This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
There are many commonly used excuses that are, in fact, useless. The dog ate my homework. I didn't see the speed limit sign. I didn't know that was income, and more.
Now, in the age of artificial intelligence there are new ones appearing, including, Google told me wrong.
That's the problem facing duck hunters who was firing shots in Idaho … on a day when that wasn't legal.
A report from Cowboy State Daily explained an experienced hunter called counting on AI for accurate information is a "crapshoot."
At best.
Game agents in Idaho had to issue citations to hunters who thought they were following the law, but weren't.
"Idaho Fish and Game spokesman Roger Phillips told Cowboy State Daily some hunters were shooting on the wrong day."
Idaho officials say they want to get on top of the problem right away.
"It's one of those things, when it starts to bubble up, we want to alert people to what's going on," explained Phillips.
Officials in Wyoming, which also has a major industry in hunting, also have concerns.
"Amanda Fry, of Wyoming Game and Fish, explained, "We are seeing inaccuracies in some AI-generated overviews of our regulations. It is an important reminder to reference our website directly for accurate information on our laws and regulations."
She told the publication state officials are happy to provide "accurate" information.
It was Cody's Scott Weber, who has hunted for decades in Wyoming and other states, who told Cowboy State Daily that "he wouldn't trust AI to keep him from getting crossways with the law."
Only the official regulations count, he pointed out.
The report explained, "In the case of the duck hunting regulations, staff discovered that a search engine pulled proposed hunting season dates that were proposed at some point during commission meetings."
Wrong.
Commissioners actually picked other dates.
The report noted another bad situation developed when AI attached fishing regulations from another state to an Idaho river with a similar name.
Game wardens aren't inclined to let excuses stand.
"Here's the thing about that, and game wardens will tell you this, you as a hunter are responsible for knowing all the regulations."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a dispute involving a town's attempts to put Christian speech in a box and keep it there.
The practice of "free speech zones" has become common across the nation, at colleges and universities, in towns and counties and more.
The basis is that authorities determine that they will allow free speech by Christians, often involving members of the faith asking passersby about their relationship with Jesus, but they will allow that only in a specified area.
And that area often is in a remote, isolated and unseen location, behind buildings, on the far side of athletic stadium parking lots and the like.
The fight that the Supreme Court now has agreed to review involves Gabriel Olivier of Mississippi.
In the town of Brandon, officials adopted an ordinance that bans religious speech on public sidewalks near the city's amphitheater.
According to First Liberty Institute, the background is this: "Gabriel Olivier is an evangelical Christian who desires to share his faith with others. Standing outside of well-attended events, Olivier shares the gospel of Jesus Christ, hoping to have peaceful conversations and reach as many people as possible. He was silenced when the City of Brandon, Mississippi, adopted an unconstitutional ordinance that prohibits him from communicating his religious beliefs to others in a city park."
City officials assigned him a "protest" area "that was so far removed from the crowds no one could receive his message." When he moved closer to the traffic areas, he was arrested.
He was fined, then sued the city in federal court and challenged the ordinance.
At the district court level, the judge dismissed the case without considering the facts. That ruling cited a U.S. Supreme Court decision, Heck v. Humphrey, that concerns prisoners and had nothing to do with these free speech circumstances.
When the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals traveled down the same path, an appeal went to the Supreme Court, which now will review.
"Every American has First Amendment rights to free speech; and every American has a right to their day in court," Kelly Shackelford, chief counsel for First Liberty Institute, said. "Both of these rights were violated for Gabe Olivier. The Supreme Court will now decide whether those rights will be protected for all Americans."
Allyson Ho, a partner at Gibson Dunn, which also is involved in the case, added, "We're pleased the Court agreed to take up this important case, and we look forward to presenting our arguments that Mr. Olivier is entitled to his day in court."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Alfred Kinsey, who used sex convicts and pedophiles to make up studies with wild claims that children are sexual from birth, largely is credit with triggering the dive into the massive promotions of deviant and damaging sex ideologies across America.
He was described by officials at Liberty Counsel, who have fought his agenda for years, as "a sexual pervert whose unscientific propaganda exploited women and harmed children."
He inflicted torture on children as they sobbed in pain and then claimed they were enjoying his sex experiments on them.
The results have included rampant pornography in schools, story book hours with drag queens, the claims that abuse of children is normal and more.
It was commentator Linda Harvey who said, "Let's be frank about school sex education. Many classes have become unapologetically pornographic, yet many parents are unaware their kids learn dangerous messages laced with obscenity in the guise of 'health education.'"
Liberty Counsel pointed out at the time 43 states have exemptions from obscenity laws that let sexually explicit materials be used in schools.
"Educational obscenity exemptions are but one example of the toxic legacy of Dr. Alfred Kinsey and his claim that children are sexual from birth and unharmed by sexual activity," explained Mary E. McAlister, senior litigation counsel for Liberty Counsel, who has been researching the exemptions and bringing their toxic history to light.
"That claim, borne out of records of systematic child sexual abuse, was used as a basis for wholesale revision of our criminal laws through the Model Penal Code, of which the educational obscenity exemptions are a part," McAlister said.
But there has been work to respond. Just two years ago, lawmakers in Indiana killed state tax funding for the Indiana University institute launched by Kinsey.
Liberty Counsel chief Mat Staver charged that Kinsey's actions are "indefensible" and Indiana University "should disassociate itself from anything related to Alfred Kinsey."
In fact, Kinsey's "research" resulted from what actually included data from "serial child rapists, sex offenders, prisoners, prostitutes, pedophiles, and pederasts."
The late Dr. Judith Reisman was a visiting professor at Liberty University School of Law and documented the criminal abuse of more than 300 infants and children in the production of Kinsey's research. These children were ages two months to 15 years.
Now, it is time for the next step, a congressional investigation of Kinsey.
That's according to Rhonda Miller, the chief of Purple for Parents United, who explained in a column at the Federalist, "Kinsey's fraudulent research and criminal experiments in the 1940s and '50s ignited the sexual revolution with the lies that sexual perversion is normal and that children are sexual from birth. His reports, 'Sexual Behavior in the Human Male' and 'Sexual Behavior in the Human Female,' laid the groundwork for comprehensive sexuality education and the repeal of legal protections for women and children. Through the United Nations, Kinsey's perversion has spread worldwide, and grassroots leaders from around the world are calling on Congress to step in."
She reported that that the idea of an investigation into what may have involved serious crimes against children arose in 1995, when Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas proposed H.R. 2749 to require an investigation to determine whether Kinsey's research resulted from "fraud or criminal wrongdoing" — and defunded agencies and institutions teaching it as credible if that was the case.
She explained, "If Congress had investigated and eradicated Kinsey's influence in 1995, the world's children would not have been perverted by it. It is time for Congress to do what it should have done 30 years ago: investigate Kinsey's crimes and fraud and defund any agency or institution that promotes them."
She pointed out Kinsey's "science" was used to damage social sciences, culture, laws and education.
"Fifty-two state laws protecting women and children were weakened or repealed as states shifted from the common law to the Model Penal Code, which was based on Kinsey's research. Many states exempted schools, museums, and libraries from laws against distributing pornography to children. Penalties for sexual crimes were lessened, and plea bargains became the norm."
Now the internet ha normalized "abusive and violent sexual behavior and fueling the demand for sex trafficking."
She noted it was her organization that worked with Indiana lawmakers to defund Kinsey's agenda.
"It's time for the federal government to step in," she said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In a stunning move that has developed in reaction to the extreme liberal positions being adopted by the Church of England, including a plan to change the Bible to remove homosexuality from its defined sins, the organization has lost 40 million members.
Actually, the few million members in the United Kingdom essentially have been tossed out of the fellowship, the worldwide Anglican church.
"As has been the case from the very beginning, we have not left the Anglican Communion; we are the Anglican Communion," charged a letter from a church chief in Rwanda.
It is the worldwide Anglicans who have announced a separation from the British component of the church.
A report at Protestia explained it was a "major blow" that developed as a "punishing reminder that theological treason has consequences."
The "departing" membership is some 10 times the number of Anglicans who remain, in England.
"We cannot continue to have communion with those who advocate the revisionist agenda, which has abandoned the inerrant word of God as the final authority," the worldwide Anglican Communion has announced.
The British portion of the organization for years has adopted changes to the Bible that allow homosexual leadership in the church, approval of wide range of other progressive issues like abortion, and more.
It recently was considering formally blessing same-sex unions and changing the Bible so that homosexuality no longer was a sin, but abruptly backed away.
Explained Protestia, "Over the past two decades, the denomination has been liberalizing at a rapid rate, recently appointing Sarah Mullally, a pro-choice feminist as the new Archbishop of Canterbury and allowing the church to bless same-sex couples, with a major contingent pushing the church to deem homosexuality no longer sinful."
It is the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans, the conservative branch, that already had been pushing back against the denomination's "abandonment of the scriptures and historic Anglican teaching."
The report explained the denomination uses four authorities: "the Archbishop of Canterbury, (someone first among equals) the Lambeth Conference (a meeting of bishops around the world that gathers once a decade), the Primates' Meeting (a meeting of the bishops and archbishops of each of the church's 41 provinces, with the last one held in 2020), and the Anglican Consultative Council, which includes everyone from bishops to deacons to laity and meets every three years."
The conservatives already had replaced the Lambeth Conference with the Jerusalem Conference, and they had issued a "Declaration," affirming Christian beliefs including the marriage as between one man and one woman.
"They further formed their own Primates' Council, held meetings, and recently released a statement that they 'no longer recognize the Archbishop of Canterbury as an Instrument of Communion' or the 'first among equals' of global Primates," the report said.
Now, the report explained, the conservatives have confirmed they are not splitting from the historic Anglican Church, but "rather that they ARE the true Anglican Communion and will be reordering themselves accordingly."
The changes will include a replacement for the Archbishop of Canterbury, as that office now is occupied by Sarah Mullally, "an illegitimate usurper."
The conservative organization said the actions are in response to "the abandonment of the Scriptures" by traditional leaders.
They first sought to persuade those leaders to repent, but they did not.
Their statement:
We resolved to reorder the Anglican Communion as follows:
1. We declare that the Anglican Communion will be reordered, with only one foundation of communion, namely the Holy Bible, "translated, read, preached, taught and obeyed in its plain and canonical sense, respectful of the church's historic and consensual reading" (Jerusalem Declaration, Article II), which reflects Article VI of the 39 Articles of Religion.
2. We reject the so-called Instruments of Communion, namely the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), and the Primates Meeting, which have failed to uphold the doctrine and discipline of the Anglican Communion.
3. We cannot continue to have communion with those who advocate the revisionist agenda, which has abandoned the inerrant word of God as the final authority and overturned Resolution I.10, of the 1998 Lambeth Conference.
4. Therefore, Gafcon has re-ordered the Anglican Communion by restoring its original structure as a fellowship of autonomous provinces bound together by the Formularies of the Reformation, as reflected at the first Lambeth Conference in 1867, and we are now the Global Anglican Communion.
5. Provinces of the Global Anglican Communion shall not participate in meetings called by the Archbishop of Canterbury, including the ACC, and shall not make any monetary contribution to the ACC, nor receive any monetary contribution from the ACC or its networks.
6. Provinces, which have yet to do so, are encouraged to amend their constitution to remove any reference to being in communion with the See of Canterbury and the Church of England.
7. To be a member of the Global Anglican Communion, a province or a diocese must assent to the Jerusalem Declaration of 2008, the contemporary standard for Anglican identity.
8. We shall form a Council of Primates of all member provinces to elect a Chairman, as primus inter pares ('first amongst equals'), to preside over the Council as it continues "to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A nurse arrested for driving under the influence has been dismissed from her job after a video of her being taken into custody confirmed she promised the officers she would let them "die."
"I'm a f—— nurse. When you come through my hospital, don't worry, I'll let you die. All your family members, and this is all on recording," the video reveals her to be saying.
According to a report at Law & Crime, the nurse was identified as Crystal Tadlock, who used to work at Memorial Hermann Greater Heights Hospital in Houston.
She was stopped and arrested by police from the Magnolia, Texas, department.
Tadlock allegedly added, "Greater Heights, b—. Don't go there."
The arrest documentation, Law & Crime said, charged that she was pulled over for speeding.
"[Tadlock] stated she was unaware she was traveling 66 mph and mentioned she was returning home from a concert at the Cynthia Woods Pavilion," the report alleges. "She indicated she had dropped off friends who had been drinking and was on her way home."
The officer reported a smell of alcohol coming from the vehicle when he pulled her over, and she allegedly failed field sobriety tests.
"During transport, Crystal became increasingly belligerent, making derogatory remarks and threats. She initially stated that the reason I was doing this was because ICE had not picked me up yet. Crystal also made racist comments about my ethnicity and stated that she is going to be getting out of this because she is white. She also stated that she had an issue with me because I was not white," the arresting officer reported.
The hospital, when officials were given details, released a statement that the employee was suspended pending investigation, and subsequently terminated.
"Once she arrived at jail, staff stated that she had also made the same comment to them that she uttered earlier, saying 'that if any of them went to the hospital where she works, she would ensure they die as well,' according to the arrest report," Law & Order said.
Police officials claimed there is "no excuse" for such actions.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The anti-Christian Communist regime in China long has been known for hating Christians and trying to obliterate either their beliefs, or them.
It previously has bulldozed Christian churches, forced faith organizations to promote the leftist ideologies of communism, censored and restricted Bibles, and much more. Arrests of Christians, especially leaders, are common.
Now its latest crackdown has cost Pastor Ezra Jin his freedom.
He's founder of Zion Church and was jailed recently, along with "dozens of church leaders and members," according to a report from the American Center for Law and Justice.
Zion Church is described as a large "underground house church," meaning it is not "authorized" by the government and therefore does not preach only messages that the communist regime approves.
He has congregations across China with thousands of members.
This is Pastor Ezra Jin.
Now detained by the Chinese Communist Party for crimes against the state.
The crime is organizing Christian religious movements in various cities.
Pray for him. pic.twitter.com/MNF6szpepa
— John Webber (@TheWebberBrief) October 12, 2025
On Friday evening, my father-in-law Pastor Ezra Jin was arrested by Chinese government officials, along with more than 20 other pastors and church workers across 7 cities in the most extensive attack on a Chinese church in 4 decades. I have been quiet here mostly because helping… https://t.co/05Vbe3ayGG pic.twitter.com/4M3l5SGR1J
— Bill Drexel (@bill_drexel) October 12, 2025
Dozens of pastors from one of the largest underground churches in China have been detained. It is reportedly the biggest crackdown on Christians by the communist regime since 2018.
Chinese police have detained Pastor Ezra Jin Mingri, the founder of Zion Church, at his home in… pic.twitter.com/1doHJm1hNJ
— CBN News (@CBNNews) October 14, 2025
Jin, a pastor and father of children with U.S. citizenship, was arrested at his home in Beihai, Guangxi, just days ago, the report said. His daughter, Grace Jin Drexel, said the events have been "very scary" for the family.
The report explained more than 30 other pastors and church staff members also "simply vanished."
A church statement said, "They broke into homes, handcuffed even the elderly, and took them away. One pastor's mother had a heart attack during the arrest. Another woman was dragged from her newborn baby."
Subsequent charges claimed "illegal dissemination of religious information via the internet."
The report said police used violence to take people into custody.
"These attacks are a stark reminder of the severe persecution Christians face in China simply for worshiping according to their faith. Though China's constitution promises religious freedom, the Chinese Communist Party, an officially atheist regime, restricts worship to government-controlled, state-approved organizations," the ACLJ explained.
The hate campaign caught the attention of U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who insisted that China allow all believers, including those in house churches, to worship without fear of attacks.
According to UPI, Rubio said, "We call on the CCP to immediately release the detained church leaders and to allow all people of faith, including members of house churches, to engage in religious activities without fear of retribution."
Church official Sean Long said, "We strongly appeal to the global church society to hold the Chinese government accountable. They cannot do whatever they want without letting people know. Let our ministers and staff members be released as soon as possible. Stop arresting our members."
Long, in an interview said, "We are not criminals but Christians. We are not anti-CCP, we are not anti-China. We love our people, love our society, love our culture. We are not a western political force. That is 100% wrong. We are a Chinese house church adhering to historic Christian faith. We are believers of Jesus. We have nothing to do with the U.S.-China tension or competition."
The organization has an estimated 10,000 participants in 40 cities.
The communists attacked the same church several years ago, when it declined to install security cameras that government officials could use in its structures.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, the chief of the House Judiciary Committee, is demanding testimony from ex-special counsel Jack Smith.
Smith needs to respond to questions about how his team "sought to silence President Trump by restricting his public statements about the case."
How Smith orchestrated an "unnecessary and abusive raid of his residence."
How Smith "attempted to improperly pressure defense counsel with the promise of political patronage."
And how Smith "manipulated key evidence."
That's according to letter from Jordan to Smith, in which he requires Smith's testimony "after several members of his special counsel team failed to fully cooperate with the committee's investigation of the Biden-Harris Justice Department's weaponization of the rule of law."
Smith, although his cases against Trump failed, did succeed in his plan to undermine "the integrity of the criminal justice system," Jordan said.
Jordan wrote, "To date, the committee has conducted transcribed interviews and depositions of several individuals detailed to your office, including Jay Bratt, J.P. Cooney, and Thomas Windom. In addition, the committee has obtained internal Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) documents that show the FBI, with the likely involvement of prosecutors that were later assigned to your team, surveilled Representative Scott Perry prior to seizing his cell phone in a stunning breach of constitutional separation of powers. Your abusive surveillance of sitting Members of Congress did not stop there. Earlier this week, the FBI, at the direction of Director Kash Patel, released an alarming document showing that your team requested and obtained private phone records for at least eight Senators and one Representative during an investigation known as 'Arctic Frost.' These documents reinforce the conclusion that your office conducted politically motivated investigations."
He explained, "Although the Committee has learned new information from these interviews, several members of your Special Counsel team failed to fully cooperate with the Committee's inquiry. For example, during a transcribed interview with the Committee, former Senior Assistant Special Counsel Thomas Windom relied on an overbroad and unreasonable interpretation of grand jury secrecy protections to refuse to answer the Committee's questions on important topics. After the Committee subpoenaed Windom to compel his testimony, he invoked various ill-defined privileges and objections, including the Fifth Amendment, to refuse to answer approximately 70 questions. According to Windom's counsel, 'the foundation of [Windom's] decision to decline to answer is his constitutional right to silence embodied in the Fifth Amendment.' For instance, Windom refused to answer 'how many other members of Congress were investigated as part of the Arctic Frost investigation and Jack Smith investigation' and if there are records of additional 'Members of Congress that were swept up by a legal process' pursuant to this investigation."
The member of Congress explained, "As the special counsel, Smith was ultimately responsible for the prosecutorial misconduct and constitutional abuses of his office."
Jordan noted another problem was Jay Bratt, who advised Smith, who "invoked the Fifth Amendment approximately 75 times during his interview with the Committee. He refused to answer key questions necessary for the Committee's oversight, including whether the purpose of the classified documents investigation was to affect the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, whether the raid on Mar-a-Lago was intended to capture political intelligence, who he met with during his three visits to the Biden-Harris White House, and why he pressured defense counsel using the promise of political patronage."
Jordan now wants from Smith details about his appointment, details about Smith's interactions and meetings with the Biden-Harris administration, and details about all of the investigations, decisions, and "tactics."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The top leaders of the Jewish nation of Israel have been caught on video, in fact, multiple videos, actually cheering for President Donald Trump, who has been described by Democrats and other leftists as a "Hitler."
The cheers followed Monday the release of the last of the hostages taken and held by the terrorists of Hamas in their act of war against Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
It was a plan assembled by Trump and his advisers, now being put into place, that at least for now halted the Israeli army's advance into Gaza against Hamas, and providwed the release of the last of the living hostages.
They had been taken by terrorists on that 2023 day when invaders also slaughtered about 1,200 Israeli citizens.
A headline at Not the Bee captured the sentiment, saying, "Man compared frequently to Hitler gets standing ovation from Israeli parliament for peace deal."
And it follows a years-long campaign by Democrats and others in the far left to deride Trump as a "Hitler."
They've often used that most-vile of epithets to complain that he's totalitarian, that he's dictatorial, that he's, in short, "Hitler."
In recent months they've expanded that to calling his supporters "Nazis."
One incident happened just weeks ago.
Trump was at a Washington, D.C., restaurant as pro-Palestine protesters from Code Pink called him "Hitler."
"Stepping out into the nation's capital since his crackdown on crime, Trump, along with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, dined at Joe's Seafood, Prime Steak & Stone Crab. While walking through the restaurant, a video obtained by CNN and posted on X by the outlet's White House reporter Samantha Waldenberg shows Vance approaching a table to greet customers.
"Enjoy your dinner," Vance said as protesters were heard in the background.
Trump was then seen walking straight toward the protesters as they yelled, "Free D.C., Free Palestine. Trump is the Hitler of our time!"
Those wild shouts now have been contrasted by the enthusiasm for Trump and his work that was revealed through the cheers of the Knesset, Israeli's lawmaking body, when Trump appeared after the release of the Israeli hostages.
Leftists even have accused conservatives and Republicans over and over of, when they raise their hands in any fashion, including to wave to the crowd, using the Nazi salute.
WND has reported calling someone "Hitler" means that they are the worst.
And that's a key mantra used by Democrats against Trump.
A report in the New York Post explained, "White House staffers and campaign aides first started using the term after Trump dined with rapper Kanye West and notorious Holocaust skeptic and white nationalist Nick Fuentes at his Mar-a-Lago estate two days before Thanksgiving in 2022," Politico reported.
The report noted the response often follows what some consider outlandish comments from Trump.
"Hey, did you see what Hitler Pig said?" Biden aides will say in those situations, the report said.
"Why do Biden and other top Democrats continually compare Donald Trump to Hitler, and not only that, but also slander his supporters as Nazis and fascists?" asks author and WND Vice President and Managing Editor David Kupelian. "They do it because, if Trump really were another Hitler, and if Christian conservatives really were Nazis and fascists, then all the normal rules of society – all laws, all moral standards, all boundaries – would vanish, which is exactly how the radical Left likes things: No rules.
"Of course," he adds, "their premise is insane: Adolf Hitler murdered 11 million people, Donald Trump murdered zero. Yet in their minds, they're in a war against Hitler. In which case it becomes not only morally permissible – but a moral imperative – for them to daily lie, bribe, steal, censor, rig elections and much more, if doing so enables them to get rid of Hitler and save millions of innocent lives."
"Trump campaign adviser Chris LaCivita argued that the nickname is more of a reflection of the White House staffers that use it," the Post reported.
"[Politico] thinks this is funny it's actually more a representation of what a rag they've become and the level of s–t that works in the White House 'Hitler Pig,'" he wrote on X.
A report in Politico said, "that moniker," is "one that aides to and allies of the president – generally younger, more digitally native individuals, not senior staffers, one person clarified – frequently use to describe Trump."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Kamala Harris, the 2024 Democrat nominee for president who lost in a landslide to President Donald Trump, giving him victories in the Electoral College, the popular vote and every single swing state, long has been an extremist on LGBT ideologies.
She was part of the Joe Biden administration that insisted even on taxpayer funding for body mutilating surgeries on children.
But now she's out with a book about how she spent a billion dollars over a few weeks in her failed campaign, and a sharp-eyed reader has spotted a significant admission: Harris confirmed that Democrats knew of the problems with having boys who say they are girls playing on girls' athletic teams.
She said that clearly was "unfair."
The confession by Harris was spotted by Macy Petty, a former NCAA volleyball player and now legislative strategist for the Concerned Women for America Legislation Action Committee, who wrote about it at Fox News.
She noted, "In her recently released book about her presidential candidacy, former Vice President Kamala Harris admits that she, too, shares concerns: 'I agree with the concerns expressed by parents and players that we have to take into account biological factors such as muscle mass and unfair student athletic advantage when we determine who plays on which teams, especially in contact sports.'"
However, Harris continued, "There was no way I was going to go against my very nature and turn on transgender people."
Petty wrote, "And there it is. Tension unmasked. When reality collides with allegiance, the Democrats choose allegiance."
The fights over boys who say they are girls and demand access to girls' teams, girls' spaces, even girls' locker rooms and showers, have erupted across the nation.
Some states have determined that sex-specific locations will be occupied by only those of that sex, and they do not allow someone with a "gender ideology" or identity to overrule science, which in fact says that being male or female is embedded in to the human body down to the DNA level, so no one actually "changes" from male to female or vice versa.
Others oddly claim that males really are female.
Petty noted the fight endured by Riley Gaines, a swimmer who tied with a male in a competition, and was forced to watch as he was awarded the trophy.
"The moment sparked a nationwide campaign to try and convince everyday Americans that this feeling was not just instinct; it was internalized bigotry and evidence that there was noble, progressive work still to do. Only one problem. It was all a lie," the commentary explained.
Harris' comments now confirm "that not even the top Democratic leaders believed what they were selling."
Petty was in college when these war over males in female spaces erupted.
"The issue was linked to the Democrats' pro-LGBTQIA+ position, which they had insisted was the civil rights issue of our time, and now it was squarely at odds with something plainly unjust. But they were in too deep. At every turn, those who tried to find solutions to the problem of men in women's sports, including traditionally far-left organizations like Women's Liberation Front, found themselves up against the powerful political operatives of the Democratic Party. Though the ties between LGB and T were fading, the radical left insisted that to be pro-gay or pro-woman, you had to also stand for men in women's sports. Democrats obliged."
The column explained polling shows that issue played "an outsized role" in last year's election, and Democrats paid the price.
"Voters did not buy the lie that their concerns were merely internalized bigotry," she noted.
And Harris is not alone in speaking the quiet part out loud.
"California Gov. Gavin Newsom has publicly admitted that this is 'an issue of fairness – it's deeply unfair.' Yet, his state is one of the worst offenders of women's rights in this area," Petty wrote.
"As we hope this issue joins the parade of failed civil rights attacks of times gone by, voters and candidates alike should heed the warning. Never stand for a lie. Truth is our only sure foundation. Policy must be based on reality."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Colorado has a novel concept in its state constitution. TABOR, the Taxpayers Bill of Rights, dates back to when the state was both Republican and Democrat, unlike its current leadership that is all-Democrat.
The provision simply calls for a vote of the people before any taxes are raised.
Now lawmakers frequently have run end-arounds to their own constitution, insisting that the money they demand is a "fee," not a tax. But that defies reality in that they charge "fees" for Colorado residents to use roads and bridges, but refuse to charge that same "fee" to out-of-state drivers using the same roads and bridges.
If it walks and talks like a tax…
Leftists in the Democrat-majority legislature also repeatedly have used a state Supreme Court ruling that appeared to allow "de minimus" or "incidental" tax revenue changes without a vote.
Now the lawmakers were faced with a serious budget shortfall, which was aggravated by their decision to replace millions of dollars abortionists lost because of congressional action and millions that wealthy EV buyers would have lost because of federal changes, with money from state taxpayers' pockets, and turned to their agenda of scooping up all the money they can.
Too much, came the warning, even from the state Supreme Court, which is so far left members tried to remove Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential ballot before being scolded by the U.S. Supreme Court.
A report at Complete Colorado revealed the state court has put officials on notice about those tax hikes.
The warning came in a court ruling that struck down two tax increases in the city of Lakewood.
"In doing so, justices raised issues that cast doubt on 'hocus pocus' incantations relied upon by legislators during the special session," the report explained.
The court, through Justice Richard Gabriel, said, "[A] taxing district (including the state) cannot exempt itself from TABOR's restrictions and requirements simply by declaring that a legislative change has a purpose other than revenue generation."
"This should be a cold shower for lawmakers who think they can alter reality with a legislative declaration. Passing a bill that declares, 'up is down,' doesn't make it so," the report said.
Further, the court found, "it was obvious when each (Lakewood) Ordinance was enacted that it would have the effect of raising revenue," and added, "although revenue generation may not have been the only purpose … revenue generation was not merely incidental."
To bring that back to state lawmakers, in their special session in August, they "passed several bills to raise tax revenue and partially fill the growing chasm between federal tax policy and progressive Democrats' insatiable spending," the report said.
The state's Democrat majority demanded Colorado taxpayers increase their state tax liability by adding back a 20% deduction allowed under federal law for business income received from partnerships, sole proprietorships and certain corporations, the report said.
That bill is expected to increase tax revenue by $97 million in 2025-26, the report said.
Further, lawmakers decided to reduce a tax deduction for insurance companies that keep at least 2% of their employees based in Colorado, resulting in an estimated $90 million increase in tax revenue, the report said.
Their thinking was that nearly $200 million in tax increases was "incidental" and "de minimus."