Parents must do their part
Recently, I have heard and read a lot about what school administrators and law enforcement are doing to make public schools safer. These actions are good news! I believe that parents have a responsibility to do all they can in their homes to protect students at school. Here are some questions parents might want to ask themselves:
If there is a gun or guns in the home, are they accessible to children, regardless of age?
Is ammunition kept separate from the gun(s)?
If there is conflict between family members, can it be resolved? Counseling might be helpful.
Is a family member being bullied at school, or even at home?
Do parents know what their child or children are viewing on their computers, cellphones or other devices?
Do video “games” played at home use the word “kill” indiscriminately? If so, this can desensitize users to the real impact of killing.
Are parents saying “I love you” and showing that love to their children by their actions?
Do children feel comfortable discussing any problem with their parent(s)?
Are parents teaching and demonstrating respect for others?
Addressing the above questions requires a lot of time and effort, but it is a good investment of both. I strongly believe that we as parents should not simply rely on school administrators and law enforcement to protect our children, even though they do their best. Parents must do their part in their homes to help keep our precious children safe at school, too.
Sounds a little strange
Why does Colorado Springs have more red-light cameras than Denver? Why does Colorado Springs charge more on the red-light tickets than Denver? Where are our voted in representatives when the city is doing this. The last great mayor we had took down of those red-light cameras. Sounds a little strange to me.
A march to tyranny
Nancy Pelosi: “No one is above the law.”
• Sandy Berger — stealing classified documents — charged with a misdemeanor — no jail time
• Hillary Clinton — illegal talking and destroying of classified documents, stealing WH furniture, lied to Congress, authorized and funded RussiaGate fraud — no consequences
• Eric Swalwell — sex affair with Chinese spy — no investigation, no consequences
• Diane Feinstein — Chinese spy chauffer — no investigation, no consequences
• Eric Holder — lied to Congress, contempt of Congress — no consequences
• Paul Pelosi — attempts to minimize DOI accident with injury — consequences unknown
• Barrack Obama — the destruction of WH property, violation of Presidential records Act by keeping classified documents — no consequences
• Hunter Biden — conspiracy and collusion with the enemy (treason)
• Joe Biden — conspiracy and collusion with the enemy (treason)
• Adam Schiff — lied to Congress, illegal subpoenas — no consequences
• Nancy Pelosi — makes millions from insider trading — no consequences
• James Comey — illegal disclosure of classified information — no consequences
• John Brennan — lied to Congress — no consequences
• James Clapper — lied to Congress — no consequences
The single thread: they are Democrats (with one questionable exception)
Yet, they never let up on Trump. Everything up to now, all the accusations, insinuations, and allegations have proven groundless. But, they keep looking, lying, manufacturing, and trying to misdirect and misinform the American citizens in desperate hope of turning an election so they can continue on their march to tyranny.
Is it really plausible?
According to the Biden administration, only households with incomes of over $400,000 will have their income tax returns face addition scrutiny by the 87,000 IRS agents being hired under the Inflation Reduction Act.
In 2022, according to the IRS, there were approximately 2.7 million households with incomes over $400,000. That would mean that each of the newly hired 87,000 IRS agents would annually only need to review 31 tax returns, thereby allowing each agent six days to review each of these tax returns.
Is it really plausible to believe the additional 87,000 IRS agents will only be reviewing the tax returns of households with incomes over $400,000?
Politically motivated fear
Sen. Pete Lee fights for sensible criminal justice policy, championing bipartisan legislation for restorative justice, victims, privacy, mental and behavioral health, and systemic change. He is now indicted by the very system he has spent decades trying to reform, and one need look no further than the political smears to see this prosecution is about laying false blame during an election year.
Instead of sensationalism, we should focus on evidence-based solutions to address the underlying economic drivers of crime. Decades of police, prosecution, and prisons waging a war on crime hasn’t worked, so why double down on more of the same?
The answer is simple and political: to scare the public into voting for “tough on crime” instead of smart on crime, effective measures like the ones Lee has tried to implement.
Sen. Lee stands up for the least among us, and the least we can do is judge his career as a dedicated public servant with a discerning eye, rather than accepting politically motivated fearmongering without questioning who benefits from it.