Speaker 1: This is Dan Kaplis and welcome to today's online podcast
Speaker 1: edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to
Speaker 1: give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
Speaker 1: and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
Speaker 1: single day on your favorite podcast platform.
Speaker 2: Welcome back to the Dan Kapla Show. I'm Christy Verton Brown.
Speaker 2: Thanks for joining us tonight. Dan is in trial, so
Speaker 2: you are stuck with me. I would like to play
Speaker 2: a clip that Ryan found for us over the break.
Speaker 2: He always is great at finding all the clips you
Speaker 2: could ever possibly want. But this one is from a
Speaker 2: new representative in Colorado, Cecilia Espinoza from HT four.
Speaker 3: Which I believe is right in the heart of Denver.
Speaker 2: She is talking about the patriarchical British monarchy of old
Speaker 2: as a perfect example of how we should view children
Speaker 2: here in Colorado, you know, rather than parental rights or
Speaker 2: any crazy idea like that, the patriarchal British monarchy is
Speaker 2: apparently the way to go.
Speaker 4: So the notion that parents have rights have always reigned
Speaker 4: supreme is not in our English Saxon history, but rather
Speaker 4: that there was always a recognition that the state had
Speaker 4: an interest in protecting the rights of children, and that
Speaker 4: was balanced by the best interest of the child doctrine
Speaker 4: which we see in much of the case, which my
Speaker 4: colleague from never referred to, which balances the rights of
Speaker 4: the parents and the child in this other context of.
Speaker 5: Issues, And in light of all of.
Speaker 4: That and my knowledge of the history of how those
Speaker 4: rights of children have been balanced over time, I would
Speaker 4: just I will have to say that I will be
Speaker 4: ann tonight.
Speaker 5: Okay.
Speaker 2: So balancing rights of parents and kids, that's her opinion
Speaker 2: of what you should do. And to look for an example,
Speaker 2: she decides we should base it on English history, the
Speaker 2: very country that we rebelled against, had a revolution against
Speaker 2: to establish our own better system of governments. It's not
Speaker 2: like Britain was some you know, novel, wonderful place of
Speaker 2: how they treated children and what rights they gave children
Speaker 2: back in the seventeen hundreds. So no idea what she's
Speaker 2: actually talking about there, as far as you know, good
Speaker 2: examples and quality law, but even the idea that she's
Speaker 2: trying to set this out as well, you know, in
Speaker 2: English history, if we pay attention to that, as opposed
Speaker 2: to I don't know, maybe American history, because we live
Speaker 2: in America her idea that we should be balancing the
Speaker 2: rights of parents and kids. Note that they are specifically
Speaker 2: not talking about life and death situations. In fact, when
Speaker 2: you talk about life and death situations abortion, for example,
Speaker 2: they hugely reject the idea that you should balance the
Speaker 2: rights of the mother and the child and try to
Speaker 2: help them both live, and you know, let's make sure
Speaker 2: they both have the right to life constitutionally, so that
Speaker 2: the child can then go on to live and have
Speaker 2: a right to liberty and a right to own property
Speaker 2: and all these rights we supposedly, you know, hold so
Speaker 2: dear on this side of the aisle. But no, they
Speaker 2: are not talking about that. In fact, they'd come down
Speaker 2: completely on the opposite end of the spectrum if you're
Speaker 2: talking about that kind of a kind of a situation.
Speaker 3: Instead, when they're talking.
Speaker 2: About balancing the rights of kids with their parents, they're
Speaker 2: talking about what names kids get to call themselves in school.
Speaker 2: They're talking about gender transitioning. If the child agrees with
Speaker 2: the gender ideology the state has decided to adopt and
Speaker 2: the parent doesn't like, well, let's go ahead and take
Speaker 2: custody away from the parents. That is literally a bill
Speaker 2: that was run this session and very nearly passed. In
Speaker 2: that version the bill House Bill thirteen twelve did actually pass,
Speaker 2: but that portion was stripped out close to the last minute.
Speaker 2: Actually still ended up being a terrible bill at least
Speaker 2: that was taken out. But Representative Espinoza like wanted those
Speaker 2: kind of things. So when they talk about balancing the
Speaker 2: rights of parents and kids, they are not talking about
Speaker 2: like the death situations. They are talking about ideology situations
Speaker 2: when they think they've got the child on the side
Speaker 2: of the state and they want to let the kid
Speaker 2: go against the parent. So that is actually what they're
Speaker 2: talking about. I think a valid question as well that
Speaker 2: we should be asking, is okay if people in control
Speaker 2: of the legislature here in the government in Colorado think
Speaker 2: that the government should be in charge of children, be
Speaker 2: in charge of implementing their rights or religious wards of
Speaker 2: the state. If you actually listen to a longer clip
Speaker 2: represented Espinosa as she goes into even more detail double
Speaker 2: the time talking about children as wards of the state,
Speaker 2: the government like sharing responsibility for children instead of parents,
Speaker 2: we should it's develop thant to ask the question, how
Speaker 2: well does the state of Colorado actually protect kids? What's
Speaker 2: their track record. What kind of laws do we have
Speaker 2: here in Colorado.
Speaker 6: Well, there's a lot of stories in news recently about
Speaker 6: schools not doing such a great job of protecting kids,
Speaker 6: specifically Jeffco Schools and to that point, Jeffco Kids First,
Speaker 6: Lindsay Datco founding that organization. Over thirty different cases of
Speaker 6: child abuse, sexual and otherwise by adults and positions of
Speaker 6: trust be the administrators, faculty members, staff, and a lot
Speaker 6: of times these stories are buried because they're inconvenient to
Speaker 6: the school districts themselves. We saw the grooming story at
Speaker 6: a Columbine high school where a high school sophomore age fifteen,
Speaker 6: had a social studies teacher who was grooming her. A
Speaker 6: female teacher and a lesbian relationlationship that ultimately saw the
Speaker 6: young woman turn eighteen and move in with the teacher
Speaker 6: that groomed her. Yes, And but for the efforts of
Speaker 6: those uncovering the facts of this case, that teacher wasn't disciplined,
Speaker 6: that teacher wasn't fired. That teacher simply was allowed to
Speaker 6: leave of her own accord, and then subsequently he had
Speaker 6: her teaching license removed.
Speaker 5: But she moved to California.
Speaker 3: Yeah, she did to.
Speaker 2: Get away from it all, to hide from the situation
Speaker 2: that she was creating, and who knows how many other
Speaker 2: kids it was created with.
Speaker 6: I kind of turned into the sheriff from Stranger Things
Speaker 6: and I go back in time, you know, like I said,
Speaker 6: as part of gen X. And I'm pretty old now,
Speaker 6: I'm fifty, but still like my parents, especially my mom,
Speaker 6: but they would be like, my kid has the rights
Speaker 6: that I give him, yeah, and nothing more and nothing
Speaker 6: less than that.
Speaker 5: That's it.
Speaker 6: We make the call and the decisions on him, what
Speaker 6: he can do and what he can watch, on the
Speaker 6: medical procedures that he might have, the things that he
Speaker 6: might do to his body.
Speaker 5: Talking about me, talk about.
Speaker 2: Me, I know, well, I mean that's part of being
Speaker 2: a child, is we all go through. And it's actually
Speaker 2: a healthy thing to go through in life. You are
Speaker 2: actually a subject to someone else's authority for a part
Speaker 2: of your life when you are learning and growing and
Speaker 2: becoming an adult, like you're a normal part of it.
Speaker 5: You're a child, you're a minor, you're a dependent.
Speaker 6: You're not an adult. You're not capable of making those decisions.
Speaker 6: That's why you have parents. I don't understand the whole
Speaker 6: mindset or argument. No, these kids are their parents' kids
Speaker 6: until or unless that you can show that there's a
Speaker 6: gregious abuse, and in those cases you remove them from
Speaker 6: the home. But different short of that, I'm talking like
Speaker 6: a very high bar Christie. Oh yeah, not just I
Speaker 6: disagree with my son or daughter's gender identity, and.
Speaker 3: I we'll let them have something they want. I won't
Speaker 3: pay for their surgery right now?
Speaker 2: No?
Speaker 5: What?
Speaker 3: Hell?
Speaker 2: No? Well, and you brought up Jefferson County schools and
Speaker 2: I'm glad you did.
Speaker 5: Ryan.
Speaker 2: I have met with Lindsay dat Co personally, which I
Speaker 2: think is a really good thing to do. You hear
Speaker 2: these stories people say, and then you're like, Okay, I
Speaker 2: want to meet with you in person and see how legitimate.
Speaker 2: This is extremely legitimate. She has data to back up
Speaker 2: research story. She knows what she's talking about. Anyone listening
Speaker 2: should look her up and look up everything she's uncovered
Speaker 2: in the Jefferson County schools. But specifically, here's a piece
Speaker 2: that she put out recently. There's a paper called the
Speaker 2: McKinney Vento Paperwork, and basically what it is is a
Speaker 2: school can sign this paper and basically help declare a
Speaker 2: child homeless so it is supposed to be in situations
Speaker 2: where the child actually does not have a parent or
Speaker 2: guardian taking care of them.
Speaker 3: Of course, those situations exist on occasion.
Speaker 2: Shocker, Jefferson County School District has the highest number of
Speaker 2: McKinney vento paperwork filed of any school district in the
Speaker 2: entire state, and they do not, at the same time
Speaker 2: have the highest homeless population in the state Denver, actually,
Speaker 2: does I believe if I read it right, And Jefferson
Speaker 2: County way above Denver with a number of pieces of
Speaker 2: paper filed four children. And there's story after story in
Speaker 2: jeffco where the parents didn't even know that administrator's teachers
Speaker 2: whoever at the school was helping kids get this paperwork
Speaker 2: signed so that the kids could get away from the
Speaker 2: parents and not be under the parents' authority. Often involve
Speaker 2: gender ideology, though it's not actually the issue that was
Speaker 2: there In every single case, they're just uncovering the different
Speaker 2: situations where this happened. They don't even know all the
Speaker 2: scenarios and details yet, but just to shear, a number
Speaker 2: of times this paperwork has been filed by jeff coo
Speaker 2: administrators with kids and without parents knowledge It's like, if
Speaker 2: you have a parent that doesn't know about it, you're
Speaker 2: not supposed to be signing this paperwork because there's a
Speaker 2: parent that's in charge of this kid, that's taking care
Speaker 2: of this kid, that this kid is living with. So
Speaker 2: a complete misuse of the paperwork. From everything I've heard,
Speaker 2: the details are still being uncovered, but just one more
Speaker 2: example of how Jeffco is literally creating this wall the
Speaker 2: Jeffco School district, this wall between the schools, the kids
Speaker 2: and the parents, and the parents are the ones finding
Speaker 2: themselves on the outside.
Speaker 3: They're boxed out.
Speaker 2: I think personally, I know there's a lot of messed
Speaker 2: up school districts in the state. I think Jeffco and
Speaker 2: Cherry Creek are two of the worst. And I say
Speaker 2: this from having talked to a number of people on
Speaker 2: the inside, being on the state Board of Education, and
Speaker 2: there's so many problematic things going on in both of them.
Speaker 6: And that is so devastating because when I first moved
Speaker 6: here Christy in twenty eighteen, I moved I live in
Speaker 6: Greenwood Village. I am in the Cherry Creek School district.
Speaker 6: I was told and I saw in publications and magazines
Speaker 6: that Cherry Creek schools.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's what I heard with the elite, premier.
Speaker 6: Public school system in the state of Colorado and even nationwide.
Speaker 3: Mm hmm.
Speaker 5: And now we watch what it's become, right right.
Speaker 2: And when I say they're two of the worst districts
Speaker 2: in the state, I am talking about four districts. When
Speaker 2: you're looking at the perspective of districts that separate parents
Speaker 2: from the equation and say we no longer need parents
Speaker 2: to get involved. So if you're a parent, you're not
Speaker 2: sending your kid to school just for academic success. I mean,
Speaker 2: look at the troubling numbers of academic success in these
Speaker 2: schools too.
Speaker 3: But like, let's set that to the side, because.
Speaker 2: You know, in some schools they perform better than other
Speaker 2: schools across the state, but not in every Cherry Creek
Speaker 2: and Jeffco school but in some of them they do.
Speaker 3: But if you're a parent, you care about more than that.
Speaker 2: You're like, I'm trusting these people to do the right
Speaker 2: thing with my child while I'm at work and they're
Speaker 2: at school. You cannot trust that in many instances in
Speaker 2: Jeffco and Cherry Creek school districts, in particulars Doc mended evidence,
Speaker 2: documented stories, not saying it happens in every school with
Speaker 2: every teacher, but it is way too widespread in these districts.
Speaker 2: Parents should be on notice, questioned it themselves, and go
Speaker 2: find out what kind of a scenario your child is
Speaker 2: in if they're in any school district, but particularly these two.
Speaker 2: I'm Christy Britton Brown. You're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 2: We'll cover more when we come back. You can call
Speaker 2: in over the break eight five five four zero five
Speaker 2: eight two five five.
Speaker 5: And now back to the dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 2: The government's view, or at least a view shared by
Speaker 2: sub legislators here in Colorado, that children are just well
Speaker 2: wards of the state, or at least that's how we
Speaker 2: should consider them, because after all, that's what the British
Speaker 2: monarchy did, and since that's in our English history, that's
Speaker 2: what America should do. No no thought to the point
Speaker 2: that we threw off all those restraints when we had
Speaker 2: our revolution and created our own constitution, and you know,
Speaker 2: our own Supreme Court has said that the constitution actually
Speaker 2: recognizes parental rights. I mean, novel idea. These these people
Speaker 2: who raise these children in their homes, maybe you should
Speaker 2: have the right to actually make some decisions for them,
Speaker 2: rather than the government that doesn't even meet every child.
Speaker 5: So, Celia, you're breaking my heart.
Speaker 6: I think you got to play the whole bit, the
Speaker 6: long because a long form of it really gets into
Speaker 6: the details, and again it'll make your head spin.
Speaker 3: I think we should.
Speaker 2: I'm going to do that, and then I want to
Speaker 2: tell people I said the question should be, so listen
Speaker 2: to this clip with this thought in mind. The question
Speaker 2: should be, if the government thinks it is qualified to
Speaker 2: do this for your children and take care of your children,
Speaker 2: it is valid to ask the question, how well is
Speaker 2: the government actually protecting our kids?
Speaker 3: Right now?
Speaker 2: We talked about school districts in the last clip of
Speaker 2: this show, but I also want to talk about actual
Speaker 2: state law when it comes to crimes against children. So
Speaker 2: keep that in mind. We'll cover that after we play
Speaker 2: this long clip of Representative Espinoza talking about how children
Speaker 2: should be treated in Colorado.
Speaker 4: Under English common law, it was recognized that the care
Speaker 4: of all infants is lodged in the king has parents
Speaker 4: patriari and by the King, this care is delegated to
Speaker 4: the Court of Chancery. In protecting neglected independent children, chance
Speaker 4: three courts use what are called equitable powers, the essential
Speaker 4: ideas of which our flexibility, guardianship and the balancing of
Speaker 4: interest in the general welfare with a view to getting
Speaker 4: a fair result than could be obtained by applying applying
Speaker 4: older and more rigid roles. So the notion that parents
Speaker 4: have rights have always reigned supreme is not in our
Speaker 4: English Saxon history, but rather that there was always a
Speaker 4: recognition that the state had an interest in protecting the
Speaker 4: rights of children, and that was balanced by the best
Speaker 4: interests of the child doctrine, which we see in much
Speaker 4: of the case law which my colleague from Denver referred to,
Speaker 4: which balances the rights of the parents and the child,
Speaker 4: and this other context of issues.
Speaker 3: And in light of all of that, and my knowledge.
Speaker 4: Of the history of how those rights of children have
Speaker 4: been balanced over time, I would just I will have
Speaker 4: to say that I will be a known tonight.
Speaker 5: Okay.
Speaker 2: I can't get over the fact that she would really
Speaker 2: rather us consider English history.
Speaker 5: English Saxon.
Speaker 6: Are you you're the English Saxon history, not Anglo Saxon.
Speaker 5: No English English sex.
Speaker 3: I'm really sure that's a discrete and actu people that
Speaker 3: can be used.
Speaker 2: But nonetheless, I can't get over the fact that she
Speaker 2: wants to focus.
Speaker 3: On that instead of US Supreme Court precedent.
Speaker 6: Well, hold on, you're a lawyer, you on that she
Speaker 6: mentioned some precedent of case law in Colorado that supports
Speaker 6: what she was saying.
Speaker 5: Is that true?
Speaker 3: Not that I'm aware of. And I think she's confusing
Speaker 3: a few things too.
Speaker 2: When you look at like custody cases and abuse cases,
Speaker 2: courts do look at the best interests of children, like
Speaker 2: it is a standard that is used.
Speaker 3: She's just misusing it.
Speaker 2: So my opinion is that she's misquoting cases in Colorado
Speaker 2: law that were or precedent that were very specific to
Speaker 2: abuse and custody and like which you know which parents
Speaker 2: should get more time with the children? Well, it's look
Speaker 2: at the best interests of the children. Are the children
Speaker 2: suffering and neglect or abuse? Okay, Well, then is it
Speaker 2: in the best interests of the child to put them
Speaker 2: in someone else's care? Like again, in abuse and neglect cases,
Speaker 2: that is a legitimate consideration. And it's sort of like
Speaker 2: one of the few responsibilities government does have when it
Speaker 2: comes to children is they are also people and citizens,
Speaker 2: and when their lives are at risk and their you know,
Speaker 2: bodies are being abused, and yeah, the government.
Speaker 3: Should step in and do something about it.
Speaker 2: But that is a rare scenario, and she's using that
Speaker 2: to say, oh, that's a blanket standard that when we
Speaker 2: look at anything involving parental rights.
Speaker 3: I mean, no, it should really be the best.
Speaker 2: Interest of the child, defined as what the child like
Speaker 2: to be called by a different name than the parents
Speaker 2: gave them at birth, with a child like to have
Speaker 2: their parents pay for some surgeries to you know, follow
Speaker 2: the state's gender ideology instead of the parents' own beliefs.
Speaker 2: Like that's where she would like to take it and apply.
Speaker 2: So I think she's miss speaking when it comes to Colorado.
Speaker 3: Okay, slaw.
Speaker 6: You know, there was a movie in the eighties called
Speaker 6: soul Man which could never be made today. I think
Speaker 6: Kelly remembers this one, but.
Speaker 3: I do not. There is a moornient.
Speaker 6: But tell me what if the kid, I mean, tell
Speaker 6: me how this is different or how it's worse.
Speaker 5: I don't think it's worse. I think it's not as bad,
Speaker 5: but it's still ridiculous. Goes to a pery. You know,
Speaker 5: it's a white kid.
Speaker 6: I'm black, and I want melanin and and I want
Speaker 6: to become a black young person who you pay for
Speaker 6: those for me, and I want to.
Speaker 3: Freak out, Well, yeah, it can be transracial.
Speaker 2: You can only be Transfender, according to rails Now, showed us.
Speaker 5: All that she could succeed in that endeavor.
Speaker 2: I know right, yes, now, I will say I know
Speaker 2: someone who at a at a very important workplace in
Speaker 2: Denver actually went to their HR manager because they disagreed
Speaker 2: with some of the standards that were being set out.
Speaker 2: And they said, well, I'd like to ask a question
Speaker 2: if I wanted. And this person was like white as
Speaker 2: white can be, and they're like, if I wanted to
Speaker 2: say that I was black for the HR department for
Speaker 2: for whatever my own purposes are, can I do that?
Speaker 3: And she was like, well, that would be up to you.
Speaker 2: You could do And this was actually a black HR
Speaker 2: director talking to a white guy. Wow, and she's more
Speaker 2: liberal and he just wanted to see what the answer
Speaker 2: would be. Of course, he would never do anything like that.
Speaker 2: He just wanted to see, like, would she come down
Speaker 2: on at least the consistent side. That's what I'm saying,
Speaker 2: Like she was at least consistent, but most aren't. They're
Speaker 2: like to be horrified by question.
Speaker 6: Like, well, credit to her because she kind of probably
Speaker 6: thought that through a few if you moves ahead on
Speaker 6: the chessboard, going oh, I see where this is going,
Speaker 6: and if I'm going to be intellectually honest.
Speaker 2: Then yeah, craft r own identity regardless of your biology.
Speaker 2: Then that applies to gender, it applies to race, it
Speaker 2: applies to ethnicity. It should apply to height, It should
Speaker 2: apply to weight, like I mean literally, it should.
Speaker 3: Apply to eight. And there's so many problems if you
Speaker 3: actually go down that road, and.
Speaker 5: That's the road. That's the road.
Speaker 6: The Senator Elizabeth Warren for years identified as an American Indian,
Speaker 6: benefited from scholarships and jobs because of it, and this
Speaker 6: is why she's rightfully.
Speaker 5: Called Pocahontas by President Trump.
Speaker 7: It's interesting that you bring that up because my son
Speaker 7: got into Florida State because he mistakenly me like checked
Speaker 7: the application as American Indian.
Speaker 5: Oh no, yeah, did he hold the Pocahontas.
Speaker 3: Did he have to tell them that it wasn't real?
Speaker 3: Well he didn't go oh it didn't go okay, yeah,
Speaker 3: but it was like, oh you did what? Oh no,
Speaker 3: I mean yeah, it gets you places as Elizabeth Warren.
Speaker 4: Is found.
Speaker 3: But it was not good.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I mean and honest reason will people correct
Speaker 2: that wouldn't pull us with Warren in that category. But
Speaker 2: since we are talking about children, and I want to
Speaker 2: get back to the state law on kids, this is
Speaker 2: the point I really want to make because I think
Speaker 2: few people know about it. George Brockler's a DA He's
Speaker 2: brought a lot of attention to this issue. But it
Speaker 2: is the law in Colorado concerning child sexual assault and
Speaker 2: online solicitation of children. If you commit that in Colorado,
Speaker 2: you are most likely going to be out on probation.
Speaker 2: The sentencing guidelines in Colorado for people who do some
Speaker 2: of the worst crimes against our children, they just get off.
Speaker 2: They get to go right back out on the street
Speaker 2: with probation. It is a it's against the law. Sure,
Speaker 2: the state bans it, and it's not going to allow it.
Speaker 2: But if you buy children online for certain activities that
Speaker 2: you want to do to abuse them, if you actually
Speaker 2: commit sexual assault against a child, you are most likely
Speaker 2: to get off in probation in Colorado. It is a
Speaker 2: horrible state of things. They had the opportunity to change
Speaker 2: that in the legislature this year and they refuse to
Speaker 2: do it. So the organization I work for, Advanced Colorado
Speaker 2: is planning to bring a ballot measure to fix this
Speaker 2: in Colorado because our state laws do not protect children.
Speaker 2: It's unacceptable. Giant majority of voters across every political spectrum
Speaker 2: think this is horrible and we've got to change it.
Speaker 2: I'm Christy Britton Brown. You're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 2: You can call in over the break eight five five
Speaker 2: four zero five eight two five five or texture thoughts
Speaker 2: to five seven seven three nine.
Speaker 5: You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 2: We've been talking about a few things with the legislative
Speaker 2: session since it's over, but one more thing I want
Speaker 2: to cover today, and I actually have something somewhat funny
Speaker 2: about the Rockies to.
Speaker 3: Show you what a disappointing team. It's so sad.
Speaker 2: I want to really want to like them because I
Speaker 2: actually like baseball, but oh, that's so bad. But before
Speaker 2: we go there, let's cover one more serious thing. In
Speaker 2: the last segment, we talked about the terrible state of
Speaker 2: Colorado's laws when it comes to people who assault children
Speaker 2: and just get out on probation. Hundreds of people every
Speaker 2: year do horrible assaults against children and just get out
Speaker 2: of probation and not taken.
Speaker 3: Seriously at all by the state.
Speaker 5: Terrible.
Speaker 2: The organization I work for, Advanced Colorado. We plan on
Speaker 2: changing that through a ballot measure that we have already
Speaker 2: gotten through title Board. We'll see where that goes. But
Speaker 2: that is something that a lot of people across the
Speaker 2: state really want. The legislature simply hasn't listened to them.
Speaker 2: But here's the other thing. It's one of the bills
Speaker 2: that Polus hasn't signed yet, and there's definitely a question
Speaker 2: as to whether or not he will. It is a
Speaker 2: bill that would cement Colorado's sanctuary state status into law.
Speaker 2: It would be the fourth law in Colorado that would
Speaker 2: make us a sanctuary state. I know Police hates that label.
Speaker 2: It's like, oh, you're not a sanctuary state because he
Speaker 2: likes to you know, let people know that. Well, if
Speaker 2: there's a court order that they have to cooperate with
Speaker 2: ICE or the Department of Homeland Security, then in that case,
Speaker 2: Colorado law enforcement will cooperate. But in every other case
Speaker 2: they don't. State law literally prohibits them from doing it.
Speaker 2: He signed the sanctuary state bills into law a period
Speaker 2: of years, and now there's another one on his desk
Speaker 2: that would go even further and fine local government officials
Speaker 2: if they decide to cooperate with ICE. If they decide, hey,
Speaker 2: there's not a court order that I have to do it,
Speaker 2: but there's this dangerous criminal that ICE needs to know about.
Speaker 3: I want to go ahead and report them.
Speaker 2: The bill would find them for doing so, literally find
Speaker 2: them thousands of dollars personally for doing their duty and
Speaker 2: protecting citizens in their local community. So if the governor
Speaker 2: decides to sign this, he hasn't said if he's going
Speaker 2: to or not yet. If he decides to do it,
Speaker 2: he will literally be cementing Colorado's sanctuary state status into
Speaker 2: law in an even deeper and more terrible way, if
Speaker 2: that's even possible after the three laws that have already
Speaker 2: been signed.
Speaker 3: So that's one to keep your eyes on.
Speaker 2: I think you should, you know, let the governor know
Speaker 2: if you have thoughts about that bill, because that is
Speaker 2: one of the worst things we could do right now
Speaker 2: is make Colorado even more dangerous.
Speaker 3: The US News and Rule Report just released their rankings
Speaker 3: on states. Last year, we were the third most dangerous.
Speaker 2: State in the nation. Want to know where we are
Speaker 2: this year in the new report, number two most dangerous
Speaker 2: state in the nation. So despite all of Governor Pullis's
Speaker 2: claims in his State of the State address, oh, I
Speaker 2: want to make Colorado the top ten safest states in
Speaker 2: the nation, we are going absolutely to the bottom of
Speaker 2: the barrel, not just the third worst, the second worst
Speaker 2: in the nation. So the you know, terrible idea to
Speaker 2: then go ahead and cement sanctuary state status. We are
Speaker 2: penalizing local officials for trying to help make Colorado safe.
Speaker 2: Terrible idea, But you know that's that's on the table.
Speaker 2: We'll see if he signs it or not. As I'm
Speaker 2: going to look through my texts right now, lots of
Speaker 2: thoughts and opinions here, people just talking about, you know,
Speaker 2: the terrible laws that they'd like to enact in Colorado,
Speaker 2: giving children the decisions to do whatever they want, whatever
Speaker 2: parents think doesn't matter anymore.
Speaker 3: And I think it's really important.
Speaker 2: To acknowledge, based on all of these texts, how close
Speaker 2: we came in Colorado. A literally declaring parent who had
Speaker 2: a different opinion from the state on gender ideology abusers
Speaker 2: of their kids. That is what thirteen twelve almost did.
Speaker 2: It would have taken. You know, parents who refused to
Speaker 2: agree with their children's you know, gender transition, don't want
Speaker 2: to cooperate with it, don't want to call them a
Speaker 2: different name. If you didn't agree with that as a
Speaker 2: parent and you were in a custody battle, the law
Speaker 2: they proposed literally said that that would then be considered
Speaker 2: the same as physical abuse.
Speaker 3: On par with that, you don't want.
Speaker 2: To call your child by a different name, You're now
Speaker 2: in the same category of someone who physically beats their
Speaker 2: child every night.
Speaker 6: Hold on you hear a mom, you named the kid,
Speaker 6: you gave the kid that you created that child, Christy
Speaker 6: within your body, You gave birth.
Speaker 5: To the child, you chose the name. I think you
Speaker 5: deserve to keep that title.
Speaker 2: I mean I certainly do too, So just like on
Speaker 2: a common sense basis, it's like really, I mean, I
Speaker 2: don't know. It's just some times it's so laffable. It's like,
Speaker 2: what's what as a response to that that's even good?
Speaker 2: Other than even you guys are just insane.
Speaker 6: I want to ask Center left people like why do
Speaker 6: you keep voting for this? Because you are And this
Speaker 6: is where I do have some frustrations with Dan, like
Speaker 6: no somebody that continues to vote Democrat. Now with all
Speaker 6: of this evidence before your very eyes, you are voting
Speaker 6: for this well, especially in Colorado.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no question about it. You live in Louisiana, you
Speaker 3: have like you.
Speaker 2: Know, Okay, maybe maybe maybe it's different. Still on the
Speaker 2: national level, it's not different at all, But at least
Speaker 2: on the state level, maybe you can claim there's some difference.
Speaker 2: But here is pretty clear what's going on quite you know,
Speaker 2: And I think what's just such the dichotomy to me
Speaker 2: is when you look at the same people who insist
Speaker 2: at a three year old and according to this legulation,
Speaker 2: a three year old literally as soon as they can
Speaker 2: speak and say they want to be called by a
Speaker 2: different name because they think they're a different gender, then
Speaker 2: the pair would have to do it, and if they didn't,
Speaker 2: they would be, you know, considered a child abuser under
Speaker 2: the law that almost passed in Colorado. That's where they
Speaker 2: want to go without but back it up for a
Speaker 2: couple of years. The baby before they're born, no best
Speaker 2: interest to the child, don't care about their rights, all
Speaker 2: about the mother's decision.
Speaker 3: I talk about parental rights here.
Speaker 5: Then where does that change, like magically somehow.
Speaker 2: As soon as the child can speak and decide it
Speaker 2: agrees with the state.
Speaker 6: Can we talk about all the things that a three
Speaker 6: year old can do versus what a three year.
Speaker 5: Old cannot do? I mean just functionally functionally, and if.
Speaker 2: We're talking about how how insane it is too, It's
Speaker 2: like they didn't write into the provisions of the bill
Speaker 2: that what if a child literally wants to be trans
Speaker 2: species okay, like wants to be treated like a dog
Speaker 2: or a cat.
Speaker 6: What if a three year old wanted to walk around
Speaker 6: Cedar Point Amusement Park all by him or herself?
Speaker 5: Would we let that three year old do that?
Speaker 2: Well, I can guarantee you the same legislators, you know,
Speaker 2: her talking about all this, would say, well, that's not
Speaker 2: in the best interest of a child. They might get kidnapped,
Speaker 2: they might get stolen. It's like, okay, so who is
Speaker 2: determining this best interest of the child standard they want
Speaker 2: They want the government.
Speaker 3: To determine that.
Speaker 2: The government to be like, well, the risk that you
Speaker 2: are kidnapped, that you get lost, that you fall into
Speaker 2: a pond and drown, Okay, that's not in your best interest.
Speaker 2: So we get to say, hey, three year old, you
Speaker 2: don't actually have the you know, experience in life, the knowledge,
Speaker 2: the wisdom, the age to make these decisions for yourself.
Speaker 2: We know better than you do, not your parents, but
Speaker 2: we do as the government. So you know, we're not
Speaker 2: going to let you be a dog. We're not gonna
Speaker 2: let you run off by yourself. But hey, because we
Speaker 2: as a state think that people can switch their gender,
Speaker 2: we're going to say that you absolutely have all the experience, age, knowledge,
Speaker 2: wisdom to go ahead and make that decision. And if
Speaker 2: your parents want to disagree, well then they're the abusers. Like, actually,
Speaker 2: it's crazy how close we got to passing a law
Speaker 2: like that in Colorado, and because a whole ton of
Speaker 2: people spoke out against it, that is not the version
Speaker 2: of law that passed. Still a bad law, still leaves
Speaker 2: open the idea that parents might be able to be
Speaker 2: accused of discriminating against their children for so called misgendering
Speaker 2: or dead naming them.
Speaker 3: But at least it.
Speaker 2: Took away the abuse portion and the custody portion at
Speaker 2: crazy times we're living in. But let's go ahead and
Speaker 2: move to the Rockies. I'm going to play this clip
Speaker 2: for you. A man who wants to sue the Rockies.
Speaker 2: In part because they're a terrible team new.
Speaker 8: Tonight the Rockies can't catch a break for a ball
Speaker 8: for that matter. But their poor performance now being cited
Speaker 8: in a lawsuit. A Parker man says he was hitting
Speaker 8: the face with a foul ball while sitting in a
Speaker 8: course field luxury box and is suffering quote catastrophic and
Speaker 8: permanent injuries. This happened in twenty twenty three during a
Speaker 8: game against the Yankees. The lawsuit claims the Rockies did
Speaker 8: not keep the stadium safe, citing quote a lack of
Speaker 8: netting to protect the fans, and it also claims that
Speaker 8: the Rockies' longstanding poor performance on the field has contributed
Speaker 8: quote to a game day environment in which spectators are
Speaker 8: less engaged with the.
Speaker 5: Action on the field. End of quote.
Speaker 8: We reach out to the Yankees for comment. They have
Speaker 8: not responded tonight.
Speaker 2: So you're playing so terrible, I don't actually pay attention
Speaker 2: to what's going on at the game. Therefore it's your
Speaker 2: fault if you hit me with the foul ball. That's
Speaker 2: a unique argument in court.
Speaker 6: Plus, I think it happened two years ago. So the
Speaker 6: Rockies they were bad, but they weren't this bad.
Speaker 3: No, I mean according so Kyle Clark is posting on Twitter.
Speaker 2: Saying that we are now witnesses to history, and here's
Speaker 2: the history. The Rockies fall to eight forty two, which
Speaker 2: is the worst fifty game start to a season in
Speaker 2: the modern era of baseball.
Speaker 5: That's correct.
Speaker 6: I think I looked it up the Kentucky Kernels of
Speaker 6: eighteen ninety five. So that's not the modern era, that's
Speaker 6: the ancient era. Ability the National League was founded in
Speaker 6: eighteen seventy six, they were one game worse at seven
Speaker 6: and forty three through fifty games than the Rockies are
Speaker 6: now at eight and forty two.
Speaker 3: I will just throw forty two horrible.
Speaker 2: I will just throw out there. Every game my daughter
Speaker 2: has ever been two of the Rockies they win.
Speaker 5: Why are you not taking her?
Speaker 9: I know?
Speaker 5: This weekend against the Yankees.
Speaker 2: I feel like I should talk to whoever owns the
Speaker 2: Rockies and be like, she might be very lucky charm.
Speaker 2: Come on, it's happened for years in a row. She
Speaker 2: goes to they win, oh yeah every time, and when
Speaker 2: she wasn't there and the rest of us went and
Speaker 2: they lost. When she's there, they win. Taker this week
Speaker 2: I don't know. Okay, you're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 2: I'm Christy Burton Brown. When we come back, I'm going
Speaker 2: to talk to you about the weapon that is commonly
Speaker 2: used in assault crimes. But there's no effort by the
Speaker 2: Democrats to ban this like they're trying to ban guns.
Speaker 5: And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 2: So I have a great question from a Texter. If
Speaker 2: Colorado is the second worst state, the second most dangerous
Speaker 2: state in the nation, which is the worst state? The
Speaker 2: answer is New Mexico. New Mexico is the only state
Speaker 2: in the US News and World Report New Report that
Speaker 2: that is more dangerous in Colorado, and they look at
Speaker 2: a wide range of crimes, criminal activity, law enforcements, different
Speaker 2: laws in the state to determine which is the most dangerous.
Speaker 2: For example, I don't think Colorado has the most violent
Speaker 2: crimes in the nation. We have a ton of property crimes.
Speaker 2: So just when you look at total amount of crimes
Speaker 2: and so therefore whether it's safe to be in Colorado,
Speaker 2: we get the second worst, moving down from third worst
Speaker 2: last year. So New Mexico is the only one that
Speaker 2: beats us out. Another texture saying dead naming what a term.
Speaker 2: I agree.
Speaker 3: They come up with all this.
Speaker 2: This is one thing the Left loves to do is
Speaker 2: invent their own language and invent their own dictionary terms
Speaker 2: and assume that everyone you know just needs to use
Speaker 2: these and understand what they are. And I think in
Speaker 2: the bill they passed thirteen twelve, in the version they
Speaker 2: actually passed, they didn't even put a definition to dead
Speaker 2: naming because there was so much controversy, even within the
Speaker 2: LGBTQ movement, as to whether or not it was smart
Speaker 2: to define it and what the definition really was. But basically,
Speaker 2: when they say dead naming, what they mean is you
Speaker 2: are calling someone by a name they no longer choose,
Speaker 2: and a name that is from their biological gender. So
Speaker 2: if you dare to say that, and if you're a parent,
Speaker 2: and you dare to say that, this state will say
Speaker 2: that you are dead naming and therefore discriminating against people.
Speaker 2: So I mean, you know, I feel like it's a
Speaker 2: human thing to get people's name wrong all the time.
Speaker 2: Is at a doctor appointment this morning, someone got my
Speaker 2: name wrong. Even when I tried to correct them, they
Speaker 2: got it wrong again. Like they're not discriminating against me
Speaker 2: because they don't know, can't remember, can't pronounce my name
Speaker 2: it It shouldn't.
Speaker 3: Be made into this giant deal.
Speaker 2: And I get that their point is like, well, it's intentional,
Speaker 2: and you're intentionally trying to offend me by using a name.
Speaker 3: I don't like.
Speaker 2: They also assume that a lot of stuff is intentional
Speaker 2: when people are just going with what makes the most
Speaker 2: sense to them or what they remember. So there's just
Speaker 2: a lot of I think, attribution of hate to people
Speaker 2: that really aren't doing things to be hateful. They're doing
Speaker 2: things because they messed up or have a different opinion.
Speaker 2: And I think in society we need to stop saying
Speaker 2: that everyone who disagrees with us and doesn't do exactly
Speaker 2: what we want actually hates us. Those accusations typically come
Speaker 2: from the left, and I think it's really, really terrible.
Speaker 2: I do want to play you a clip with Idris
Speaker 2: Elba suggesting that kitchen knives represent twenty five percent of
Speaker 2: assault crimes and yet they are not even attempted.
Speaker 3: To be banned like guns are all the time. I
Speaker 3: think this is pretty funny.
Speaker 9: The truth is is that kitchen knives are perhaps twenty
Speaker 9: five percent of the knives used in most of the
Speaker 9: terrible crimes. That's one of the stats in the films,
Speaker 9: and those kitchen knives are usually a domestic situation. Okay,
Speaker 9: so kitchen knives, of course, it's very difficult their domestic knife.
Speaker 9: I do think there is areas of innovation that we
Speaker 9: can do with kitchen knives. I hate to say, not
Speaker 9: all kitchen knives need to have a point on them.
Speaker 9: That sounds like a crazy thing to say, but actually
Speaker 9: it would reduce you know, you can still cut your
Speaker 9: food without the point on the knife, which is an
Speaker 9: innovative way to sort of look at it. And in
Speaker 9: a country in crisis, I'm sorry, but yeah, let's look
Speaker 9: at that. But the truth is all knives. You know,
Speaker 9: the loophole on the heritage knives allows the sale of
Speaker 9: zombie ninja swords to be sold. So while you know
Speaker 9: you've got your granddad's sword on there and you want
Speaker 9: that as fine, of course, but it is leaving a
Speaker 9: loophole for someone to carry a ninja sword. So let's
Speaker 9: ban them all and if you need, if you have
Speaker 9: one of those knives, get a license for it. Simple
Speaker 9: as that, And I think it's a small contribution to society.
Speaker 5: If you say I'm going.
Speaker 9: To back that, I'll get a license from my granddad's
Speaker 9: sword because it is leaving you know, these kids vulnerable.
Speaker 2: Well, and so most people who keep their granddad's swords
Speaker 2: aren't actually keeping them so they can murder people with them.
Speaker 3: They're keeping them because it's a you know, I.
Speaker 5: Mean, doesn't everybody have their granddad's sword. I do.
Speaker 3: No, I've never met anyone who does.
Speaker 6: Okay, because he went from like zombie knives to granddad's sword. Like,
Speaker 6: wait a minute, where did you started at zombie? Now
Speaker 6: it's a granddad's sword.
Speaker 3: Are you talking about? Well, And here's the thing.
Speaker 2: If you're a liberal and you think, you know it's
Speaker 2: a weapon that's the problem rather than the person that's
Speaker 2: the problem, then you're just going to continue to go
Speaker 2: down the line and be like, Okay, now, let's get
Speaker 2: rid of guns. Now, let's get rid of kitchen knives,
Speaker 2: or let's eliminate the point on the end of them, like,
Speaker 2: let's go ahead and make sure you have a license
Speaker 2: to your grandfather's sword. And it just people still are
Speaker 2: going to have hay and people use their hands to abuse,
Speaker 2: harm and kill people all the time. If there are
Speaker 2: evil people or in other cases, people who are mentally disturbed.
Speaker 3: And need help.
Speaker 2: They often find a way to do the evil they're
Speaker 2: going to do, whether you take that particular weapon from
Speaker 2: them or not. So I think the main point is
Speaker 2: that we need to find better solutions to changing how
Speaker 2: people act and get people to help they need and
Speaker 2: the treatment they needed some cases, and rehabilitation they need.
Speaker 2: And you need to focus on the people instead of
Speaker 2: the objects, because it's really people that make things happen,
Speaker 2: not the objects. It is like the driver of the
Speaker 2: car who gets into a wreck, not the car itself, unless,
Speaker 2: of course, you're dealing with driverless cars.
Speaker 6: Like or if you're following the liberal media headlines and
Speaker 6: the driver's identity is inconvenience.
Speaker 5: So you'll see on the AP.
Speaker 6: Car drives into crowded street in New Orleans on New
Speaker 6: Year's Yes, the car did it all by itself.
Speaker 5: Nobody was driving it.
Speaker 7: I know.
Speaker 5: Wait, somebody was driving it.
Speaker 6: That's how you know if it was a Mega supporter.
Speaker 6: Oh we know the name they where they're from.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, Well, speaking of dealing with things differently, I
Speaker 2: do think a lot of stuff spend the news recently
Speaker 2: with attacks on Jewish people is treated so differently by
Speaker 2: the media than attacks on any other set of people. Thankfully,
Speaker 2: the Trump administration cracking down on Harvard and actually saying
Speaker 2: they can't admit international students anymore because they don't stop
Speaker 2: the violent protests against Jewish students. It's about time we
Speaker 2: see something like that. But society as a whole does
Speaker 2: not push back on attacks on Jewish people as much
Speaker 2: as they should. That needs to change. Thanks for listening today.
Speaker 2: I'm Christy Burton Brown. You've been on the Dan Kapli Show.
Speaker 2: I hope you have a great rest of your week,
Speaker 2: and thanks for being with us tonight.