The US is headed for tyranny, and fascism. Or is it?...

 "No Kings Day" recently set a record, or so it was claimed, of 2,600+ protests across the country. The protests were mostly peaceful demonstrations organized not only in the US but around the world. Their stated purpose was to express opposition to what the participants see as rising authoritarianism in the Trump administration. There is the perception, and I emphasize the word 'perception', that the constitutional democratic form of government of the United States is under threat of, I'm not exactly sure what the protesters are afraid of, but I presume, ceasing to exist. That we are entering into a fascist dictatorship ruled by Donald Trump. 

Peaceful protests and demonstrations are a civil right in the US, a right afforded to every US citizen. They are a hallmark of a free, civil society. Are we really on the brink of authoritarian rule? Fascism? Naziism? Dictatorship? In the United States every citizen is entitled to their own opinion, as well as the right to openly speak their opinion. However, while it may not be a requirement of law, every citizen also bears the moral responsibility of adhering to the principles of right and wrong. Every American has the right to call Donald Trump whatever moniker they choose. Nazi, fascist, Hitler, that's a civil right. Untold numbers of American soldiers gave their lives so that we may preserve that right. 

When the activist fervor carries into violence, then there are no rights. At that point, it becomes a crime and the rule of law comes into play. Attacking federal officers, ramming personal vehicles into Immigration and Customs vehicles, endangering the lives of federal officers conducting federal sanctioned operations is not only illegal, it's morally inept. Far too many activists are under the misconception that ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, are conducting raids on innocent Americans. The vast majority of these raids have been targeted against illegal aliens with criminal records. And these criminal records are not pedestrian offenses. Rape, murder, drug offenses, human trafficking, assault, property crimes, et cetera. Unfortunately, the victims of these crimes are inevitably American citizens. It's worth noting that far too many of these victims are deceased as a result of the crimes inflicted upon them. And the claims of ripping innocent, hard-working victims from their homes and families is patently baseless. Illegal entry, re-entry or remaining without authorization is a crime. It's in the statutes and has been for generations. The fact that Biden and Obama chose to ignore immigration laws does not revoke them. The fact that the Trump administration is enforcing them does not make them inhumane. 

If leftist activists are frightened that we are devolving into authoritarian rule, I suggest enlightening oneself with some knowledge of history. Was czarist Russia a constitutional democracy before Stalin and Lenin took control? Was Germany a constitutional democracy before Hitler assumed power? Does anyone of sound mind and some knowledge of world history believe that 535 elected members of Congress who hold the power of impeachment believe that a president could choose to, and succeed in eliminating the legislative branch? About the same odds as a meteorite hitting planet earth and destroying all forms of life. It's a possibility, but highly unlikely...

The Age of Obama

 Is over. Even Barack Obama knows that, though he's reluctant to acknowledge it. As Trump was finalizing  a deal to end the war between Israel and Hamas which basically, repudiated everything Obama had ever had a hand in regarding the Middle East. In a recent podcast interview, the ever arrogant, pompous ex-pres demoaned the politicization of the FBI and Justice department as though he didn't play an instrumental part in their corruption. It's especially contemptible considering his role in various and sundry scandals is now documented public knowledge. 

Obama now appears nonplussed, wondering how the nation came to embrace Trump, a man who in almost every ideological way set out to undo everything he had 'accomplished'. Once thought to be a transcendent figure in American politics, despite the incessant media accolades and unmerited awards, Obama's legacy has been eclipsed by his Republican successor. And for very good reasons. 

Obama utilized the federal bureaucracy to push the country to adopt leftist social views. Which the Biden admin blindly and willingly continued. Most presidents leave Washington after their time in office is over to avoid the impression that they are trying to manipulate their successors. Obama pretentiously did not. It is clear and evident to even this most casual observer that Obama was directing the marionette that was Joe Biden. It was Obama who unleashed the intelligence agencies and the Department of Justice on political foes. And it was Obama who put into motion the DEI foolishness that permeated much of the Western world. 

It's not a well-known fact, but indeed is a fact that Obama issued an executive order to establish a "Coordinated Government-Wide Initiative to Promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce" back in 2011. This ignominious order coincided with the timing of legacy, mainstream media racializing practically every topic written about. 

The left has long sought to transform American culture not in alignment with its own cultural and political goals. Clearly, Obama played a significant role in the incipient stages of the Great Awokening. It appears Obama's legacy is that of abject failure. A century-old progressive movement that collapsed under its own contradictions, unrealized ideals and failure to connect with reality. 

Fewer young people are identifying as trans...

 A very surprising shift is taking place in the gender and sexual identities of young Americans. Data from the Heterodox Social Science Report shows that since 2023 both trans and queer identity among young Americans has dropped sharply with Generation Z. 

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) which conducts a large annual survey of US undergraduates, polled over 60,000 students in 2025. Just 3.6% of respondents this year identified as something other than male or female. In 2024 that figure was 5.2% and 6.8% in 2022 and 2023. The number of trans-identified students has halved in just two years. 

This trend is especially marked in elite institutions. Andover Phillips Academy in Boston surveys over 75% of its students each year. In 2023, 9.2% identified as neither male nor female. In 2025, that number was 3%. A similar story comes from Brown University. 5% of students identified as non-binary in 2022 and 2023, by 2025 that share had dropped to 2.6%. 

More of the surveys inquired about sexual orientation than gender identity. Based on the data in the graph, the pattern appears to be rising non-conformity from 2010 until 2023, with a near 10 point drop in the ensuing two years. 

It's tempting to speculate about the reasons behind the rise and fall of trans and queer identities. Mental illness among American teens has fallen since 2021 as confirmed by the FIRE data.  Changes in mental health over time, especially depression, made s significant difference in the trend of trans and queer identities over this period. The drop in mental health issues encompassed all social groups, including trans and queer youth. The post-pandemic decline in mental illness did not immediately trigger a decline in sexual and gender non-conformity, that shift didn't occur until a year or two later. There is no clear evidence to indicate what is driving the retreat from alternative gender and sexual identity. However, there is clear evidence that it is happening. Ironically, "woke" attitudes such as shouting down those perceived as hostile to transgenderism hasn't changed much since 2020. 

It appears that trans and queer identification has declined among young Americans even as levels os wokeness and religion have not. For young people, gender and sexual identity are now independent fashions that rise and fall separately from other cultural and political currents. This is quite an unexpected post-progressive development that education and media establishments will be reluctant to acknowledge. 

Is legalizing marijuana really a good idea?...

 Over the last decade a handful of states have mulled the idea of legalizing the use of recreational marijuana. Some have forged ahead with the legislation to do so, some have not. As of 2025, 24 states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana. That's close to half of the 50 states. Fourteen states have legalized the restricted medical use of marijuana. Doctor's prescription only. The standards for obtaining a prescription are not known and not a subject of this article. I am making no contest as to the validity of medical use marijuana. My understanding is marijuana can be quite effective in alleviating the pain associated with certain cancers and the treatment of them. I have personal experience with the pain associated with cancer and chemotherapy and I am 100% behind anything that can alleviate this pain.

But this is not the point. Cancer patients who are suffering indescribable pain are not typically out driving and getting into accidents. Recreational users are. Data shows these 'users' are involved in a disproportionately high number of auto fatalities. We have known for a long time, a very long time the relationship between drinking and auto accidents and fatalities. There is no need to delve into those statistics. It is worth noting the relationships between driving while under the influence of THC and auto accidents and fatalities. 

Going back to the days of the repeal of prohibition and the invention of automobiles, there is a dark relationship between driving and the consumption of alcohol. The loss of life due to driving while intoxicated is inestimable, beyond frightening, and it continues today. But we have now included a new dimension to this lunacy. Driving while high. As I mentioned earlier, almost half of the states have approved recreational use. I might ask the question, what is the 'purpose' of drinking alcohol, if not recreational? I dare say, there's never been a medical professional ever who has prescribed alcohol for a medical condition. Obviously, alcohol is exclusively for recreational purposes. It serves no medicinal purpose. When these 24 states passed these laws, was due consideration given to the risks associated with driving while impaired? I think not.

A recent study conducted in Ohio, which is one of the 'legal recreational states' proffers the following statistics: 42% of drivers in Montgomery County Ohio who died in traffic accidents over a six year period from 2018 to 2024tested positive for THC. Any way you look at it, that is very competitive with traffic fatalities due to driving while under the influence of alcohol. I wouldn't expect results much different from other 'recreational use states'. 

Who exactly benefits from these liberal laws? The recreational users? Of course. It is without doubt a fledgling industry within itself, as was alcohol in the early days.  We are approaching the benchmark where about half of traffic fatalities are due to driving while high. Is the high from a joint worth dying for? Or taking the lives of innocents in an accident? How is this net effect any different from driving while under the influence of alcohol? The net result is people die, does it matter what the inebriated person was indulging in?... 

Having the right to indulge in the recreational use of THC products is not the issue. Just as the right to imbibe alcohol is legal. But no one has the right to operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of any substance that impairs the ability to safely operate a vehicle. This puts not only their life but the lives of others at risk. We have well over a century of evidence that the results of this can be catastrophic. About 12,000 people each year are killed in auto accidents involving drunk driving. In 2021, there were about 11,000 drug involved traffic fatalities reported. This includes crashes where one or more drugs were detected, not THC alone and not necessarily causal. Obviously, there is a surfeit of recreational drugs, most of which are illegal and will always be. A few peer-reviewed studies comparing crash rates before and after legalization across states estimate increases in fatalities that could amount to 1,000 - 1,400 additional traffic deaths per year. Data for traffic fatalities where THC was known to be the cause of the crash is in an incipient stage. But the pattern is already emerging. Legalization may have solved the issue of reducing the amount of drug offenses for a 'seemingly harmless' drug that many will indulge in anyway, but at what cost? It sort of seems like throwing fuel on the fire...

Colorado: beautiful state, ugly policy.

 When Americans think of Colorado, we think of beautiful, scenic mountains , clear mountain air, and not just freedom but a 'sense' of freedom. It is without doubt one of our most beautiful states, of many. Many alluring advertisements attempting to convince foreigners to visit the US shows photos of Colorado landscapes. Visitors from the world over as well as the US make a stop in Colorado a must. 

If you are a visitor, what Colorado has to offer cannot be beat. If you are a resident or a counselor, there are issues. In 2019, Colorado enacted a law that restricts counselors (lawyers) from having conversations regarding gender and sexuality with clients under the age of 18. Any counselor who engages in any such conversations with clients under the age of 18 could face steep fines, up to $5,000 for each violation, possible suspension from practice and even revocation of license. 

A Colorado lawyer challenged this lawsuit. The Supreme Court heard her case today, and there are aspects of her case that should lead to a ruling in her favor. A ruling leading to free speech prevailing. Colorado bans the expression of viewpoints with which it disagrees. If a young girl comes to this lawyer, whom we'll call "Beth' and says she thinks she may be a boy, and wants to realign her identity with her sex,  Colorado law bans that conversation. The law does, however, allow conversations to impel that girl down a path of gender transition, which might include dangerous drugs and procedures. Colorado is forcibly obliging counselors and their clients to succumb to its ideological demands or refuse help. 

Colorado's misplaced paternalism harms the very children it aims to protect. Colorado law declares 'change' a forbidden goal if a client seeks conversation to help them recover an identity consistent with the biological sex. Studies show that roughly 90 percent of children who struggle with gender issues before puberty  will regain comfort with their sex over time. Colorado's law encourages these children to a path of gender transition. Colorado law deprives children of the many reported benefits that can come from counseling, including a better understanding, improved mental health, and increased hope that they can live consistently with their faith. Many clients believe that their religious identity is more fundamental than their self-perceptions of gender and sexuality. 

For whatever reason, Colorado's state government goads counselors and clients into a forced ideological path. Unfortunately, this path ignores free speech, client autonomy, and restricts available help which leads to sabotaging help in the counseling room. The most helpful ways to discuss gender and sexuality, which are widely debated natters of moral and spiritual significance should be left to the counselor and client, not the government. 

This matter is now before the U.S. Supreme Court to reaffirm that freedom. By all means and matters it should protect free speech from Colorado's attempt to thwart it. The rule of law is the rule of law. No state is allowed to opt out... This includes Colorado...