Texas Lies and Fear

Texas Lies and Fear

Recently Texas got busted inflating the positive case results with CV19. This time the inexplicable increase was blamed on “computer errors”. A previous increase in positive results was engineered by including possible test results with confirmed test results. And before that positive cases naturally rose with the increase in testing. All along Texas, and Texas leaders have been instigating fear and panic based on positive test results.

A few months back when lockdowns were initiated, Abbott was more reasonable and stated flatly that we would expect a rise in cases as more testing occurred. He said we would monitor CV19 based on hospitalization and deaths and pointed to those as the metrics to make decisions based on. This made sense. However, he quickly changed strategies and started looking at cases. Cases are more easily manipulated and the death rate was flattening.

You can’t convince intelligent people that a 0.65% death rate (per CDC) virus warrants shutting down lives, liberty and freedom. That’s what you are asking when you support draconian measures like in NZ. People look at that and think… “dang, i don’t want to be dragged out of my house and tossed into a quarantine facility, no matter how nice they make it sound.” Consider the world’s out of proportion response when comparing CV19’s estimated 0.68% death rate to the common flu with a death rate of 0.11%.

In reality, the CV19 death rate is much lower. Birx demanded deaths that were not caused by CV19 to be reported as CV19 deaths. So we don’t even know the real number with regards to deaths because of CV19. It may very well be the same or less than the flu. We do know that Birx bought a higher death rate… per her demands and the CARES act, hospitals were paid $39k more per CV19 death. Money talks.

People are waking up to the fact that it’s not really that deadly. It’s taken months to work through the misleading models presented early that showed a doomsday of 2 million deaths. These were presented by trusted “experts” at the time. These were either outright lies or incredibly bad experts. These numbers panicked the people. But, that misinformation is finally starting to fade from memory.

To compensate for the lack of deaths we are now given new horror stories and new fear… a new boogeyman. This new boogeyman consists of serious conditions that fall short of death. More fear mongering. New statistics and “science” to debate ad nauseum and without enough data. Just like the lack of overwhelming death testimonies, these stories are in direct contradiction to what our own life experience shows… and that is that most people we know that have had it either barely knew they had it or experience a few days of flu-like symptoms… only to fully and completely recover after some rest.

A high percentage of deaths attributed to CV19 were people above 80 years old, many had multiple morbidities when they died. It’s very likely that the majority of these cases were older people that actually died of something else and were mislabeled as a CV19 death due to Birx’s mandate. We don’t know that answer, we are not given that breakdown of deaths caused by CV19 and deaths that incidentally had CV19. So, we remain divided on that point.

This virus panic would be over if we did not have mandated masks across the country. The mask is the only real-world evidence for most people that this virus exists at the level of danger that the media and politicians indicate. It’s a brilliant exercise in gaslighting. No real day-to-day evidence of a pandemic, but look all the people are wearing a scary medical mask so it must be a scary virus even though little personal evidence confirms that belief for most people. The data and science doesn’t come close to supporting the crazy measures of isolation and lockdown. Have you seen the recent case, hospitalization and death curves? They show a standard disease progression and we are on the right of the bell curve. It’s all over but the lying at this point.

Further, these panicked people and pseudo-scientists ignore and ridicule every treatment that comes along. They don’t even give them a fair shake. You would think that if the virus is so deadly and scary that the attitude would be that we should focus very hard to iron out any potential issues with a treatment in the interest of a solution. But nope… they go straight to the bottom of the debate pyramid and attack honest doctors personally because they cannot attack the success that they are having with patients. It is obvious that we are being forced into a holding pattern for a vaccine. Who can’t see this?

Here is the kicker! This untested vaccine will be 1000x more dangerous than any of the treatments that have been rejected citing safety concerns. This is a matter of circumstance. The testing is cut way short and is full of conflicts of interests.

The world is full of insane control freaks these days. From politicians making tyranical decress, to your neighbor at the grocery store yelling at you to put on a useless mask. Insanity is the right word. Insanity is being encouraged. Fire is being yelled in the theatre.

Thankfully, the trend seems to be moving away from this paranoia and back toward normalcy, science and logic. Recently, people have been talking about all the lies and deceit and simple inconsistencies in the demands placed on people. Outside of the Facebook echo chamber the world is real and alive, most people are not irrationally hiding in their basement… at least in my area.

This entire chapter of terrorized people is an embarrassment and a house of cards that will fall hard when the time comes. Until then, take off your scientifically useless mask and choose to live your life again, instead of living in fear of something that is very unlikely to harm you.

They Thought They Were Free, The Germans, 1933-45

They Thought They Were Free, The Germans, 1933-45

Excerpt from pages 166-73 of “They Thought They Were Free” First published in 1955

By Milton Mayer

But Then It Was Too Late

“What no one seemed to notice,” said a colleague of mine, a philologist, “was the ever widening gap, after 1933, between the government and the people. Just think how very wide this gap was to begin with, here in Germany. And it became always wider. You know, it doesn’t make people close to their government to be told that this is a people’s government, a true democracy, or to be enrolled in civilian defense, or even to vote. All this has little, really nothing, to do with knowing one is governing.

“What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

“This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.

“You will understand me when I say that my Middle High German was my life. It was all I cared about. I was a scholar, a specialist. Then, suddenly, I was plunged into all the new activity, as the university was drawn into the new situation; meetings, conferences, interviews, ceremonies, and, above all, papers to be filled out, reports, bibliographies, lists, questionnaires. And on top of that were the demands in the community, the things in which one had to, was ‘expected to’ participate that had not been there or had not been important before. It was all rigmarole, of course, but it consumed all one’s energies, coming on top of the work one really wanted to do. You can see how easy it was, then, not to think about fundamental things. One had no time.”

“Those,” I said, “are the words of my friend the baker. ‘One had no time to think. There was so much going on.’”

“Your friend the baker was right,” said my colleague. “The dictatorship, and the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway. I do not speak of your ‘little men,’ your baker and so on; I speak of my colleagues and myself, learned men, mind you. Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. There was no need to. Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about—we were decent people—and kept us so busy with continuous changes and ‘crises’ and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the ‘national enemies,’ without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. Unconsciously, I suppose, we were grateful. Who wants to think?

“To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it—please try to believe me—unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head.

“How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice—‘Resist the beginnings’ and ‘Consider the end.’ But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have. And everyone counts on that might.

“Your ‘little men,’ your Nazi friends, were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say) but because we sensed better. Pastor Niemöller spoke for the thousands and thousands of men like me when he spoke (too modestly of himself) and said that, when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist, and so he did nothing; and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist, and he did nothing; and then the schools, the press, the Jews, and so on, and he was always uneasier, but still he did nothing. And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something—but then it was too late.”

“Yes,” I said.

“You see,” my colleague went on, “one doesn’t see exactly where or how to move. Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’ Why not?—Well, you are not in the habit of doing it. And it is not just fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you; it is also genuine uncertainty.

“Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community, ‘everyone’ is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know, in France or Italy there would be slogans against the government painted on walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, ‘It’s not so bad’ or ‘You’re seeing things’ or ‘You’re an alarmist.’

“And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can’t prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don’t know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, who are, naturally, people who have always thought as you have.

“But your friends are fewer now. Some have drifted off somewhere or submerged themselves in their work. You no longer see as many as you did at meetings or gatherings. Informal groups become smaller; attendance drops off in little organizations, and the organizations themselves wither. Now, in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to—to what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must make an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker. So you wait, and you wait.

“But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That’s the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked—if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in ’43 had come immediately after the ‘German Firm’ stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in ’33. But of course this isn’t the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.

“And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby, saying ‘Jewish swine,’ collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you live in—your nation, your people—is not the world you were born in at all. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. Now you live in a system which rules without responsibility even to God. The system itself could not have intended this in the beginning, but in order to sustain itself it was compelled to go all the way.

“You have gone almost all the way yourself. Life is a continuing process, a flow, not a succession of acts and events at all. It has flowed to a new level, carrying you with it, without any effort on your part. On this new level you live, you have been living more comfortably every day, with new morals, new principles. You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things that your father, even in Germany, could not have imagined.

“Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven’t done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we do nothing). You remember those early meetings of your department in the university when, if one had stood, others would have stood, perhaps, but no one stood. A small matter, a matter of hiring this man or that, and you hired this one rather than that. You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.

“What then? You must then shoot yourself. A few did. Or ‘adjust’ your principles. Many tried, and some, I suppose, succeeded; not I, however. Or learn to live the rest of your life with your shame. This last is the nearest there is, under the circumstances, to heroism: shame. Many Germans became this poor kind of hero, many more, I think, than the world knows or cares to know.”

I said nothing. I thought of nothing to say.

“I can tell you,” my colleague went on, “of a man in Leipzig, a judge. He was not a Nazi, except nominally, but he certainly wasn’t an anti-Nazi. He was just—a judge. In ’42 or ’43, early ’43, I think it was, a Jew was tried before him in a case involving, but only incidentally, relations with an ‘Aryan’ woman. This was ‘race injury,’ something the Party was especially anxious to punish. In the case at bar, however, the judge had the power to convict the man of a ‘nonracial’ offense and send him to an ordinary prison for a very long term, thus saving him from Party ‘processing’ which would have meant concentration camp or, more probably, deportation and death. But the man was innocent of the ‘nonracial’ charge, in the judge’s opinion, and so, as an honorable judge, he acquitted him. Of course, the Party seized the Jew as soon as he left the courtroom.”

“And the judge?”

“Yes, the judge. He could not get the case off his conscience—a case, mind you, in which he had acquitted an innocent man. He thought that he should have convicted him and saved him from the Party, but how could he have convicted an innocent man? The thing preyed on him more and more, and he had to talk about it, first to his family, then to his friends, and then to acquaintances. (That’s how I heard about it.) After the ’44 Putsch they arrested him. After that, I don’t know.”

I said nothing.

“Once the war began,” my colleague continued, “resistance, protest, criticism, complaint, all carried with them a multiplied likelihood of the greatest punishment. Mere lack of enthusiasm, or failure to show it in public, was ‘defeatism.’ You assumed that there were lists of those who would be ‘dealt with’ later, after the victory. Goebbels was very clever here, too. He continually promised a ‘victory orgy’ to ‘take care of’ those who thought that their ‘treasonable attitude’ had escaped notice. And he meant it; that was not just propaganda. And that was enough to put an end to all uncertainty.

“Once the war began, the government could do anything ‘necessary’ to win it; so it was with the ‘final solution of the Jewish problem,’ which the Nazis always talked about but never dared undertake, not even the Nazis, until war and its ‘necessities’ gave them the knowledge that they could get away with it. The people abroad who thought that war against Hitler would help the Jews were wrong. And the people in Germany who, once the war had begun, still thought of complaining, protesting, resisting, were betting on Germany’s losing the war. It was a long bet. Not many made it.”

Copyright notice: Excerpt from pages 166-73 of They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45 by Milton Mayer, published by the University of Chicago Press. ©1955, 1966 by the University of Chicago. All rights reserved. This text may be used and shared in accordance with the fair-use provisions of U.S. copyright law, and it may be archived and redistributed in electronic form, provided that this entire notice, including copyright information, is carried and provided that the University of Chicago Press is notified and no fee is charged for access. Archiving, redistribution, or republication of this text on other terms, in any medium, requires the consent of the University of Chicago Press. (Footnotes and other references included in the book may have been removed from this online version of the text.)

Milton Mayer
They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45
©1955, 1966, 368 pages
Paper $19.00 ISBN: 0-226-51192-8

The Chains Set Lightly

The Chains Set Lightly

It was a dreadful night when I heard word
The news said the trusted man was stirred
To steal away the bullets and lead
And lead the march against the free instead

He held up high some crazy men
And claimed it wouldn’t happen again
If the lawful would just sacrifice
And surrender the means to guard their life

Trade their liberty and property
For a fading glimpse of security
The devils game since the dawn of man
Divide, disarm to conquer the land

Asked to bow, submit, and put all faith
In lies, and liars and apostate
There is little left for honest men
Wolves smell blood, the snakes crawl in

The criminals all rejoice in words
That shield bad deeds from justice swords
Left to strike without repose
Innocent death is unopposed

Tyrants whistle a cold dark tune
Pleased that history lost to time so soon
Now nothing stands between freedom and hell
Bury the past in the wishing well

With no walls to quell the evil tide
The man of sin, four horses ride
The luke warm cower for lack of will
The old republic abandoned and still

Through ages might makes right the lie
That enslaves the ones they pacify
With other’s riches fleeced for need
Crouch down and lick the hands that feed

The center does not hold with time
Truths expose the serpent’s rhyme
A whisper wounds the golden hall
The meek push on as kingdoms fall

As centuries roll across the land
The scholars try to comprehend
How men had risen above the kings
Then fallen back to suffering

They stood upon freedom’s shore
Where greed drove the fight for more
Of gifts and legacies unearned
Godless and broke, their liberty burned

Since ashes mask that final day
New words were made, designed to say
The careful lies that fool the “free”
To embrace their unarmed destiny

And the chains set lightly
A distant flame burns brightly

An original poem by Davy Crockett, LittlePuppyDogs.com

Copyright (c) 2020, LittlePuppyDogs.com. All Rights Reserved.

Leader in Me: Leading to Authoritarianism

Leader in Me: Leading to Authoritarianism

The Leader in Me (TLiM) is a common social-emotional learning (SEL) program implemented across the United States. In plain sight, TLiM is developing an acceptance for an authoritarian/collective mindset by destroying the independent/individual mindset in children.

The Individual

A working definition for the individual is:

Individuality (or self-hood) is the state or quality of being an individual; particularly of being a person separate from other people and possessing their own needs or goals, rights and responsibilities.


Notice that an individual is defined by personal needs, goals, rights and responsibilities. The Leader in Me claims that the first 3 habits are designed to build an independent individual:

“Habits 1–3 focus on developing a strong “personal root system,” building character and becoming more independent.”


The Individual: Work and Responsibilities

However, on review of the first three TLiM habits, it is apparent that the primary emphasis, if not sole emphasis, is on personal responsibilities. Found in the first three habits are the following attributes, which all assign responsibilities.

“responsible”, “take initiative”, “choose actions, attitudes and moods”, “make good choices when no one is looking”, “plan ahead”, “set goals”, “set priorities”, “follow a schedule”, ” make a plan”, “disciplined”, “organized”

Extracted from Leader in Me habits

No where to be found are the ideas of personal needs, goals, or rights.

The Leader in Me assigned all of the personal responsibilities and risk to the individual under the premise of “becoming more independent”, but removed all of the benefits and rewards.

The Individual: Sacrifice to the Collective

The Leader in Me robs the individual of their earned rewards. Notably, their personal needs, goals and rights are stripped away and focus is shifted to the collective. Notice the following excerpts from the Leader in Me that demand sacrifice and key elements that define a healthy individual. You will also find emphasis on emotions of others and a perceived responsibility to prioritize them.

“I say no to things I know I should not do”, “I balance courage for getting what I want with consideration for what others want”, “I make deposits in others’ Emotional Bank Accounts”, “I listen to other people’s ideas and feelings”

Extracted from Leader in Me habits

Consideration for others is important when making some decisions. However, personal needs and goals in TLiM are devalued as selfishness pursuits (“wants”) to be negotiated, not encouraged as a foundation for personal growth as an individual.

In effect, the independent individual’s personal needs and goals are denied by The Leader in Me.

The Individual: Consent through Compromise

Further, the degradation of the individual is also accomplished by demanding that he or she immediately compromise when challenges occur, seemingly regardless of the situation.

“When conflicts arise, I look for third alternatives.”, “I try to see things from their viewpoints.”, “I listen to others without interrupting.”

Extracted from Leader in Me habits

To be fair, there are often times when compromise is valuable. Again, what is left out of TLiM exposes it’s bias. Balance here is important, not absolutes. Jefferson had balance in his position on compromise, TLiM does not.

In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.

Thomas Jefferson

An individual that is concerned with the theft of his or her personal rights or beliefs is with absolute TLiM language told to compromise. It is demanded that the individual cede to the arguments of others and that sacrifice of personal rights should be accepted for the sake of the collective.

In such ways, the personal rights of the individual are surrendered to the collective.

The Collective

A working definition of the collective is:

A collective is a group of entities that share or are motivated by at least one common issue or interest, or work together to achieve a common objective.


Notice that the collective is defined by “work together to achieve a common objective”. The Leader in Me claims that it’s second triad of habits addresses the collective, or “working well with others”.

“Habits 4–6 teach skills of working well with others, and becoming more interdependent.”


TLiM knows that parents would reject teaching dependency, thus the use of the word interdependent but the training and the results more closely maps to codependent. (An article for another time)

The Collective: Hijacking the Benefits

In the previous section, it was established that The Leader in Me is quick to assign personal responsibilities to the individual, while equally quick to divert attention from personal needs, goals and rights. So where does TLiM encourage motivation for accepting such personal responsibilities and the hard work and dedication demanded?

Throughout the TLiM habits, the individual is instructed to see his value solely in terms of how he or she contributes to the collective. In general, this is how he might serve the school, which is obviously the authority figure for children in public school.

“important part of my classroom”, “contribute to my school’s mission”, “good citizen”, “does things that have meaning and make a difference”

Extracted from The Leader in Me habits

Missing are values based on personal accomplishment such as mastery of a academic subject, expertise in a personal pursuit, excellence in a sport and other efforts that reflect personal growth, thus fulfilling personal needs or goals.

The Collective: Redirecting Personal Needs

A common chart that describes the overall needs of the individual is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

With habit 7, The Leader in Me perhaps makes some exceptions for personal needs outside of the collective:

Habit 7 is about taking care of oneself in order to ensure great leadership can continue into the future.


Interestingly, this habit matches quite well with Maslow’s hierarchy, but the seventh habit only acknowledges the individual’s most basic and primal needs.


I take care of my body by eating right, exercising and getting sleep.

Excerpted from Habit 7


I spend time with family and friends.

Excerpted from Habit 7

However, the final sentence of the seventh habit lays collective claim to the top tier personal needs in Maslow’s hierachy. According to Maslow, the higher tier needs represent personal growth needs, while the lower tier represent deficiency needs.


I find meaningful ways to help others.

Excerpted from Habit 7

Maslow’s evaluation of personal needs at the higher level is quite different than The Leader in Me proposes.

Esteem needs – which Maslow classified into two categories: (i) esteem for oneself (dignity, achievement, mastery, independence) and (ii) the desire for reputation or respect from others (e.g., status, prestige).


The Leader in Me completely ignores the personal esteem needs, as the program is void of individual excellence promotion (outside of raw labor). In contrast, TLiM celebrates the collective esteem needs by encouraging self-worth analysis based on peer emotions and opinions.

Mastery of personal skills, knowledge or endeavors are ignored, and replaced by the narrow role of servitude to an authority that TLiM promotes. Thus, shifting the esteem needs to collective acceptance.

Self-actualization needs – realizing personal potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences. A desire “to become everything one is capable of becoming”


In the Leader in Me, self-actualization needs are prioritized by emphasis on serving an authority figure’s needs. As discussed in the previous section, this language is prevalent in the TLiM program, with zero emphasis on personal needs.

Never do the habits allude to becoming the best that you can personally be, but kids are constantly told to do “meaningful” and “difference” making work for others. Again, the emphasis for self-actualization is shifted to a collective focus.

In effect, TLiM reserves the growth needs for a collective focus and the deficiency needs for an individual focus.

The Authoritarianism Endgame

Make no mistake, The Leader in Me is a clever indoctrination program that to date has not seen the light of scrutiny. The cute, cuddly cartoon characters and soft language in the habits has helped the program flourish without many philosophical or political challenges. As this article points out, TLiM is clever in what it leaves out of kids minds, as much as what it emphasizes.

Unfortunately, the program and other SEL programs are laying the groundwork for an authoritarian mindset to flourish in near future generations. Students exposed to the non-stop repetition of habits are being brainwashed to accept authoritarianism . And parents that are not paying attention are supporting that message by implicitly supporting the habits. Parental involvement is part of TLiM program, by the way.

The overall message of The Leader in Me is two-fold:

  • It is your personal responsibility to attend to the collective needs and goals set by an authority.
  • (Beyond basic survival) your personal needs, goals and rights are selfish, and should be devalued in favor of collective priorities.

Generally, TLiM is apolitical with regards to left and right. However, it can be further argued that TLiM’s emphasis on emotional decision-making combined with today’s left-leaning curriculum sets a foundation for an authoritarian left mindset in classrooms across America.

The Nolan Chart Dichotomy

Plotting the assignment of responsibility, needs, goals and rights promoted by TLiM on a political spectrum chart, such as the Nolan chart, emphasizes the dichotomy, and in effect the authoritarian leanings of The Leader in Me.

The Leader in Me promotes a mindset where the individual is responsible for the work and the collective sets the agenda and reaps the rewards. This is a broken mindset that enables authoritarian governments to most easily pry individual freedom and personal rights from unsuspecting men, in the name of the collective good .

“it is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.”

Frederick Douglass

Leader in Me: A Second Letter to the School Board

A second attempt to raise awareness about the Leader in Me program. Again, there was no reply to this email from the school board. We did receive a damage-control call from the principal.

Dear [School Board President] and the MISD School Board,

We live in [ ——- ] with [ —— ] children in the district. It is with much reflection that we have decided to seek alternatives to our current MISD school. This is not something in which we take lightly, as alternatives are costly and we already pay for public school through taxes.

Are there public schools in McKinney that encourage individual excellence and accordingly use an objective grading system where grades are earned, not assessed?

Our experience with the teachers in MISD has been positive, but the curriculum and chosen programs emphasize ideas that encourage dependence on peers and servitude to social ideas of the day. Comparatively, gaining knowledge and individual recognition does not seem to be emphasized to the same degree. My understanding is that this curriculum is set by the superintendent and the school board.

The ideas of dependence and group-think are rampant in programs like Leader in Me, Engage! Learning Model and the Rubric’s grading system. Some examples:

  • Our school has a “Go Getter” award based on obedience to arbitrary habits instead of an honor roll that rewards individual excellence. There is no excuse for that.
  • Students with no depth of knowledge on a subject are tasked with teaching other students in project-based learning. With the teacher’s role limited, all kids are wasting valuable time learning worker-bee roles, not acquiring real leadership skills based on facts and logic.
  • Grades are subjectively “assessed”, not earned.

The Leader in Me program presents its concepts in terms of absolutes, through repetition. The program’s “7 habits” are presented as rules-to-live-by and always require thinking from the perspective of the collective, not the individual. In other words, the kids are being taught that the only way to approach problems is by building consensus and gaining peer approval. They are not taught approaches to problem solving that encourages them to set practical goals and then achieve great results on their own, as an individual. This is extremely important and the program steals concepts of individualism from them after consistent, daily repetition. If the habits were only mentioned periodically I would not raise this concern. However, at our school the habits are in everything, everyday, everywhere, all the time and it gets worse every school year. These are values that we do not agree with when presented as absolutes and repeated without limits.

ELM and the Rubric’s grading system are equally problematic. Both are not useful when it comes helping individuals learn materials and understand exactly how they can improve themselves. Assessing a subjective score out of group sessions is not helping to educate children.

Those that have chosen these programs, for whatever reason, are doing the kids and ultimately future generations a significant disservice.

Best Regards,

Davy Crockett

Leader in Me: A Letter to the School Board

Below you will find a letter that was sent to our school board regarding The Leader in Me and other programs chosen by our elementary school. We received no response from the school board, only a damage-control call from the principal. We have since left the school district.

Please feel free to use this as a template and edit it to fit your situation best if you think it might help.

Hi [School Board President],

I live in the [——–] area and have [——-=] children in the district. We are very happy with the teacher’s and faculty at our school, so please do not consider my concerns a comment on the school staff.

I am concerned with the priorities set forth and choices made by McKinney ISD. It concerns me that board’s priorities often seem out of alignment with McKinney taxpayers and students. specifically with regards to public education.

I’d like to express disapproval in the choice of “educational” programs implemented in the district schools. I find these choices to be disingenuous and it is unclear how they might contribute to an educational foundation for success. To point:

  • The Leader in Me is time wasted and creates buzzword-chanting robots. We laugh about this program as it’s been five years of corporate buzzwords parroted by teachers and principals in email and phone calls. Then the buzzwords are preached to the students who recite them back like zombies. The” 7 Habits” are marketed as leadership skills but they are not. Leading involves learning facts and taking a principled or educated stand, not seeking group consensus before acting. The program does not encourage the “individual”, but instead embraces what they call “interdependence” and pretends that that means something other than “dependence”. I do not agree with teaching dependence to children. It’s disconcerting how much time is spent in and out of the classroom fascinated with these buzzwords. It’s also a financial waste as reportedly the program cost roughly $50k per school per year.
  • The Rubric’s Grading System is uninspiring, everyone gets a 3. Many students have determined that it is impossible to get 4’s unless they are in “Alpha” and that they generally get 3’s whether they work or not. That is cause for concern. Some schools simply do not give 4’s early in the year because they somehow believe that that provides an incentive for better effort later in the year. This does not make sense. The Rubric’s system is by definition subjective and does not play a positive role in inspiring academic or real-wold success. The idea that teachers should arbitrarily “assess” the scores of student by observation is unhelpful. This leaves the student unable to determine a personal path to better grades. And as a parent, I look at a report card with all 3’s and I want to tell my son that he can do better, but can he? It’s all subjective, so you tell me.
  • ELM is group training, and fails the individual. It plays out exactly as anyone would expect. One student leads the group, does the work and is the only one that actually learns the material. In general, this is the student that is already ahead and it leaves the other students behind since they will naturally ride the coat tails. All students need more personal accountability, not less.

I would encourage MISD to reconsider these choices with academic excellence in mind. It is of note, that McKinney ISD spends significant money on schools, but reports show that the district is not competing academically with other Texas schools with similar resources. Perhaps, the adoption of these unhelpful programs is more than partly to blame. These choices bring up questions:

  • What happened to grading systems where a student could be told exactly how to improve his or her grade?
  • What happened to promoting individual excellence?
  • What happened to encouraging individual thought, not chanting phrases?
  • What happened to awards based on academics, not how well you follow and recite buzzwords?
  • What happened to text books? We struggle with homework because we get worksheets with no examples and no reference materials to study from.
  • Why is McKinney ISD involved in unproven educational programs?

I hope that you will take the time to consider these concerns. I have spoken to other McKinney parents that feel the same but do not yet feel secure in commenting for fear of rocking the boat. I suppose that is why I have not commented until now.

Thank you in advance for your time and attention.

Best Regards,

Davy Crockett

Leader in Me: From Education to Indoctrination

Leader in Me: From Education to Indoctrination

The Leader in Me program uses absolutes presented as 7 habits to validate certain ideas while devaluing alternatives. The suggested habits are perhaps valuable tools in some situations, but are not absolute life lessons.

All of the habits form a foundation of support for the collective, while ignoring and thus, devaluing the individual. It is worth skepticism because it is a “all-the-time” program at schools that adopt it.

Here is how the Leader in Me website describes their program:

The Leader in Me is not an event and it’s not a curriculum; it’s ubiquitous leadership development—meaning everywhere and all the time. Instead of “teaching leadership every Tuesday at 1 p.m.,” educators use an integrated approach and make leadership training part of everything they do. So the model impacts everything—the traditions, events, organization, culture, instructional methodologies, and curriculum of the school.

Sounds like textbook indoctrination through repetition, even using their own words.


The Leader In Me (TLiM) program is marketed as a “whole school transformation process” that is “aligned to many national and state academic standards, including Common Core standards”.

The program is currently implemented in more than 2,500 public school in the U.S. (out of ~100,000) and growing. When implemented, students review the habits daily, teachers incorporate the habits into lesson plans, the morning announcements highlight the habits, email correspondence mentions the habits, and faculty plans events promoting the habits. The habits are everywhere. With the broad exposure to these messages and the impressionability of kids, the program deserves some scrutiny.

Big Picture

The Leader in Me supports the transition from an classic model focused on education to a modern model focused on indoctrination. The messages in TLiM match perfectly to encourage the modern model, but are not compatible with the classic model.

Classic Model of Education

As a point of reference, the educational system was setup to tread a path from:

  • Child-Like Emotions to Mature Logic
  • Ignorance to Knowledge
  • Focus and Repetition leading to Mastery
  • Dependence to Independence


Historically, this was the American system of education.

The Leader In Me Model of Indoctrination

Modern education, as encouraged by Social-Emotional programs like The Leader in Me, trap students in a tornado of lies. TLiM and it’s suggested teaching practice stunt students academic growth and redirect children’s energy from a focus on personal development to a focus on emotions and activist causes.

The Leader In Me (TLiM) is a indoctrination program that masquerades as a ubiquitous leadership program. It is the glue that binds common core, group learning and subjective grades together. This is demonstrated by TLiM’s  “Whole Transformation Process”:

  • A “Leadership” Program that praises feelings, ideas and causes
  • Confusing lesson plans that promote variety over mastery
  • Subjective grading systems, like Rubrics, where teachers assess grades instead of students earning them
  • Group learning where the group is highlighted over the individual

The result is a chaotic, confusing system.


The system of confusion denies healthy educational growth, leaving students personally and educationally immature. This system actively encourages this stagnation as it coddles emotions, dependency and causes, the three fundamental attributes of The Leader in Me program.

Further, the modern system creates confusion in each part of the process. Common core creates academic confusion while TLiM supports world view confusion. Confused by irrational goals and lack of knowledge, they are more likely to follow emotionally-laden lies.

Finally, It has become common practice for off-topic causes and world views to be incorporated with other lessons. Many schools do not have accountable reference materials, like textbooks. So, controversial political issues, moral values and world views can be presented from one perspective without parent’s awareness or consent.

Confusion is all around. It’s a complete mess. And what comes out of the confusion is anyone’s guess. Certainly not properly educated kids.

If programs like TLiM continue to escape the suspicious eyes of parents, then the likely result will be a generation of indoctrinated kids ready to serve a cause and save the world.

From chaos to order.


Leader in Me: Social Justice Activism

Leader in Me: Social Justice Activism

Get ready to serve a cause and save the world!

Beautifully designed T-Shirt to show your support for The Leader in Me (TLiM) program. Each of the 7 Habits is clearly listed but without the obfuscation or the cute, cuddly characters to soften the brainwashing.

With this T-Shirt, you will fit in with your TLiM school’s overwhelming effort to force you to think about, write about, read about, chant, see, hear, taste, smell and say pledges to the 7 habits every day, all day. It’s not a cult, we promise.

Oh, and as with all communist and socialist programs, one size fits all.

Habit 1: Decide or Comply

Don’t ask questions! By “Be Proactive”, we mean be ready to obey and do what is asked. Compliance is mandatory.

I do the right thing without being asked, even when no one is looking.

Habit 2: Serve a Cause

Again, don’t think too much! Just pick a social justice cause and focus. We will tell you which causes are meaningful. You’ve seen some of the approved causes sprinkled into your textbooks. Keep in mind, that your worth is wholly determined by your ability to serve the cause.

I do things that have meaning and make a difference. I am an important part of my classroom and contribute to my school’s mission and vision.

Habit 3: Organize

Of course your social justice cause is the most important. Get to work.

I spend my time on things that are most important…. I am disciplined and organized.

Habit 4: Sacrifice

This is not about you. It never was. It’s about the cause. Besides, you’re just being selfish, the cause is of grave concern and is an emotional burden on us all.

I balance courage for getting what I want with consideration for what others want. I make deposits in others’ Emotional Bank Accounts.

Habit 5: Build Consensus

Speaking of others, let’s get them involved with our cause too. Be sure to speak in terms of emotions and pie-in-the-sky plans, because our cause is not based on facts. Knowledge will only expose the illegitimacy of our cause.

I listen to other people’s ideas and feelings…. I am confident in voicing my ideas.

Habit 6: Influence Others

You are useless on your own. You can only help the cause in groups. Build groups, join groups, be dependent on groups. These groups will also keep you from straying if you start to question the legitimacy of the cause.

I work well in groups. I seek out other people’s ideas to solve problems because I know that by teaming with others we can create better solutions than anyone of us can alone.

Habit 7: Save The World

You remember the cause, right? Time to get your friends and family involved. This world isn’t going to save itself. They probably don’t think the cause is all that important, but surely you will help them see how meaningful it really is. After all, the planet depends on it!

I spend time with family and friends. I learn in lots of ways and lots of places, not just at school. I find meaningful ways to help others.

Habit 8: Social Justice Warrior Mode On (Not Shown)

Congratulations, you are now a slave to the cause. You are exceptionally good at it too. People look to you for your feelings and ideas. They celebrate you. Others are not as enlightened as you and will welcome your busybody meddling.

Warning!  Make sure to mock facts that counter the cause’s paper thin claims… you wouldn’t want to lose the “expert” status you gained from your Leader in Me indoctrination, would you?

I have found something that I am good at and really like doing. I am proud, but do not boast. Instead, I use my expertise to help and inspire others.

Author’s Note

The primary theme above is that TLiM is unbalanced in it’s promotion of the collective over the individual. Through TLiM, this pro-collective/anti-individual message is getting through to students loud and clear, whether the students or the parents know it or not.

While this post may come across as snarky, words have meaning. As words are repeated over and over and over and over as they are in a program such as TLiM, kids start to believe the concepts presented without question.

The concepts in TLiM are in direct opposition to individual freedom and liberty.

Concepts found in the 7 Habits:

  • Dependence (Interdependence)
  • Ideas and Feelings
  • Groups and Peers
  • Community Causes

Concepts not found in the 7 Habits:

  • Independence
  • Facts and Knowledge
  • Individuals
  • Personal Goals




The Worship of the Word “We”

The Worship of the Word “We”

The following are excerpts from Anthem, Ayn Rand. In this final chapter the main character awakens and escapes from the hell of a collective dystopian society to claim freedom as an individual. The dystopian society worshipped the word “we” and had banned the word “I”. 

These are the last things before me. And as I stand here at the door of glory, I look behind me for the last time. I look upon the history of men, which I have learned from the books, and I wonder. It was a long story, and the spirit which moved it was the spirit of man’s freedom. But what is freedom? Freedom from what? There is nothing to take a man’s freedom away from him, save other men. To be free, a man must be free of his brothers. That is freedom. That and nothing else.

At first, man was enslaved by the gods. But he broke their chains. Then he was enslaved by the kings. But he broke their chains. He was enslaved by his birth, by his kin, by his race. But he broke their chains. He declared to all his brothers that a man has rights which neither god nor king nor other men can take away from him, no matter what their number, for his is the right of man, and there is no right on earth above this right. And he stood on the threshold of freedom for which the blood of the centuries behind him had been spilled.

But then he gave up all he had won, and fell lower than his savage beginning.

What brought it to pass? What disaster took their reason away from men? What whip lashed them to their knees in shame and submission? The worship of the word “We.”

When men accepted that worship, the structure of centuries collapsed about them, the structure whose every beam had come from the thought of some one man, each in his day down the ages, from the depth of some one spirit, such as spirit existed but for its own sake. Those men who survived—those eager to obey, eager to live for one another, since they had nothing else to vindicate them—those men could neither carry on, nor preserve what they had received. Thus did all thought, all science, all wisdom perish on earth. Thus did men—men with nothing to offer save their great numbers—lose the steel towers, the flying ships, the power wires, all the things they had not created and could never keep. Perhaps, later, some men had been born with the mind and the courage to recover these things which were lost; perhaps these men came before the Councils of Scholars. They answered as I have been answered—and for the same reasons.

But I still wonder how it was possible, in those graceless years of transition, long ago, that men did not see whither they were going, and went on, in blindness and cowardice, to their fate. I wonder, for it is hard for me to conceive how men who knew the word “I,” could give it up and not know what they had lost. But such has been the story, for I have lived in the City of the damned, and I know what horror men permitted to be brought upon them.

Perhaps, in those days, there were a few among men, a few of clear sight and clean soul, who refused to surrender that word. What agony must have been theirs before that which they saw coming and could not stop! Perhaps they cried out in protest and in warning. But men paid no heed to their warning. And they, those few, fought a hopeless battle, and they perished with their banners smeared by their own blood. And they chose to perish, for they knew. To them, I send my salute across the centuries, and my pity.

Theirs is the banner in my hand. And I wish I had the power to tell them that the despair of their hearts was not to be final, and their night was not without hope. For the battle they lost can never be lost. For that which they died to save can never perish. Through all the darkness, through all the shame of which men are capable, the spirit of man will remain alive on this earth. It may sleep, but it will awaken. It may wear chains, but it will break through. And man will go on. Man, not men.

Anthem, Chapter 12, Ayn Rand

Of Tyrants, Lies and Decrees

Of Tyrants, Lies and Decrees


“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” ― C. S. Lewis

On April 9, 2019 tyrants in New York City declared a state of emergency and ordered free people to be injected or face fines. I do not use the term “tyranny” lightly.

The decree issued on this date made it a crime to simply live. By this order, citizens must receive an injection to lawfully live in their community. To coerce free people against their will is tyranny.



“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” – H. L. Mencken

The case for this tyranny is justified by lies. The hysteria and danger posed by measles is irrational, as history shows. The fundamental claim that the MMR vaccine is safe is scientifically false.

Unlike other approved drugs, the MMR testing did not use a double blind placebo control during clinical trials. Astoundingly, all of the childhood vaccines have been allowed to skip this step.

This means that safety of the MMR is not known to the degree that all other approved drugs require. Specifically, the MMR clinical studies do not reveal: (1) unbiased adverse reaction results and (2) causation of reported reactions. This is a gaping hole in the safety profile of the MMR vaccine!


Ignoring this and many other deficiencies with regards to safety testing, the commissioner appeals to her “expert” status as a pediatrician, while making blanket statements that the MMR is safe. Only offering claims and expecting trust because she was once a pediatrician.


Further, like all tyrants, she feels the need to dehumanize the opposition. There are many legitimate questions raised by the opposition which if heard would disrupt the false sense of security created by unfounded proclamations of an “expert”.


Of course, the Commissioner refuses to address the following:

  1. Do the “anti-vaxxers” generally have personal experiences with vaccine injury because they too were once “pro-vaxxers” and followed the advice of their pediatrician to their child’s detriment? Would that not make them “ex-vaxxers”? Is that term too revealing of truth?
  2. Do these “ex-vaxxers” point out that the MMR is not double blind placebo control (DBPC) tested during clinical trials like all other approved drugs require? Do they point out that the DBPC is the gold standard of safety testing and childhood vaccines skipped that step?
  3. Do these “ex-vaxxers” point people to the VAERS system where they can review reported vaccine injuries on their own? Do the tell people that last year alone 60k+ vaccine injuries were reported and 400+ vaccine related deaths?
  4. Do these “ex-vaxxers” ask people to consider the dramatic rise in Autism from 1 in 10,000 to the current 1 in 45? Do they point out how double blind placebo control (DBPC) testing doesn’t exist for childhood vaccines? Do they point out that without DBPC then autism causation is not known.
  5. Do these “ex-vaxxers” point out that there is special court that protects Pharma from vaccine liability when they cause vaccine injuries? Do they relate the fact that $4B has been paid out to vaccine injured through this court?


“An unjust law in itself is an act of violence.” – Mahatma Gandhi

The decree demands that adults and children be vaccinated within 48 hours or face a fine of $1000 to $2000.

The bottom line: this decree makes criminals out of law-abiding citizens. 


In order to make  “living life without injection” a crime a claim must be made that doing so violates some existing law.


The decree claims that the act of “living your life without injection” is a “prohibited act”.


Once this slight of hand is accepted, then the penalties for “living life without injection” are codified in 3.11.



Of Tyrants, Lies and Decrees.

“Those who are capable of tyranny are capable of perjury to sustain it.” ― Lysander Spooner

Regardless of one’s stance on vaccines it must be apparent that forcing injections is unwise. Even if one believes that the current vaccines are extremely safe and effective then you must consider how future leaders might abuse this newfound tool. The dystopian potential of forced injections is infinite.

“A well informed citizenry is the best defense against tyranny.” – Thomas Jefferson



Click to access ICAN-Reply.pdf

Click to access health-code-article3.pdf