Sending the wrong message
Reference the acquittal of the man who obstructed the road during a protest. Viewpoint: Protester Acquitted (Gazette, June 18)
So its OK to stand in the middle of the road and block traffic? I don’t think so. I guess he refused to move and that was why he was arrested. Misdemeanor offenses such as these should have resulted in a hefty fine and if not paid, a day or two in jail. This 25 -year-old former military man says it was unjust and violated his constitutional rights.
Give me a break. Yes, he had the right to protest, but not break the law. He should have thought about that before obstructing traffic. His acquittal sends the wrong message to other protesters and undercuts the police from doing their jobs. By the way, what happened to the protesters on I-25 that blocked traffic and beat on cars?
Situation begs for close scrutiny
I believe the Gazette has an opportunity to win another Pulitzer, this time for investigative reporting. The recent article about Lt. Colonel Matthew Lohmeier’s experience with egregious suppression of his reports on growing Marxism in the military demands a close and unbiased examination of the situation, including interviews with as many as possible of those officers and enlisted he mentions in his book and interviews.
Given the lieutenant colonel’s removal from his post, this situation begs for close scrutiny, and the Gazette is well-placed to tackle it. Nothing is more likely to effect change in the military than well-researched and substantiated evidence proving the existence of this threat to our military and thus to our national security.
A sad moment in military history
Sunday’s Gazette (June, 20) reported that the VA will start ramping up to perform sexual reassignment operations. I guess the road to social transformation has totally infiltrated the military now. As many older veterans can attest to, this latest policy is the logical result of military-political correctness.
In conversations with older vets, I find that to a man, that they are appalled by this new policy and the tax dollars wasted in this foolhardy endeavor.
Many DAV service officers will tell you that they have fought the VA tooth and nail to get benefits for veterans who are deserving of them due to disabilities, suffered while serving their country. What does sexual preference have to do with anything?
Moreover, how can this possibly be relevant in an all-volunteer military?
This is truly a sad moment in military history in my humble opinion.
We must have forgotten the primary mission of the military, which is; to prepare for, and to fight this nation’s battles. To that end, I want a well-trained- well-equipped, and well-paid military who understands why they are in the military in the first place!
The military should not be a social engineering laboratory. The Chinese and Russian army’s must be belly laughing all the way to the PT fields. Our enemies may not be so socially enlightened and politically correct as our military if we ever have to come face to face with them.
Last, I would expect that veteran groups (of which I belong) would speak out against this new VA policy. I would expect that politicians would voice their disapproval also. (Hope you’re listening Doug Lamborn) Let’s see some political courage and common sense.
Maybe it’s just time to change the phrase from; Be All That You Can Be in exchange for; Be the Gender That You Want To Be (and the military will pay for it.)
A purposefully destructive ideology
I always enjoy Joe Barrera’s columns, even if I often disagree with him. He is a classical liberal capable of open dialogue and critical analyses, a compliment I could not give to most Leftists who have a totalitarian bent to their thinking, wanting to shut down and stifle countervailing arguments and ban conservative thought off of the major social media platforms.
However, while the good professor gives a very convincing defense of critical race theory (CRT) in Friday’s Gazette (“Vital need for ethnic studies”) as a graduate level exercise, this framework is wholly detached from the actual implementation. He says this is not even an undergraduate level course, so why are we taking elementary level children and segregating them by skin color for teaching CRT? Why does the corporate non-academic implementation segregate off European males for special abusive treatment? This is not a liberal dialogue, it a purposefully destructive ideology to drive a wedge between racial groups.
The same party that brought you Jim Crow, slavery, redlining, and systematic racism is now bringing you CRT to destroy the idea that we are all unique individuals, brothers and sisters regardless of skin color, and not foremost members of this or that race. CRT has no end point outside of totalitarianism, no equality for individuals, just equity (i.e., group identity foremost and totalitarianism), it has no place in a democratic society.
Election integrity in question
I was concerned when our Democrat Secretary of State Jenna Griswold put a temporary emergency order in place to stop an election audit of the 2020 election, and plans to make it permanent. Is that Constitutional?
Every voter in Colorado needs to believe that our election was free, fair and perfect as we have been told by our election officials. It shouldn’t matter which side of the political spectrum you are on, you should want to be assured that our election was honest and above board. We are seeing huge voting discrepancies in Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Georgia, and Arizona. The Arizona audit is the first, most transparent, third party audit in our history and Democratic Secretaries of State across the country are trying to stop them. Why? Every voter wants their vote to count and if elections are being manipulated we become Venezuela.
Lets demand an audit in Colorado.