Tuesday, November 14, 2017


Just Be Nice 

If I had a magic wand, I’d wave Societal Color-Coders into Societal Character Leaders!
Why? Because Color-Coders of ALL colors destroy that which Character Leaders toil in earnest to build. 
Hell! Education, road and bridge budgets are now taking a back seat to “monument demolition” budgets...just because of this grossly unreasonable focus on skin color.
A Societal Color-Coder – aka racist - is one whose argument is wholly based on the color of one’s skin. Individuals including Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Maxine Waters come to mind.  
A Societal Character Leader is one whose whole argument is based on one’s behavior/character. Herman Cain, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Ben Carson are good examples of Societal Character Leaders.
After watching Ekow Yankah, a law professor, on Tucker Carlson last night, I blurted out to Chuck, “Damn’t all! This guy’s setting us back years! I’m frick’n exhausted with this kind of vile behavior! He reminds me of a white jerk I saw on a news report – some 30 years ago – who referred to my black neighbors as – well you know what!”
Poor Chuck. I yacked on repeating stories about how our efforts to mend color divides are always dragged down by racists of ALL color!
Ekow and his words replicated the before mentioned Color-Coders.
I shouted at the TV, “You inconsiderate jerk! Tell me! In your obvious hatred of people who have white skin, are you barking orders that a child who has a white parent should hereby “Go forth and hate that parent!”
Can’t bear to picture how his ill-formed, confusing mindset will cripple his children.
42 years ago, I was a solo petitioner against efforts to “color-code” Denver schools by "busing children.”
It never occurred to the powers that be, that simple budgeting mathematics would “equalize” education. Color-Coding would never work, for people have a habit of “moving.”
Very pregnant with my last child made those hot summer walks in our neighborhood a bit of a challenge.
We were blessed in that we lived in a neighborhood culturally rich with 1st generation Greeks, French, Japanese, Turks, Jews, Germans, Italians, Irish, Africans and mutts like me.  
We relished, learned from, loved and respected each other's cultural differences. We had FUN!
As he signed my little petition, my 3 door down neighbor teared up, "Roni. I spent my whole life working hard to get out of the ghetto. Now they want to bus my children back in there."
Four years later, I served on the Five Points Community Center Board when Vietnamese families were moving to Denver. When asked, “What do we do about them?” some board members said things that were unmentionable here as they growled “stay put” on any who dare tried to "get out of the ghetto.”
I’ll never forget the one board member who stood the tallest against the vile ones, for she was the shortest, oldest and smartest. She only saw “actions” not “color.” I loved that lady and her stories, “Once had to spank Bill McNichols.” She taught me stuff like, “Get some urea on that Pear tree.”
In 1968, a family whose skin was darker than mine moved next door to us. Because my family enjoyed their friendship, the other neighbors blatantly shunned us and bellowed at their children, “Get in the house NOW” each time my then 3 year old would go outside to play!
Long ago forgot the names of the rude neighbors. Only recently lost touch with my “enjoyable” neighbors.
Forever, I've publically asked for a test wherein individuals of a variety of skin colors, would behave in different ways - rude, obnoxious, kind, sweet. We'd study the responses to "behaviors versus the skin colors." I'll bet "behavior" will prevail.
It saddens me that President Barack Hussein Obama used the 8 years American voters gave him to “bus us back to the ghetto.”
I wished he hadn’t done that.
But he did.
What’s done CAN be un-done.
Couple ways...
Judge a person ONLY by their actions, not the shade of their skin.
Really LOOK at each human as an individual, not a collective. Unless they’re a hippy. OK. That wasn’t nice. But, having tolerated them once, their reemergence has extinguished my tolerance.
Think before you speak or act. 
Choose words that will heal, mend and resolve. Frame them in love. 
Don't do anything that would endanger you or your loved ones, but, when you witness unacceptable words or actions, do NOT given them attention. At all. Walk far, far away. Please. 
Anyway, you're smart. You get the gist. 
Just be nice. That'll work. 
Thank you. 

Thursday, October 5, 2017

Support President Trump for pro-life HHS Secretary

Tweet to support President Trump for a pro-life HHS secretary
October 5, 2017
As you know, President Trump soon will be naming a new secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services. The importance of having a pro-life person in that post cannot be overstated.
As you also know, the president prefers to take his message to the American people via his Twitter account, rather than waiting for the mainstream media to edit, dilute or overlook what he has to say. We are confident that if we approach the president on Twitter, he will get our message.
That’s why today, Oct. 5, Priests for Life and our youth ministry Stand True, Students for Life of America and the Susan B. Anthony List will be leading a Tweetfest to express our support to President Trump for choosing a strong pro-life candidate for HHS.
I’m sure I don’t have to remind you what the wrong person in the post can do. It was HHS that imposed the burdensome and unconstitutional abortifacient and contraception mandate on every employer in the country, including Priests for Life.
This president has displayed his commitment to the pro-life movement on numerous occasions, so we have no doubt that his HHS appointment will be strongly prolife. But the pro-abortion forces will criticize the President, and we want him to know that we stand with him as he makes this selection  from among the fine candidates believed to be on the short list.
And please forward this action email to as many people as you can. Be sure to sign up for regular action alerts from Priests for Life at www.StopAbortionNow.org.
Fr. Frank Pavone
Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life
Priests for Life
PO Box 236695
Cocoa, FL 32923
Tel. 321-500-1000,
Toll Free 888-735-3448
Email: mail@priestsforlife.org
We offer various options  for you to receive different emails from the different branches of our ministry. See how you can vary your preferences or unsubscribe. Remember, we want to keep you in the loop!

Saturday, September 2, 2017


Obama's dreamers get coddled, U.S. citizens get jailed. 

Each time I'm reminded of DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) I reflect back to this past spring at our Colorado capitol. 

Why?  Honest, hard working third, fourth and some fifth generation U.S. Citizens testified on an essential bill that would have recognized their "valid pre-existing rights."

Sponsored by Freshman Legislator Kimmi Lewis -HB 17-1141, the Equal Standing bill, would have provided protection for U.S. Citizens (in this particular case, Grazing Allotment Owners) from federal employees who went outside the law in their treatment of these U.S. Citizens.  

When anyone preaches, "Have some compassion! Keep Obama's Dreamer act!" it streams in the words and visions of U.S. Citizens telling Colorado's Assembly Members their heart wrenching stories about how federal employees destroyed their livelihoods and lives. 

Unlike the "illegal" immigrants, none of these U.S. Citizens had broken the law. Contrarily, it was federal employees - who had a history of breaking the law. 

Unlike "illegal" immigrants, Equal Standing did NOT request preferential treatment. It asked only that "valid pre-existing rights" of these U.S. Citizens be recognized. 

Equal Standing asked for the return of "due process" for U.S.Citizens, and that federal employees be held accountable for their harmful, wrongful, illegal, unconstitutional actions. 

I'll bet you the same Colorado legislators who told these U.S. Citizens, "No. You don't have any rights," are probably insisting "illegal" immigrants continue getting preferential treatment for "breaking the law." 

So here we go again. Coddling those who break the law, while jailing U.S. Citizens. 

Where's the "compassion" for U.S. Citizens? 

Here's the original draft copy of Equal Standing: 


Following is an excerpt from a Colorado Independent Cattlemen's Association newsletter: 

Supporting the effort of the CICA and Range Allotment Owner’s, attorneys Harriet Hageman and Korry Lewis of Hageman Law P.C. issued the following statement concerning HB 17-1141: “Colorado HB 17-1141 takes a bold step in the right direction. Range allotment owners are expected to comply with copious laws, burdensome regulations, and continuously changing policies of federal land management agencies.
It is time for Americans to expect the federal employees, as enforcers of the laws and policies, to likewise respect the allotment owners’ constitutionally-protected property interests.” The CICA was thoroughly disheartened to witness testimony against the bill by Terry Fankhauser, Executive Vice President of the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association. Fankhouser testified to representing the entire membership of the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association, the Colorado Wool Growers Association and the Colorado Public Lands Council. Fankhouser introduced Cory Doig, of C.E. Brookes and Associates, as an “expert in the field”. Doig expressed his opinion that ranchers have no rights to the forage on allotments and that the bill violated federal agents’ immunity from prosecution under the Qualified Immunity Doctrine. When questioned by Representative Leonard as to the current process for resolving disputes, Doig explained that the hosts of appeal, objection and litigation avenues are all “extremely expensive” and “time consumptive”. Doig postulated that a revised version of the bill might better address the issue. Representative Leonard subsequently asked for an example of legislation that “could end or at least provide a huge disincentive for those kinds of conflicts”. Doig replied, “Perhaps something that uses very plain language, that is define the scope of employment or the relationship between the exact federal employees that are on that allotment, would be something off the top of my head, but it would take some time to come up with something that I think could work.”
The number of USFS allotment owners has declined by 65% since 1966 (U.S. Department of Agriculture). The BLM’s website likewise confirms that “Grazing use on public lands has declined from 18.2 million AUMs in 1954 to 8.6 million AUMs in FY 2015 (a 53 percent decrease)”. When a cattlemen’s organization hires legal counsel to fight against rancher’s interests instead of working towards a solution for a problem that they agree undeniably exists, it is a sad day indeed. Ranchers, are the heart and soul of the CICA’s grassroots organization which sees to the interests and profitability of producers of  USA  raised beef.

For more on the Equal Standing and testimonies, go to: http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2017/02/25/emotion-behind-colorado-bill-to-protect-property-human-rights-from-feds-still-simmering/

Monday, August 28, 2017


What "law" did Sheriff Joe Arpaio break? 
What spurred this question was the brouhaha over President Donald Trump’s pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
My first question was, “What ‘law’ did Sheriff Arpaio break?”
I couldn’t find it anywhere. Why? Because he broke NO law. Therefore, it is this layperson’s charge that it was the judge, who first “broke the law,” by filing an injunction which ordered Arpaio to stop being a “law enforcer.” 
There are substantive differences between “law, regulation, injunctions etc.”
A quickie brief: Only U.S. Congress and State General Assemblies can make law. Agencies make regulations. Judges “interpret” law; they do NOT make law!
Don’t believe me. Do your own homework.
Learn how journalists opinions can mislead you.
Go beyond headers such as “Pardoning Joe Arpaio would show contempt for the Constitution” (Denver Post 2017/08/24). What you’ll learn is the reverse: The judge showed contempt for the Constitution, by filing an injunction which denied Sheriff Arpaio use of exercising the “law enforcement” duties his constituency elected him to do.