Republicans.

Colorado is #1 in car thefts and bank robberies. Our streets are dirty, and our parks are no longer safe. Our oil and gas industry is prevented from exploring and producing abundant, reliable, affordable and efficient energy. The attack on our farming and ranching communities is resulting in higher costs at the grocery store. Housing and the cost of living is skyrocketing. Our kid’s education is no longer focused on reading, writing, math, history, civics, science, great literature and critical thinking. Our children have become targets of a radical, activist, ideologue agenda that is sexualizing them and dividing them by race. Colorado has one of the most radical pro-abortion laws in the nation and in the world. Colorado has legalized aborting a baby up to the time it is in the birth canal. Colorado is broken. It is time to elect Grassroots candidates who have the courage and the fortitude to fix it. It is time to elect Grassroots candidates who do what is right for the people even when political and special interest strategists are advising otherwise.

It has taken time to connect the dots. I have watched the Democrat party become a party of radical, activist ideologues focused on controlling almost every aspect of every day, hardworking individual’s lives. The Democrat party of today is no longer the party of JFK. JFK cut taxes and said, “Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.” Today’s Democrat mantra is bigger and bigger government exerting more and more control over “We the People.” When government gets big, individuals become small. This is antithetical to our American Idea.

I have also watched squishy big government Republicans “reach across the aisle” in a “bi-partisanship” manner to “work with” the radical, activist, Democrat ideologues. Instead of making the case and standing for the Republican principles of limited, representative government, these squishy big government Republicans have reached so far across the aisle that they are standing on the other side of the aisle. You are probably receiving text messages and phone calls from these politicians advocating for certain candidates. They are representing special interests instead of “We the People.”

Big government and big business like each other. Big business uses big government to squelch the little guy. It is time to elect Grassroots candidates who will represent us, not big money interests. When government is limited, individuals have the opportunity to live big lives.

Together we can fix Colorado by electing Grassroots candidates Greg Lopez for Governor, Ron Hanks for U.S. Senate and Tina Peters for Secretary of State. GREG LOPEZ FOR COLORADO GOVERNOR I have gotten to know Greg Lopez and his wife Lisa. They are delightful individuals who care deeply about the people of Colorado. They have been married for almost 34 years. Greg is truly the Grassroots candidate. He is running for governor to serve all the people of Colorado. He is not a squishy politician influenced by big money interests.

Greg is a veteran of the United States Air Force. As the former mayor of Parker, Colorado, he gained knowledge and experience regarding water management, smart development, policing and infrastructure management. He also served on numerous boards including Secretary and Treasurer of the E-470 Highway Authority.

Greg was the first Director of the ACE Scholarship Foundation, a non-profit organization that awards scholarships to students of low-income families to give them the opportunity to attend the school of their choice.

Greg also served as the President and CEO of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, President/CEO of the Rocky Mountain Minority Supplier Development Council, and Director of the United States Small Business Administration.

To defeat Polis this November, Greg has been building support and coalitions for years with moderate Democrats, Hispanic and ethnic communities, suburban moms, small business owners, rural Colorado, conservatives, Republicans, Libertarians and Unaffiliateds. He is the only candidate that appeals across this wide spectrum of Coloradans.

The Greg Lopez administration will fix Colorado’s economy by shrinking government, lowering taxes and reducing rules and regulations. The Greg Lopez administration will stand for educational choice and parent’s rights. The Greg Lopez administration will reclaim safe streets, safe parks and safe communities. The Greg Lopez administration will stand for health freedom and life.

Vote for Grassroots candidate Greg Lopez for Colorado governor 2022. RON HANKS FOR U.S. SENATE Ron Hanks is a 32-year military veteran who served our country as an enlisted man and commissioned officer. He worked as a linguist (speaks four languages) and an intelligence officer. He has extensive experience in national security issues. He worked in the oil and gas industry in North Dakota and just completed serving as a representative in the 2022 Colorado state legislature. Ron Hanks’ legislative record shows that he is truly a man of the people and not a big money businessman trying to buy his way onto the ballot.

Ron Hanks realizes that national security is a top priority. The Democrat open border policy is inviting an invasion of America. A Yahoo News article from last October reported that 1,956,519 noncitizens tried to enter the United States illegally over the past year. We have no idea who is coming across the border. A Daily Mail piece from last year reported, “More known or suspected terrorists than recorded in previous years have crossed the southern border in the midst of Joe Biden's migration crisis, according to a video from the outgoing Border Patrol chief.” The Yahoo article further states that 146,925 children were encountered trying to enter the United States. Many disappear into the shadows of sex trafficking and other depravities. There is nothing compassionate about this Democrat open border policy. Senator Ron Hanks will go to work on day one to secure our border.

We have taken affordable, reliable, abundant and efficient energy for granted. The costs at the gas pump are hurting Coloradans. Ron Hanks will work to restore our energy independence which will help bring manufacturing back to America. Reduced fuel prices will lower the cost to produce and transport goods which will reduce Biden/Bennet’s government induced inflation.

Ron Hanks realizes that the current government run education system is letting our kids, our families and our teachers down. Senator Ron Hanks will restore traditional education in our schools and stop indoctrinating and dividing our kids using the Critical Race Theory agenda. Senator Hanks will stop the sexualization of our children through the radical, activist sex education curriculum. Ron Hanks notes the first step to achieving this is to eliminate the Department of Education.

Every day more truth is revealed regarding the manipulation of our elections. Ron Hanks understands that free, fair and honest elections are the bedrock to our American Idea. Senator Ron Hanks will work to eliminate the manipulation of our elections so that each American is confident that their vote counts.

Ron Hanks is the Grassroots candidate who will work for you. Vote for Ron Hanks for U.S. Senate. TINA PETERS FOR SECRETARY OF STATE The Colorado Secretary of State race may be the most important race in the country. Every day more truth is revealed regarding manipulation of our elections. We expect denials from Democrat Secretary of State Jena Griswold, but it is astonishing that squishy big money Colorado Republicans are denying the manipulation of our elections. I wonder why? However, that is a subject for another time.

I never dreamed that an unconventional American Patriot would be a gorgeous blonde in high heels. America was founded on unconventional Patriots from Paul Revere’s midnight ride (probably against the rules), to the Patriots at Bunker Hill (definitely against the rules) to the men who signed the Declaration of Independence (definitely against the rules), to the Civil War underground railroad (definitely against the rules), to Rosa Parks refusal to give up her seat on a bus (definitely against the rules).

I met Tina Peters as she was contemplating running for Mesa County Clerk and Recorder. As a business owner for many years, Tina thought she could improve wait times at the Motor Vehicle Department. She did.

Tina Peters has never been a rule breaker. She didn’t even have a parking ticket prior to all this election nonsense. Something happened. The rules were wrong. As the official election official for Mesa County, Tina Peters had a responsibility to maintain records of elections for 22 months per federal rules and 25 months per Colorado rules. But other “rules” said she couldn’t back up those voting systems. I wonder why? But that is a subject for another time.

When Jena Griswold’s staff and Dominion Voting Machine System employees scheduled a “Trusted Build” to update the voting machines, Tina Peters asked if the “Trusted Build” would erase any records. Tina was told yes. As any prudent county clerk would do, Tina Peters arranged to back-up the files of those machines. And that is where the trouble began. The Mesa County Voting Systems Report #1 and Report #2, which were researched by independent experts, revealed that the Griswold/Dominion “Trusted Build” erased and/or overwrote 29,000 log files and that the machines could be accessed via the internet. Moderate Democrats, Libertarians, Unaffiliated, Republicans and Conservatives should have a very big problem with this.

I have interviewed Mesa County Voting Systems Report #3 co-author Dr. Walter Daugherity on two different occasions. He is highly credentialed. Dr. Daugherity is a pioneer in the computer science arena. He taught for 32 years at Texas A&M. He received his master’s and doctorate from Harvard. Jena Griswold and squishy big government Republicans are ignoring his findings. I wonder why, but that is a subject for another time.

Dr. Daugherity and his co-author were the first to look inside the Dominion machines. What they found was riveting. They discovered that a second set of records was created that did not match up with the initial voting records. I wonder why, but that is a subject for another time.

Recently Democrat Secretary of State Jena Griswold designated former Republican Secretary of State Wayne Williams to oversee the upcoming Mesa County Clerk and Recorder’s elections. As Colorado Secretary of State, Wayne Williams dictated that all counties use the Dominion Voting Machines. The Douglas County Clerk and Recorder successfully sued so that Douglas County did not use the Dominion machines. I wonder why Williams issued that edict, but that is a subject for another day.

The other woman who is running for Secretary of State on the Republican ticket sits on the board of the Center of Tech and Civic Life (CTCL). Journalist Mollie Hemingway wrote in her book Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech and the Democrats Seized Our Elections, “The Zuckerberg Initiative, an organization led by Zuckerberg’s wife Priscilla, gave more that $400 million to nonprofit groups that were part of a conspiracy to control the 2020 election. Most of those funds -- colloquially called ‘Zuck Bucks’ -- were funneled through the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), a group led by three Democrats with a long history of activism.” The other woman who is running for Secretary of State on the Republican ticket sits on the board of the Center of Tech and Civic Life (CTCL). She says that she sits on the board so that she can have a seat at the table. It looks like election manipulation was on the menu. She is either naïve as to what was going on at CTCL regarding election manipulation or she knew. If she was naïve, then she is incompetent. If she knew, then she is complicit.

There is another candidate in the Secretary of State race on the Republican ticket. I do not know him well. He seems like a good guy; however, he does not have the fire in the belly to take on the Democrats and the squishy big government Republicans, to clean up Colorado’s elections. Tina Peters does.

For our state and for our country, vote for Tina Peters for Colorado Secretary of State.

So many of you have asked for recommendations regarding other races. There are amazing Grassroots candidates running for offices throughout the state. I do not currently have the bandwidth to fully vet them, hence just these three recommendations. Any candidate that reached out to me, I gave them time on the show so that you can know them better. Check out my website kimmonson.com and search for their names to listen to their interviews.

We are at our moment in history. We are in the third Founding of our great American Republic. God willing, we will protect her and pass her on to the next generation. With fervent faith in the Divine Provider, we must work and pray to elect these amazing Grassroots Colorado candidates: Greg Lopez for Governor, Ron Hanks for U.S. Senate and Tina Peters for Secretary of State. Your Contributions Are Important For the past several years I have provided clarity on important issues and used my platform to protect the interests of Colorado citizens. It takes a considerable amount of money and time to do this. To support this important work, please go here and make a contribution. Thank you and onward!

Kim Monson Featured Articles: Recent Episodes

Kim Monson