Hick Christian's Podcast

"The Heresy of Nice: When Christianity Loses Its Edge"

David Rice and Gretchen Garrity examine what they call the "doctrine of niceness," arguing that modern Christianity has confused being "nice" with biblical love. They explore how Scripture shows that true love sometimes requires difficult conversations, rebuke, and even righteous anger. Drawing on biblical examples and church history, including ancient heresies such as Marcionism, they discuss how contemporary therapeutic culture has influenced the church's approach to confronting sin and evil. The hosts argue that biblical Christianity calls believers to speak truth boldly, even when it's uncomfortable, citing numerous scriptural examples where Jesus and the apostles used strong language against wrongdoing.

Key Topics: Biblical definitions of love, church discipline, scriptural examples of confrontation, historical heresies, and the theological distinction between being loving and being "nice."

Gretchen Garrity’s blog can be found here: Right to Win Ozarks and TikTok.

Gretchen Garrity is a former journalist who has written boldly for years. She is a brave Christian conservative, but she’s most proud of being a grandmother.

HickChristian is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

The doctored video that was originally uploaded on May 29th at 12 pm. Notice the editing jump after John Garrity speaks.

This screen recording was created at 3:09 pm. The file was uploaded originally around 12:00 pm on May 29, 2025.

The original link is now broken and you cannot go to it after I sent this email at 3:35 pm.

The new link is here.

This new video is 16 seconds longer than the original, meaning that the one edit I caught isn’t the only edit. This video is 1:11:50 long. The previous video is 1:11:34. Perhaps, they have edited other videos in the past?

I did this screen grab at 9:09 am. 14 hours before 9 am on May 30th would have been 7 pm on May 29th.

The new video was uploaded at 7 pm, past closing time for the branch to be open. They did this after hours. They have not responded to my email on who is responsible for uploading Public Records to their YouTube channel.

"Caught Red-Handed: The After-Hours Cover-Up"

The library's response to inquiry reveals the deliberate nature of their sunshine law violations. After I documented the edited video at 3:09 PM and sent a sunshine request at 3:35 PM asking who was responsible for uploading public records, the library immediately removed the doctored video.

By 7:00 PM—immediately after the Nixa branch's closing hours—a new version appeared with the previously edited content restored. The replacement video runs 1:11:50, a full 16 seconds longer than the original 1:11:34 recording, indicating multiple edits were made to the public record beyond the violation documented by this investigation.

The after-hours timing suggests library staff recognized the legal jeopardy their editing created and worked outside normal business hours to correct the violation. The library has not responded to the sunshine request identifying who handles YouTube uploads or acknowledged the editing of public records.

This timeline proves they knew exactly what they were doing wrong and moved quickly to cover their tracks once caught. The 16-second difference suggests this is a pattern, not an isolated incident.

The library's response timeline reveals consciousness of guilt. Within 3.5 hours of receiving a sunshine law inquiry about video editing, library staff worked after normal business hours to remove the doctored recording and replace it with a complete version. The corrected video, uploaded at approximately 7:00 PM, runs 16 seconds longer than the original—proving the documented editing violation was only part of the content illegally removed from the public record.

What’s in the missing video that I first noticed, not mentioning the extra 14 seconds I haven’t had time to piece together?

A flat out denial by interim Executive Director that the Library Board has statutory authority to review the Library’s Budget. I did another screen recording in case the video is again removed and or doctored.

Garrity: “The statute requires I do it.”

Pegram: “It does not. John. It does not.”

John: “Do you want me to read it to you?”Pegram: “Sure. Go ahead.”

Watch the clip and listen to the tone. You decide if the tone is one an employee should use with an employer. Or if an employee should fight so hard to hide documents that an employer has a right to see.

Here is a link directly to the time stamp where it occurs.

The edited content reveals why library staff worked after hours to conceal their sunshine law violation. The removed segment captured interim Executive Director Pegram directly contradicting board members about their statutory authority to review the library's budget.

When board members asserted their legal right to budget oversight, Pegram responded with a flat denial: 'It does not. John. It does not.' When offered to have the statute read aloud, she replied, 'Sure. Go ahead'—the tone suggesting an employee challenging her employers rather than providing requested information.

This exchange explains the systematic transparency obstruction documented throughout this investigation. If the interim director believes the elected board lacks authority to review budgets, her resistance to public records requests and video editing to hide confrontations follows logically.

The Simple Request That Exposed the System

On March 29, 2025, I submitted a straightforward public records request to the Christian County Library, seeking basic budget information that taxpayers have a right to see. What followed was a masterclass in bureaucratic obstruction, revealing how public institutions can weaponize administrative processes to avoid accountability.

The library's response? A staggering $185 fee estimate, justified by claims that the records were stored in "specialized and highly technical management software that entry-level employees are not trained or authorized to access."

The reality is that the library uses QuickBooks.

When QuickBooks Becomes "Specialized Software"

In her detailed April 4 response, Interim Director Tory Pegram explained why taxpayers would need to pay $185 to see how their tax dollars are spent:

"Many of the records you are requesting here are not just sitting in paper or digital files somewhere but will need to be pulled from bank and financial management tools that only administrative staff are trained and authorized to be able to access and use."

"Administrator time will also be required to pull records from bank account and other financial specialized and highly technical management software that entry level employees are not trained or authorized to access or use."

This language portrays a complex, enterprise-level financial system that requires specialized expertise to navigate. The truth is more mundane: the library uses QuickBooks, the same accounting software used by millions of small businesses nationwide—software specifically designed for non-accountants to use easily.

Standard budget reports in QuickBooks can be generated with a few mouse clicks. Any administrative assistant familiar with basic computer operations could produce these records in minutes, not the 11+ hours the library claimed would be necessary.

On May 27th, I finally was able to raise the funds to pay for the extortion like fees to get the budget information. I sent an email. This was two days before this video came out.

After demanding $185 for budget documents, the library has failed to respond to this reporter's agreement to pay their fee. The May 27th email authorizing payment has gone unanswered, violating sunshine law requirements for timely responses to records requests.

The timing raises questions: two days after the payment authorization, staff uploaded an edited video removing interim director Pegram's denial of board budget authority. Missouri sunshine law requires government entities to respond to records requests within three business days.

The Supreme Court's Warning About Fee Obstruction

The library's fee structure directly contradicts recent Missouri Supreme Court precedent. In Gross v. Parson (2021), the state's highest court specifically condemned the practice of using excessive fees to discourage public records requests.

The Court held that charging excessive fees "puts the transparency intended by the Sunshine Law out of reach for the average citizen and in some cases even deters requesters." The justices recognized that public bodies cannot be allowed to "test the determination of anyone requesting its records" by imposing prohibitive costs.

In an earlier case, State ex rel. Missouri Local Government Retirement System v. Bill (1996), Missouri courts established that "forcing a plaintiff to bear the governmental body's expenses would effectively deny public access to documents" and that agencies cannot "test the determination of anyone requesting its records" by imposing excessive costs.

The Christian County Library's approach fits precisely the pattern these courts rejected: claiming administrative complexity where none exists, inflating time estimates, and pricing transparency out of reach for ordinary citizens.

A Pattern of Avoiding Oversight

The fee obstruction appears to be part of a broader pattern of transparency avoidance at the library. Despite my explicit request that all communications be shared with the Board of Trustees and the library's attorney, standard practice for ensuring proper oversight, Pegram explained why she wouldn't comply:

"There is nothing in state law that requires the board or contracted legal counsel of a government agency to be cc'd on sunshine requests or responses. In fact there are risks involved with openly cc'ing all five individual board members on any written correspondence..."

This response reveals a troubling attitude: rather than embracing transparency and board oversight, the interim director actively seeks to minimize it, finding excuses to keep the governing body in the dark about public records requests.

The Legal Framework They're Violating

Missouri law creates clear obligations that the library appears to be systematically ignoring:

Treasurer's Statutory Rights

Missouri library statutes (RSMo 182.060, 182.640, 182.707) explicitly require library boards to elect treasurers and grant them specific responsibilities for financial oversight. RSMo 181.060 requires "the librarian of the library together with the treasurer of the library" to certify annual tax income and financial information to state authorities.

The statutes mandate that budget approval requires "the affirmative vote of a majority of the full board of trustees." A treasurer cannot fulfill their statutory duty without access to financial information.

Public's Right to Information

Missouri's Sunshine Law (RSMo 610.010 et seq.) "applies to all records, regardless of what form they are kept in" and creates a presumption that meetings and records should be open to the public. Budget documents are specifically designated as public records under RSMo 67.060 and are available for public inspection during reasonable hours.

Missouri law requires that "no expenditure of public moneys shall be made unless it is authorized" and that budget documents "must be kept on file" as public records. The treasurer's oversight role is essential to ensuring legal compliance.

Video Recording Integrity

Missouri law specifically provides for "the recording by audiotape, videotape, or other electronic means of any open meeting." Once they choose to record, they create a public record.

The Sunshine Law applies to records "regardless of what form they are kept in," and public bodies "cannot avoid a records request by destroying records after it receives a request for those records." This principle extends to the alteration of records.

More seriously, RSMo 575.100 criminalizes altering, destroying, suppressing, or concealing "any record, document or thing with the purpose to impair its verity, legibility or availability in any official proceeding or investigation." Video recordings of public meetings are official records.

The Criminal Implications

The evidence raises questions about potential violations of multiple Missouri criminal statutes:

* Tampering with Physical Evidence (RSMo 575.100): Altering public meeting recordings to remove discussions of statutory requirements

* Filing False Documents (RSMo 570.095): Misrepresenting software complexity and administrative requirements to justify excessive fees

* Official Misconduct (RSMo 575.320): Public servants engaging in misconduct in their official capacity

The pattern is clear: when faced with legitimate oversight requests, the library both prices out access through deceptive fee justifications and actively edits public records to hide contradictory evidence.

The Cost of Accountability

When public institutions can charge $185 for basic budget information while simultaneously editing meeting videos to hide legal discussions, democracy suffers. The Christian County Library's approach effectively creates a system where transparency is available only to those who can afford it—and even then, only in the edited version the library chooses to provide.

Consider the arithmetic: For many Missouri families, $185 represents a significant expense—money that could be allocated toward groceries, utilities, or other necessities. By pricing public information out of reach while doctoring the "free" video records, the library ensures that complete accountability remains largely inaccessible.

Missouri Courts Have Seen This Before

The library's tactics aren't new. Missouri's Sunshine Law exemptions "are supposed to be construed as narrowly as possible to further the openness of government." Courts can award penalties up to $1,000 for unknowing violations and $5,000 for purposeful violations, plus attorney's fees to prevailing parties.

The Missouri Supreme Court has made clear that government bodies cannot use administrative barriers to obstruct legitimate public oversight. The combination of fee obstruction and video editing suggests a level of intentionality that could trigger the higher penalty structure for purposeful violations.

Questions That Demand Answers

The Christian County Library's approach raises serious questions:

* Why does a public institution claim that QuickBooks constitutes "specialized and highly technical management software"?

* How can 11+ hours of work be justified for generating standard financial reports?

* Why are public meeting videos being edited to remove discussions of statutory requirements?

* What statutory obligations was Pegram discussing in the 2+ seconds cut from the public video?

* Who authorized the editing of public meeting recordings?

* What other information might be hidden behind prohibitive fees or selective editing?

The Simple Test

Here's how citizens can test their library's commitment to transparency: Ask who uploads public meeting videos to YouTube. This simple question requires no "specialized software," no extensive research, and no administrative review.

If they can't answer that basic question promptly and without fees, you've learned everything you need to know about their attitude toward public accountability.

The bottom line: The library cannot simultaneously claim to operate under Missouri law while denying access to information that Missouri law requires them to maintain and provide—and they indeed can't edit public records to hide discussions that contradict their public statements.

I care enough about the Library and the Library Board to bring this transparency issues to light. My silence on this issue will not serve the community. No one pats me on the back for investigative journalism.

The Christian County Library was contacted for comment, but did not respond by publication time.

David Rice is the editor of HickChristian News and has been investigating government transparency issues in Southwest Missouri since December 2023.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

I spoke with Sister Janine Van Tran from the order Congregation of Mary Queen about the 40 Days for Life ministry.

40 Days for Life is a pro-life campaign in 2004 in Bryan/College Station, Texas, initiated by a group led by David Bereit. It’s a focused, peaceful effort to end abortion through prayer, fasting, and community outreach, typically held outside abortion facilities. The campaign runs for 40 days—symbolizing a biblical period of transformation—and occurs twice a year: once in the spring (often aligning with Lent) and once in the fall (usually September to early November).

Sister Janine works in Springfield with the Springfield-Cape Girardeau Catholic Diocese to help protect children. She does so through peaceful vigils, aimed at communicating redemption and care to those who need another option besides the one offered by Planned Parenthood or Abortion Clinics.

Through the 40 Days for Life ministry, every child and mother is offered community resources, including safe places to stay, utilities, and other care. Our children aren’t meant to be lost but can be saved through the patient prayers of believers.

While 40 Days of Life is a ministry, it works with everyone committed to helping save unborn children and rescuing mothers. As Sister Janine said, this is the most critical issue of our time.

If you want to sign up, joining a vigil is quick and easy. It only took me about 3 minutes.

Abortion is a polarizing issue. It is hard for it not to be. Any problem that is a choice between all or nothing will be polarizing. A child cannot be partially born and partially aborted.

Because of this, Abortion ends up being an all-or-nothing issue. Yet, the children, women, and men affected are not an all or nothing for Christ who redeems us all. I am a sinner who should offer grace to those whom God offers grace. It is not my place to deny God’s gifts to anyone seeking them, even if they don’t know it yet.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

The Starfish Strategy: How Missouri Democrats Plan to Regenerate After 2024 Defeat

Introduction: The Starfish Metaphor

There is an illuminating biological metaphor at play in the Democratic strategy for rural Missouri. Starfish possess a remarkable regenerative capability: when an arm is severed from a starfish and cast into a new environment, that limb can regenerate into a complete clone of the original organism. Through this process, starfish can effectively reproduce throughout an environment, establishing a growing presence in previously unoccupied territory.

While the "Starfish Brigade" group publicly employs the heartwarming story about saving individual starfish by throwing them back into the water (suggesting the power of small, meaningful actions), the Democratic Rural Caucus efforts appear to function more like the starfish's biological reproduction mechanism – attempting to clone elements of the national party structure and messaging in every rural Missouri county, despite that same approach having failed to elect Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election.

The 2024 Election Defeat

The 2024 presidential election resulted in Donald Trump defeating Kamala Harris with approximately 74.5 million votes to Harris's 72.3 million in the popular vote – a margin of about 2.2 million votes. More decisively, Trump secured 312 electoral votes to Harris's 226, reclaiming key battleground states that Democrats had won in 2020. This electoral defeat represented a significant setback for Democrats nationally, raising questions about their messaging, policy priorities, and electoral strategy.

Rather than pivoting or recalibrating their approach after this defeat, evidence from Missouri suggests that state-level Democratic organizations are doubling down on the same messaging and priorities that failed to resonate with enough voters nationally.

Missouri Democrats' Strategic Response

The "Plan to takeover Rural Missouri" Document

An internal strategy document obtained from Missouri Democratic organizers reveals their post-election focus:

"Rural Missouri is a prime location for municipal election success for the Democratic party in 2025. By strategically investing in town council, city council, and borough races, we stand to generate a good bench as well as creating a good recognition of Rural Missouri nationwide as a region to invest in for the party."

The document outlines a focus on:

* Municipal-level investment: Targeting town councils, city councils, and borough races

* Strategic county targeting: Specifically mentioning Iron, Dent, Macon, and Osage counties

* Candidate recruitment: Emphasizing working-class candidates outside traditional political backgrounds

* Data-driven approach: Using VAN (Voter Activation Network) for optimized canvassing

While the document acknowledges that "all or nothing thinking does not exist in working class rural communities," the actual implementation of their strategy shows little moderation of progressive messaging for rural audiences.

"Missouri Strategies for Rural Organizing" Meeting

A virtual meeting held on February 13, 2025, with 64 participants, revealed specific tactics being emphasized:

"A win number is the average of the last three elections plus one vote that is how many voters you have to talk to in your district to win."

The meeting featured an extensive discussion of VAN (Voter Activation Network) usage, targeted campaigning, and fundraising strategies. Notably, organizer Paolo Cremidis expressed frustration about national Democratic funding priorities:

"Like, it's total b******t. And, like, so much money goes into primaries in races that are cis, right? And races that don't matter, right? Like, the fact that Jamal Bowman and, um... George Latimer, they spent $80 million combined in a primary for a congressional seat in Westchester County. And they got less than 30% turnout."

On-the-Ground Implementation: The Starfish Brigade

The Starfish Brigade, operating in Osage County (one of the specifically targeted counties in the strategy document), demonstrates how these strategies are being implemented locally.

Founded and led by "Marty Kole," who describes herself as having "dual degrees in elementary education and interactive media" with a "master's in media psychology and social change” and a “nomad Bohemian witch,” the group held a meeting at the Osage County Library that revealed their approach.

Rather than moderating their message for a rural audience, the meeting featured:

* Screening of a video by Robert Reich defining "five elements that define fascism" with direct comparisons to Trump

* Showing a video of Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker warning: "It took the Nazis three weeks, two days, eight hours, and 40 minutes to dismantle a constitutional republic"

* Explicit discussion of Nazi propaganda techniques

Marti explicitly described their mission:

"We won the American Revolution. We won World War II. We won the Civil War. We beat fascism before, and we know how to do it. We have lots of books written about it. We have books that we can read about. For the moment, we still have free speech, so we can still talk about this."

Divisive Messaging Across Counties

Similar patterns of divisive political messaging appear in multiple counties:

Greene County

Editor’s Note: The Book Bag Program founded by Shiela Michaels was mentioned, and was Gail Smart, running for the Springfield Public School Board at attendance and in agreement with the Communist, Lucas Underwood?

The Southwest Missouri Solidarity Network, active in Greene County, uses stark historical comparisons in their public messaging:

"The self-evident truth that all are created equal were just words on the paper to win public approval. The founders kept their slaves, women and tenants couldn't vote, and the natives in the way of our progress had to be 'removed'."

Their posts directly compare modern law enforcement to slave catchers:

"But I and others in the Solidarity Network have asked ourselves what the difference is between law enforcement chasing a homeless man in the night, and a slave catcher pursuing one running for their freedom?"

Town Hall Guidance

Instructions for engaging with Republican representatives at town halls specifically advise different emotional displays based on circumstances:

"If you are attending the town hall and have been personally and acutely (read: fired) impacted by the actions of the Republican government, freely express emotion regarding your situation."

"If you are attending and have not been impacted, meter your emotion carefully"

This strategic deployment of emotion contrasts with the document's claim to seek a broad coalition.

Focusing on Divisive Issues

Despite electoral defeat, Missouri Democrats continue to focus on issues with limited appeal in rural areas. For example, transgender rights in athletics remains a centerpiece of their activism, despite polling showing limited public support.

Recent polling shows that approximately 76% of Americans oppose allowing transgender women and girls to compete in sports against other women and girls. A Gallup poll found that 69% of Americans say transgender athletes should play on teams matching their birth gender rather than their gender identity.

Yet Democratic organizing materials show continued focus on transgender and LGBTQ+ issues in rural outreach:

"We are organizing a protest to demonstrate support for the LGBTQ+ community, with a special focus on transgender and non-binary individuals, as well as supporting immigrants. Our goal is to affirm our presence and commitment to these important causes."

The Fundamental Question

This analysis raises a fundamental question: If the policies and messaging Democrats have followed for the past four years did not help them keep the White House, why will the same approach help them win it four years from now?

On issues where public opinion is not aligned with progressive positions – such as transgender athletes in women's sports, which is opposed by nearly 80% of Americans – Missouri Democrats face a stark choice:

* Die on the hill: Continue advocating for unpopular positions out of principle, potentially sacrificing electoral viability

* Overthrow the hill: Use the "starfish strategy" of tearing off their arm to build local power bases that can eventually overpower majority opinion through institutional capture.

The "Plan to Take Over Rural Missouri" document and the implementation observed in Osage County, Greene County, and elsewhere suggests Democrats are pursuing the second option—establishing progressive infrastructure in rural areas despite, rather than because of, their policy positions' appeal to residents.

Whether this approach can succeed in the face of the clear electoral challenges demonstrated in the 2024 election remains the central question for Democratic organizers in Missouri and beyond. It’s hard to tell if their plan is based on reason and well-thought-out principles or if it’s just witchcraft and cauldrons brewing while making spells to Mars.

As disappointing as it is to be associated in a party with the Blunts, Kehoes, Tilley’s, Sinquefields, and others, the Republicans have yet to endorse witches for office. They kill babies while praising God.

HickChristian is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

The Haunting Little Girl

A disturbing video has emerged from Sullivan, Missouri, that no parent should ever have to watch: it appears to be a young girl, head shaved, being led through city streets and a parking lot by an adult male toward apartments known for housing illegal aliens (almost all men brought in to work)—the man in the video was [allegedly] described by the source as a known drug dealer with no relation to the child. The girl appears drugged, moving erratically. When concerned citizens reported this to Franklin County law enforcement, the police department silently met their questions. No investigation. Not even a wellness check.

Community in Crisis

During the Biden administration, two coach buses arrived in Sullivan, MO, one afternoon, causing concerns for local residents. The men who got off the buses were all immigrants—no families. As they departed the buses, they walked straight toward [what was allegedly] Steve Stumpe's properties—in this case, his Maple Street Apartments and his associated trailer parks, though he also owns several lower-end rentals. What followed was a wave of intimidation through the community.

Reports came in of women who no longer felt safe shopping alone. The men who were dropped off followed and filmed in the store. They felt harassed. Even the wife of local official Ryan Hewkin was targeted. As one resident confronted Stumpe allegedly in a recorded conversation: "Do you think Ryan Hewkin is happy that someone wanted to steal his wife?"

Stumpe's Response: "They Will Live Here Anyway"

In a recorded conversation, alleged property owner Steve Stumpe's attitude is evident:

* Admits rentals [allegedly] come through "McGinnis."

* Claims "They will live here anyway."

* Deflects responsibility: "I'm not the police."

* Acknowledges: "Sullivan was safe... until they started coming in last year."

The Numbers Don't Lie

Sullivan's crime statistics tell the story:

Crime Rates vs National Average

Your chance of becoming a victim in Sullivan:

* Overall crime: 1 in 18

* Property crime: 1 in 19

* Violent crime: 1 in 195

Crime in Sullivan, MO has skyrocketed.

Compared to nearby cities, Sullivan is experiencing a crime wave—especially in violent crime. Why should this small city have seen a jump in violent crime and how is it not correlated to the male immigrants coming off the coach buses into apartments and trailers allegedly belonging to Steve Stumpe?

A fascinating connection exists between Stumpe and political figures. He is the father-in-law to Republican Representative David Schatz’s son. David Schatz runs three businesses in the area, including Schatz Undeground. David Schatz ran for Sen. Roy Blunt’s vacated seat but lost. Blunt and Schatz are allegedly close.

I’m only speculating, but if anyone could bring in cheap labor for a friend of Schatz, the well-connected Blunt could. The alleged payoff for landlords like Stumpe is guaranteed [alleged] rent payments, with various sources reporting amounts ranging from $1500 to $2200 per migrant from the Biden Administration. Exact figures have become increasingly difficult to verify due to what appears to be coordinated efforts to obscure this information because of payoffs to news organizations from USAID.

Do you wonder why rent went up so much during the Biden Administration? According to Zillow, they went up 35%. Did you imagine you might be competing with the Federal government, which was paying rent for an extra 20 million illegal immigrants? This also would create artificial pressure on the price of homes.

When Local Police Didn’t do a Wellness Check, ICE Responded

After local law enforcement's inaction on the video of the little child, concerned citizens reached out to Social Media:

* Tom Homan (former ICE director)

* Kristi Noem

Result: Within one week, ICE agents arrived and removed multiple individuals from the area. However, the Franklin County and Sullivan Police did not react to this evidence when it was presented to them by the concerned citizens. Franklin County Deputies and Sheriff have an obligation to all children.

A recent report from the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General found that over 300,000 migrant children under the care of the Office of Refugee Resettlement effectively disappeared from official radar. In a letter to ICE acting Director Patrick Lechleitner, Cloud expressed worries that the “failure” in oversight left the children vulnerable to sex trafficking and forced labor.

Are there political pressures at play to look the other direction concerning the illegal immigrants brought into Sullivan? Have we decided that in America, the children brought here illegally belong to the gangs?

Trump’s response, compared to Biden’s encouragement of this lawlessness over the last four years, may finally provide us with the humanitarian relief we need to protect children and end this violence in our communities.

The Trump Federal Response

On February 19, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order targeting the "taxpayer subsidization of open borders." The order specifically:

* Directs all Federal departments to identify programs providing benefits to illegal immigrants

* Ensures Federal funds won't support "sanctuary" policies

* Mandates stricter eligibility verification for benefits

* Targets state and local assistance programs

* Reinstates "Remain in Mexico" policies

* Ends the CBP One app (a mobile application previously used by migrants to schedule appointments for entry at U.S. ports, which critics argued essentially created a self-service border crossing system)

* Terminates categorical parole programs

* Detains dangerous criminal aliens at Guantanamo Bay

The timing is crucial: According to DOGE estimates, American taxpayers spent over $150.7 billion on illegal immigration in 2023 alone. For perspective, this equals the amount spent on income security programs for military veterans and their families.

The Money Trail

The financial impact is staggering:

National Costs (FAIR Calculations)

* Total annual taxpayer cost: $182 billion

* Federal expenses: $66.5 billion

* State/local expenses: $115.6 billion

* Cost for 20 million illegal aliens and their children

Sanctuary City Spending (Since 2022)

* New York City: $5.22 billion

* FY 2023: $1.47 billion

* FY 2024 committed: $3.07 billion

* Chicago: $574.5 million

* Ending New Arrivals Mission due to $1 billion budget shortfall

* Denver: $356 million

* Cared for 42,911 new arrivals

Congressional Findings

* U.S. House Homeland Security Committee estimates $451 billion taxpayer cost for illegal aliens and gotaways since January 2021

* CBO reports $16.2 billion cost for Biden Administration's Medicaid-funded emergency services for illegal aliens

Additional Federal Spending

* Over $1 billion allocated through FEMA since 2021

* Billions were given to organizations facilitating mass illegal migration

* Billions spent on legal services challenging deportation orders

What's Next?

This investigation continues as we examine the following:

* Federal funding rates

* Property ownership records

* Political connections

* Law enforcement responses

* Community safety measures

This is a developing story. Have information? Reach out through Substack.

Primary Evidence

* Recorded Conversation

* Audio transcript between Anonymous Source and Steve Stumpe

* Contains direct quotes and admissions regarding rental practices

* Verified and authenticated

* Video Evidence

* Surveillance footage from a Sullivan parking lot

* Along Hwy in Sullivan

* Shows an incident with a young girl

* Location verified

Official Documents

* Executive Order

* "President Donald J. Trump Ends Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders"

* Date: February 19, 2025

* Source: White House

* URL: https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-ends-taxpayer-subsidization-of-open-borders/

* Congressional Investigation

* Title: "Michael Cloud Demands Answers from ICE Over Nearly 300,000 Missing Migrant Children"

* Source: U.S. House of Representatives

* URL: https://cloud.house.gov/posts/michael-cloud-demands-answers-from-ice-over-nearly-300000-missing-migrant-children

* Crime Statistics

* Source: AreaVibes/FBI Uniform Crime Reports

* Data Year: 2022

* Released: September 2023

* URL: https://www.areavibes.com/sullivan-mo/crime/

* NewsNation Report

* Title: "Illegal immigration cost US taxpayers $150.7B: DOGE"

* Authors: Alex Caprariello, Jeff Arnold

* Date: December 4, 2024

* URL: https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/immigration/illegal-immigration-cost-us-taxpayers-150-7b-doge/

Property Records

* Tri-County Properties Holdings

* Six mobile home parks across Franklin and Crawford Counties

* Total: 318 lots

* Locations:

* Red Barn Mobile Home Park (Villa Ridge)

* Pear Tree Mobile Home Park (Gerald)

* Hillside Mobile Home Park (Gerald)

* Sycamore MH Park (Sullivan)

* Country Squire MH Park (Bourbon)

* Lakewood Mobile Home Park (Bourbon)

Additional Data Sources

* Federal Agency Statistics

* Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) estimates

* Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) calculations

* Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports

* U.S. House Homeland Security Committee estimates

Transcript

Anonymous Source (00:00:48):

How do we get rid of the illegals?

Anonymous Source (00:00:50):

I'm worried about the drug cartel and the illegals.

Anonymous Source (00:00:53):

How do we get rid of them?

Anonymous Source (00:00:55):

I will talk to,

(00:00:56):

because I'm not directly involved in any of our day-to-day men,

(00:01:00):

but I will talk to the people that are,

(00:01:03):

and if they're here on work basis,

Steve Stumpe (00:01:05):

because they're calling for us requesting that they be allowed to rent from us,

Steve Stumpe (00:01:10):

and it came from McGinnis.

Anonymous Source (00:01:14):

I really don't care about McGinnis.

Anonymous Source (00:01:16):

I know them.

Anonymous Source (00:01:17):

I really don't care.

Anonymous Source (00:01:18):

I'm asking why they're living here.

Anonymous Source (00:01:20):

And they should go over to Cuba.

Anonymous Source (00:01:22):

Really, they should go over to Cuba.

Anonymous Source (00:01:23):

But you know what?

Anonymous Source (00:01:24):

They're living here.

Anonymous Source (00:01:26):

And when they're not working, they're here.

Anonymous Source (00:01:29):

That's what I'm worried about.

Anonymous Source (00:01:31):

What they're doing when they're not working is a concern to me.

Steve Stumpe (00:01:34):

It's not my worry.

Steve Stumpe (00:01:36):

I'm concerned about not just the only goal of what they do whenever they're not working.

(00:01:42):

I'm concerned about even Americans when they're not working at all.

(00:01:47):

To me, that is despicable also.

Anonymous Source (00:01:51):

It is, yes, but I still believe that we shouldn't be.

Steve Stumpe (00:01:54):

I keep paying for every one of them through my taxes.

Steve Stumpe (00:01:57):

I keep paying for them.

(00:01:59):

Same.

(00:02:04):

We all do.

Anonymous Source (00:02:06):

But for the last two years, there's been a pandemic.

Anonymous Source (00:02:13):

For the last two years, there's been a pandemic, and a lot of Americans have gotten lazy.

Anonymous Source (00:02:19):

We just need our legislature to kick them into business, and then they'll get back to work.

Anonymous Source (00:02:24):

But right now, we don't need illegals here.

Anonymous Source (00:02:27):

We don't need illegals here.

Anonymous Source (00:02:29):

We don't need more trouble.

Anonymous Source (00:02:30):

We have drug problems already.

Anonymous Source (00:02:33):

This is going to be way worse.

Anonymous Source (00:02:34):

This is bad.

Anonymous Source (00:02:36):

I just want our children and our women stolen.

Anonymous Source (00:02:38):

I don't want them raped.

Anonymous Source (00:02:40):

I don't want them gone.

Anonymous Source (00:02:42):

The sex trafficking numbers have gone up.

Anonymous Source (00:02:49):

No, the illegals need to quit.

Anonymous Source (00:02:52):

They need to quit following them.

Anonymous Source (00:02:54):

They need to quit harassing them in the store.

Anonymous Source (00:02:57):

They need to quit filming them.

Anonymous Source (00:02:58):

Do you know they're filming them?

Anonymous Source (00:02:59):

They filmed me one day.

Steve Stumpe (00:03:01):

I'm not the police.

Anonymous Source (00:03:04):

But you are renting to these people that are doing this to our people.

Steve Stumpe (00:03:10):

And that is no different if you hire someone that happens to get a DWI,

Steve Stumpe (00:03:15):

and in the course of their DWI,

Steve Stumpe (00:03:18):

they hurt someone.

Anonymous Source (00:03:19):

That's not even a comparison, Steve.

Anonymous Source (00:03:21):

Not even a comparison.

Anonymous Source (00:03:22):

Do you know what drug cartel is?

Anonymous Source (00:03:24):

These people, they don't have family up here.

Anonymous Source (00:03:27):

Do you know what?

Anonymous Source (00:03:28):

They would easily cut your daughter's fingers off and mail them to you for money.

Anonymous Source (00:03:34):

Because that's what they do.

Anonymous Source (00:03:35):

These are ugly people.

Anonymous Source (00:03:36):

These are dangerous people.

Anonymous Source (00:03:38):

This isn't your typical DWI bad guy gone wrong.

Anonymous Source (00:03:43):

He's not a Christian kind of guy.

Anonymous Source (00:03:47):

But we're talking about illegal aliens.

Anonymous Source (00:03:50):

Have you turned on the news?

Anonymous Source (00:03:52):

Have you watched any One American Network news?

Anonymous Source (00:03:56):

They don't want illegals in our country.

Anonymous Source (00:04:01):

This is wrong.

Anonymous Source (00:04:03):

They need to come over like everybody else is like Kevin's parents or his

Anonymous Source (00:04:07):

grandparents came over.

Anonymous Source (00:04:09):

They had to work and become a citizen just like everybody else should.

Anonymous Source (00:04:12):

These people are citizens and they're dangerous.

Anonymous Source (00:04:18):

I'm just worried about our women and children.

Anonymous Source (00:04:21):

And I know I'm just saying, Steve, move them to Cuba.

Anonymous Source (00:04:24):

Steve, still move to Cuba.

Anonymous Source (00:04:26):

I think they're just, they need to get out of here.

Steve Stumpe (00:04:39):

correct authorities can deal with them.

Anonymous Source (00:04:42):

Well, I have out there told many, many women, please call the police.

Anonymous Source (00:04:48):

Please call the police.

Anonymous Source (00:04:49):

They post it on Facebook.

Anonymous Source (00:04:50):

But you know what?

Anonymous Source (00:04:52):

I don't know why they wouldn't either.

Anonymous Source (00:04:53):

I do, but they don't.

Anonymous Source (00:04:56):

So I don't know what to tell you on that.

Anonymous Source (00:04:58):

Otherwise, all I know is they're not doing it.

Anonymous Source (00:05:02):

But there's a lot going on and they're scared.

Anonymous Source (00:05:05):

And I mean, I don't like it for them.

Anonymous Source (00:05:08):

I don't like it that they can't go shopping.

Anonymous Source (00:05:12):

I just want it to be safe around here and it's not safe.

Anonymous Source (00:05:28):

Steve, we shouldn't have to even worry about calling the police.

Anonymous Source (00:05:35):

This should be a good community that we shouldn't have to worry about being stolen

Anonymous Source (00:05:40):

in the middle of the day.

Anonymous Source (00:05:41):

Do you think Ryan Hewkin is happy that someone wanted to steal his wife?

Steve Stumpe (00:05:47):

I totally agree with you.

Steve Stumpe (00:05:49):

And if you think that us not renting to a hot German will solve the problem,

Steve Stumpe (00:05:56):

then we're in a cocoon that we're not looking to see what's going on in the real world.

(00:06:06):

But I am telling you that the reality of the situation is much bigger than us or you.

(00:06:12):

And so I'm sorry, can we make it on our part?

(00:06:15):

Yes, we can.

(00:06:16):

Can we go above and beyond what is illegal?

(00:06:19):

No, we cannot.

Anonymous Source (00:06:20):

If they didn't have a place to live, they wouldn't be here.

(00:06:26):

They will live here anyway.

Steve Stumpe (00:06:28):

They will live here.

(00:06:31):

And...

Anonymous Source (00:06:34):

I don't want anybody to get hurt.

Anonymous Source (00:06:38):

You should go look at your grandchildren and think about what men will do to her if

Anonymous Source (00:06:45):

they get a hold of her.

Anonymous Source (00:06:48):

And then make a decision.

Anonymous Source (00:06:50):

Because that's what happens.

Anonymous Source (00:06:52):

That's what happens in a drug cartel world.

Anonymous Source (00:06:55):

Little girls become sex trafficked.

Anonymous Source (00:06:59):

And it's going to be if one little girl comes missing around here.

(00:07:05):

to be most possible.

(00:07:06):

Well,

Anonymous Source (00:07:06):

could you look at yourself in the mirror if one of those people living in that

Anonymous Source (00:07:10):

trailer court steals a child and ships it off?

Anonymous Source (00:07:13):

Could you look at your face in the mirror?

Steve Stumpe (00:07:15):

I mean,

Steve Stumpe (00:07:15):

that told the lives of everyone that's in our,

Steve Stumpe (00:07:18):

and this is where what I was explaining to you all about someone that works for a

Steve Stumpe (00:07:23):

being involved.

Anonymous Source (00:07:24):

I'll tell you what.

Anonymous Source (00:07:25):

We've fired people that are sex predators.

Anonymous Source (00:07:28):

They get fired.

Steve Stumpe (00:07:29):

We won't run to them.

Anonymous Source (00:07:32):

No, but they're American.

Anonymous Source (00:07:36):

They're American.

Anonymous Source (00:07:37):

They're already being prosecuted and they don't have a job.

Anonymous Source (00:07:41):

So that's what we do.

Anonymous Source (00:07:42):

They have nowhere to go but to jail to sit because predators, that's where they belong.

Anonymous Source (00:07:47):

Now, illegal predators.

Anonymous Source (00:07:49):

Illegal predators do not believe, they don't belong in America.

Anonymous Source (00:07:54):

This is where our veterans fought to keep things like that out of here.

Anonymous Source (00:08:00):

Oh, I know.

Anonymous Source (00:08:01):

They're all over.

Steve Stumpe (00:08:01):

I know.

Steve Stumpe (00:08:02):

But we're not talking about them.

Steve Stumpe (00:08:03):

We're talking about not adding to it.

Steve Stumpe (00:08:04):

And you did.

Anonymous Source (00:08:24):

Steve, there's no way you're going to justify this.

Anonymous Source (00:08:27):

I'm sorry.

Anonymous Source (00:08:28):

Steve,

Anonymous Source (00:08:29):

there's no way our discussion is going to ever justify having illegal drug cartel

Anonymous Source (00:08:35):

in this community.

Anonymous Source (00:08:36):

Housing to them just gives them more reason to do what they need to do on their own time.

Anonymous Source (00:08:42):

So as far as I'm concerned, you can give them all jobs, I don't care.

Anonymous Source (00:08:46):

But what they're doing in the evening is not good.

Anonymous Source (00:08:49):

These women are scared.

Anonymous Source (00:08:51):

And as long as the women are scared and the children are in danger,

Anonymous Source (00:08:55):

there's gonna be problems here.

Anonymous Source (00:08:56):

There's always gonna be problems like that if we don't protect them.

Anonymous Source (00:09:00):

and i'm not talking about americans we already have problems with americans but we

Anonymous Source (00:09:05):

don't need to add to it we need to be a solution to this problem this is insane i

Steve Stumpe (00:09:11):

agree

Steve Stumpe (00:09:15):

It's not my idea.

Steve Stumpe (00:09:16):

It's not my idea.

Steve Stumpe (00:09:17):

No, Sullivan was safe.

Steve Stumpe (00:09:19):

And the Ashley crime was down until they started coming in last year.

Anonymous Source (00:09:33):

And it's blown up.

Anonymous Source (00:09:34):

I've been watching it.

Anonymous Source (00:09:35):

I've got data, and I sent it on to the sheriff.

Steve Stumpe (00:09:38):

We had our company's truck stolen right out of our building.

Anonymous Source (00:09:42):

Yeah, well, that's drug problems.

Anonymous Source (00:09:44):

Do you think things are going to get better, Steve?

(00:09:47):

We're talking about fentanyl.

(00:09:48):

We're talking about fentanyl.

Anonymous Source (00:09:50):

We're not talking about meth anymore.

Anonymous Source (00:09:52):

Now, are Americans like meth?

Anonymous Source (00:09:54):

We're talking about fentanyl from China.

Anonymous Source (00:09:56):

I don't think that we're going to get very far.

(00:09:59):

I want to tell you that.

(00:10:02):

Anyone that feels threatened or anything that anybody has done to them, please call the police.

(00:10:08):

Please call the police.

Anonymous Source (00:10:09):

Trust me, I have told them that.

Anonymous Source (00:10:11):

I think they're just kind of confused why they even have to call the police.

Anonymous Source (00:10:19):

I told them that it's not a safe community anymore.

Anonymous Source (00:10:23):

So you need to call the police because the people that are living here that don't

Anonymous Source (00:10:28):

belong in America are your problem.

Anonymous Source (00:10:30):

And we need to make sure that we protect ourselves.

Anonymous Source (00:10:33):

So I'm telling the women to make sure they take their husbands and guns.

Steve Stumpe (00:10:37):

I wish that was the only problem that we had.

Steve Stumpe (00:10:39):

That would be a fantastic thing.

Anonymous Source (00:10:42):

The problem here is, is don't add to our problems.

Anonymous Source (00:10:46):

We already had problems.

Anonymous Source (00:10:48):

Now, they just tripled.

Anonymous Source (00:10:51):

This isn't even doubled.

Anonymous Source (00:10:52):

This is insane.

Anonymous Source (00:10:53):

They're everywhere.

Anonymous Source (00:10:53):

They're walking in the streets.

Anonymous Source (00:10:55):

I've got some lady this morning,

Anonymous Source (00:10:56):

I don't even know,

Anonymous Source (00:10:57):

telling me,

Anonymous Source (00:10:58):

yeah,

Anonymous Source (00:10:59):

cars were stolen over at Johanny's.

Anonymous Source (00:11:00):

Cars were stolen at my parking lot.

Anonymous Source (00:11:02):

Yeah, cars are being stolen all over because they're coming off of Maple Street.

Anonymous Source (00:11:07):

And what am I supposed to say to her?

Anonymous Source (00:11:09):

I said, oh, I'm starting to hear that.

(00:11:12):

I don't want to tell her something.

Anonymous Source (00:11:18):

other people for what is going on with your illegal immigrants.

Anonymous Source (00:11:22):

These are dangerous people who do not belong in Sullivan, period.

Anonymous Source (00:11:29):

They do not belong here.

Anonymous Source (00:11:30):

Anyone who brings them in and gives them a house is part of the problem.

Anonymous Source (00:11:37):

They're destroying America.

Anonymous Source (00:11:39):

Whoever brings these people into a small community is only causing us more problems

Anonymous Source (00:11:46):

than we need.

Anonymous Source (00:11:48):

I can bring them in.

Steve Stumpe (00:11:49):

I don't give them jobs.

Steve Stumpe (00:11:51):

You're giving them a house.

Anonymous Source (00:11:53):

You're giving them a house.

Steve Stumpe (00:11:54):

Somebody's selling them food and somebody is selling them utilities and somebody is

Steve Stumpe (00:12:00):

doing a lot of other stuff for them.

Anonymous Source (00:12:02):

And you want your money.

Anonymous Source (00:12:04):

I get it.

Anonymous Source (00:12:04):

So you want your part.

Anonymous Source (00:12:05):

So go ahead and take the rent.

Anonymous Source (00:12:07):

I get it.

Anonymous Source (00:12:07):

I do.

Anonymous Source (00:12:08):

But all I'm saying is money is not everything's

Anonymous Source (00:12:11):

Steve, I'm just saying we've got some dangerous stuff going on.

Anonymous Source (00:12:14):

People are being stolen or trying to be stolen.

Anonymous Source (00:12:17):

There's all kinds of things going on we don't want happening.

(00:12:20):

To rent from us, you have to have a job.

Steve Stumpe (00:12:22):

You have to be able to afford your rent and you have to.

Anonymous Source (00:12:25):

Yeah, one person.

Anonymous Source (00:12:26):

One person to rent, sure.

Anonymous Source (00:12:29):

I've seen pallets.

Anonymous Source (00:12:32):

on saturday night with a actually an elected official who was disgusted with what's

Anonymous Source (00:12:37):

going on in our community and i showed him i said i want to show you where they're

Anonymous Source (00:12:41):

living and how they're living he can see pallets on the floors so yeah one person

Anonymous Source (00:12:46):

might have a job that's renting it but it ain't all 25 of them living in one

Anonymous Source (00:12:51):

apartment

Steve Stumpe (00:12:59):

Okay,

Steve Stumpe (00:13:00):

I thank you for calling,

Steve Stumpe (00:13:01):

and I would encourage you to tell anyone that has a problem with anyone else to

(00:13:05):

call the police.

(00:13:06):

Thank you.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

Christian County Library uses a survey company called Net Promoter to tell its library’s story. Here is the website of Orange Boy.

In this video from the October 2024 Board Meeting, the Marketing Director presents his findings from the NPS survey.

I didn’t know much about a Net Promoter Survey, thought speaking with Deborah helped. So I had to research. I went to Claude.AI (which can be an excellent teacher) and asked two questions.

What are the limitations of a NPS survey? Since it only asks one question [about satisfaction] and asks fewer and fewer clients/customers each time, doesn't it present a rosier picture of data than is actually present in the community about a business?

It answered:

Let me analyze the key limitations of Net Promoter Score (NPS) surveys:

The single-question limitation creates several issues:

1. It fails to capture why customers feel the way they do, making it difficult to take specific action on feedback

2. It doesn't distinguish between different aspects of the customer experience (e.g., product quality vs. customer service)

3. The question measures intent ("would you recommend") rather than actual behavior, which can differ significantly

Your observation about declining response rates over time is important and can indeed create bias:

- Customers with strong feelings (either very positive or very negative) are more likely to respond, creating response bias

- If satisfied customers are more likely to respond to repeat surveys, this can artificially inflate scores over time

- The "silent majority" of moderately satisfied or dissatisfied customers may be underrepresented

Additional limitations include:

- Cultural differences in how people rate numerical scales can make international comparisons unreliable

- The arbitrary grouping of scores (0-6 detractors, 7-8 passives, 9-10 promoters) may not reflect meaningful differences in customer sentiment

- The metric doesn't account for industry context - what's considered a good NPS score varies significantly across sectors

Would you like me to elaborate on any of these points or discuss potential solutions to address these limitations?

Can you write up a summary of why NPS surveys are designed to hide bad community metrics for a library system that is facing backlash in the community? I've uncovered a Sunshine Report showing a library using this data, but I want an analysis of how NPS reports aren't effective and can hide data. [I was expecting a short answer. I was even worried it would come back with a woke answer about Libraries being misunderstood in today’s political climate.]

Analysis: How NPS Surveys Can Mask Negative Community Sentiment in Library Systems

Structural Limitations of NPS in Public Services

Net Promoter Score surveys have inherent limitations that make them particularly problematic for measuring public library satisfaction, especially during periods of community controversy:

Selection Bias and Response Patterns

1. Active Library Users vs. General Public

* NPS typically only captures responses from active library users

* Excludes community members who have stopped using the library due to dissatisfaction

* Misses input from taxpayers who fund but don't use library services

2. Frequency Bias

* Regular patrons (likely more satisfied) are oversampled

* Dissatisfied former users are systematically excluded

* Creates an echo chamber of positive feedback

[Concerns Deborah and I spoke to in our interview.]

Data Collection and Representation Issues

1. Single Metric Oversimplification

* Reduces complex community concerns to a single number

* Obscures specific areas of dissatisfaction

* Cannot capture nuanced feedback about controversial issues

2. Timing and Distribution Effects

* Surveys are often conducted during peak usage times

* May miss seasonal users or those with limited access

* Can be inadvertently (or intentionally) timed to avoid periods of controversy

[The one question about satisfaction can be misleading. “On a scale from 0 (not at all) to 10 (very), how likely are you to recommend the Christian County Library to others?” This doesn’t allow for further probing of new account holders as they mature or leave the system in disgust.]

These are the follow-up questions to the first question about Overall Satisfaction on the Survey:

Please explain your score:

* We are interested in learning what needs the library meets in the community.

* When you used the library, what need were you seeking to fill? Please select the option that best applies. Other (please specify):

* We are interested in learning what needs the library meets in the community.

* When you used the library, what need were you seeking to fill?

* Please select the option that best applies. The quality of service met or exceeded expectations.

* Please respond to the following statements about your most recent library experience.

* Staff responded to my needs in a timely fashion.

* Please respond to the following statements about your most recent library experience.

* Communication about services was effective.

* Please respond to the following statements about your most recent library experience.

* Staff treated me with courtesy and respect.

* Please respond to the following statements about your most recent library experience.

* How often do you visit the library?

* How did you learn about the service you used?

* Other (please specify):

* How did you learn about the service you used?

The respondents scored the Library. These are the scores they chose by percentage (1-4). “0” indicates no response to the question, I believe.

How NPS Can Mask Real Issues

Mathematical Distortion

1. Score Calculation

* Detractor scores (0-6) are grouped together, minimizing the impact of extremely negative responses.

[Only 25 scores are under 6 out of 614? 536 scores are “8” and above, with most of those being “10.” In reading the scores, I saw one patron complain about pornography for youth but still rated the library at an 8. Only one patron listed the library at a six, talking about antithetical values. These scores are too good. There should be a bell curve distribution of opinion. Anonmolous scores like this are curated in an environment where the community shows up to boring Library Board meetings demanding Library Board members leave and hundreds of Facebook commenters agree with the removal of sexually explicit material from the Library for children.]

* Passive scores (7-8) are eliminated from the final calculation

* This methodology can make significant negative sentiment appear less severe

[If this is so, this is padding the numbers to hide true dissatisfaction. No wonder CCL wants to use a survey like this and then bring it out to tout their highly satisfied user numbers. It’s misleading.]

2. Percentage Manipulation

* Final scores represent net differences rather than absolute satisfaction levels.

* A library could have 40% detractors but still show a positive NPS if promoters are slightly more numerous.

* This masks the actual volume of dissatisfied community members

[Again, misleading data.]

Context Elimination

1. Loss of Specific Feedback

* No capture of reasons for dissatisfaction

* Cannot track specific policy or service complaints

* Eliminates context for community concerns

[We never learn why people are dissatisfied and never know what to address based on the first carefully curated question by CCL.]

2. Missing Demographic Information

* No correlation between satisfaction and community segments

* Cannot identify underserved or dissatisfied populations

* Masks equity issues in service delivery

[What age groups? What backgrounds? What faiths are dissatisfied with the Library?]

Administrative Implications

Reporting Vulnerabilities

1. Selective Data Presentation

* Can cherry-pick survey periods with better scores

* Ability to exclude "outlier" responses

* Can present trending data that obscures periodic dissatisfaction

[They can send out surveys when they know families are too busy to respond.]

2. Benchmark Manipulation

* Lack of standardized benchmarks for public libraries

* Can compare against inappropriate peer institutions

* Ability to set arbitrary success thresholds

[They can determine an appropriate threshold for “successful” libraries. No one has determined what a happy library looks like, but as the Marketing Director stated, we have one.]

Policy Impact

1. False Positive Feedback Loop

* Positive NPS scores can be used to justify controversial decisions

* May delay necessary policy changes

* Can create artificial support for administrative decisions

[We can put any book in the collection we want. The data supports the librarians. Even if we curated the question, the data, and the threshold for what it should look like. The data is reliable as long as you squint hard enough.]

2. Resource Allocation

* May justify reducing community engagement efforts

* Can mask need for service improvements

* May impact funding decisions inappropriately

[We are happy, happy, happy. So we need more tax bond money at our library.]

Documentation and Transparency Concerns

Data Accessibility

1. Limited Raw Data

* NPS typically reports only final scores

* Original response data is often not preserved

* Difficult to audit or independently analyze

[What does their raw data look like?]

2. Methodology Opacity

* Survey distribution methods often unclear

* Response rate calculations may be obscured

* Sampling methodology rarely documented

[Deborah spoke to this in the interview. She found one email for a survey. I don’t remember getting one, but my junk filter is high. How many people have their surveys dumped into junk mail?]

Public Record Implications

1. Incomplete Public Record

* May not meet public institution documentation requirements

* Difficulty in Sunshine Record Request effectively

* Limited usefulness for public oversight

[The Library has a history of Sunshine Record Request difficulties if not outright violations. However, they complied this time.]

2. Historical Tracking

* Difficult to compare across time periods

* Cannot track specific issue resolution

* May not maintain adequate response records

[How do we know that patrons feel heard and their satisfaction has improved when the number of patrons surveyed dwindles every time the survey has been sent out?]

Recommendations for Public Oversight

1. Documentation Requirements

* Mandate preservation of raw response data

* Require documentation of methodology

* Maintain records of all survey periods

[Where are the good records?]

* 2. Supplemental Metrics

* Implement multiple satisfaction measures

* Require qualitative feedback collection

* Maintain comprehensive community feedback systems

[Why aren’t there various types of surveys? Is it a money issue? Or a priority issue?]

3. Transparency Measures

* Regular public reporting of complete data

* Clear methodology documentation

* Active community engagement processes

[The board meetings over the last two years should be an indicator of public dissatisfaction, but that wasn’t included.]

Conclusion

The Christian County Library Board needs to direct the Interim Executive Director, Dana Roberts, to suspend this Net Promoter Survey. It doesn’t collect meaningful data from the community. Still, it uses valuable taxpayer funds (which CCL is running out of due to mismanagement by the previous executive director) to misrepresent how satisfied the community is with the library.

Orange Boy isn’t offering a qualitative survey system for libraries. It’s offering a PR Damage Control System for Libraries. This system is used to either justify the need for larger tax bonds in the community or to control the narrative when Librarians are called to task for failing to respond to community complaints. They massage the data for the client and allow the librarians to present a public relations face to the community: cheap makeup and fake teeth.

They are taking your money to tell you how great they are about taking your money. This survey from Orange Boy is designed to tell you a story, a narrative. However, it’s not a good story, and the Marketing Director at CCL is not Shakespearean in expressing an epic. It’s more of a wake modern comedy—buy our brand because we are woke, and we deserve your money because we are woke.

Do you want a Library system that serves and meets your family's needs or a Library system that surveys all they see as their domain, including your children?

HickChristian is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

HickChristian is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

​Article 1

Article 2

During a rush of year-end giving, starting on Thursday, December 19th, 2024, and ending on December 31st, 2024, U-Turn in Education received several year-end donations to its GiveButter campaign that has existed since August 2023. This campaign has languished without a recent gift since about nine months ago when they first received an anonymous gift of $500, then $1000 from Nexstar, the marketing company of KOLR10. 

[KOLR10] is owned by Mission Broadcasting, which maintains a local marketing agreement (LMA) with Nexstar Media Group, owner of MyNetworkTV affiliate KOZL-TV (channel 27) and Osage Beach–licensed Fox affiliate KRBK (channel 49), for the provision of certain services.

In the last couple of weeks, over two thousand dollars have come into U-Turn from the Expedia Group, starting with a donation on the same day by Jeremy Hayes, the husband of Sheila Michaels (she ran for Western County Commissioner and applied for Library Board Trustee in Christian County). 

Every donation tracked has been made through the platform GiveButter, which has various fees or donations (tips) to their platform, which can range from small to large. 

Below are screenshots of U-Turns campaign on GiveButter. Please note the amounts from Expedia Group and Jeremy Hayes in particular. Also, note Nexstar the next time you watch KOLR10 and wonder if you should continue to watch KOLR10.

Key Individuals & Relationships

Senior Finance Officer at Expedia

Jeremy Hayes’ LinkedIn Profile.

Jeremy Hayes is currently at the Expedia Group as the Senior Finance Manager if his LinkedIn Profile account is up-to-date. As Jeremey hasn’t posted yet, it may not be. 

U-TURN: Treasurer and Board Member

Jeremy Hayes is the UTurn in Education’s Treasurer. He acts as the financial officer for the non-profit he donated to the business and is the senior finance officer from which the donations were made. 

Sheila Michaels (Jeremy Hayes' wife)

Sheila received the 2024 Humanitarian Award from the Community Foundation of the Ozarks. She also received other rewards that U-Turn was quick to point out. However, none of this would have been possible without her connections, activism, and problematic views on books.

In this article, before the November election, I highlight several reasons Sheila Michaels would have been a poor choice as a Christian County Commissioner. I explained in that article why her election to that position would have been a disaster for Christian County.

In none of her campaign material did I discover any disclosure about her relationship with U-Turn. While U-Turn often acted less like a non-profit and more like a PAC in how they promoted Shiela on Social Media, there was no indication she was directly linked by marriage to the organization. 

Further, Sheila, after not winning a seat, tried to get the County Commissioners to appoint her to the Library Board as a trustee. Her primary goal is to position herself on the Library Board.

Donation Pattern & Structure

First Day:

On December 15th, Jeremy Hayes donated out of his funds $98.47. Then Expedia Group, on the same day, donated $821.79. The funds were both given in amounts to the hundredth place. Neither amount, even from Jeremy, was rounded to the nearest dollar or ten.

Twelve Days Later (all processed same day)

The Expedia Group donates the first $383.44, the second $361.66, and the third $479.30. Each amount is again processed to the hundredth. The total giving for the Expedia Group amounted to $2046.19. 

Now, it might be that the fees have been subtracted, and we are only seeing the amounts donated minus fees. Usually, one would expect to see this payout schedule on the donor side as UTurn and not on the front-facing side as the donee. Furthermore, only the fees from Jeremy Hayes and the Expedia Group are listed to the hundredth cent like this.

Transaction Specifics

What can we determine from these transactions on GiveButter’s donation page?

* All amounts are calculated to exact cents (two decimal places).

* Each donation is processed separately on GiveButter.

* Each incurred separate platform processing fees.

* It could have been consolidated to save on fees.

* All transactions kept under $1,000.

* Multiple donations are processed on the same day instead of a single amount.

Fees add up to the donor, and Expedia Group might want to have a policy to minimize the cost of employee-matched funds by donating in one amount if going to the same foundation on the same day. Generally, they send a letter to the foundation explaining how much was donated by each employee so the foundation can send out a separate thank you letter. 

The amounts were all under $1,000. There are strict regulations within corporations to manage spending, and smaller amounts would attract less attention for oversight and review. 

Timing Context

I could not confirm the pay periods for Expedia Group. The first payments occurred on Thursday, December 19th. The payments happened two weeks later, on Tuesday, December 31st (twelve days later). 

If Expedia Group practices a year-end Employee Matching Fund drive, this would explain Jeremy Hayes’ giving and perhaps one donation. If Jeremy Hayes donated three more times on the same day, it might explain the three other contributions. If he had spoken to three different employees and told them how great U-Turn in Education is, that might explain their giving. As a one-time gift, though, they all managed to stay under $1000 each. Yet, Tuesday doesn’t fall on a pay period if we assume Thursday does. If Tuesday does, then Thursday doesn’t. If they both fall on pay periods, then Expedia Group has a unique pay period calendar. 

Undisclosed Elements Summary

What is the relationship between Jeremy Hayes, Senior Finance Manager at Expedia Group, and Jeremy Hayes, Treasurer for U-Turn in Education? Further, what is his relationship to his wife’s campaign manager or her application for Library Board Trustee? 

Further, does his role at Expedia Group give him the authority to process or approve donations to non-profits? How does his relationship with U-Turn benefit the organization and his wife, Sheila Michaels?

U-Turns Origins 

In an interview with Jay Howard on the podcast The Humanities District, Dr. Elizabeth Dudash-Buskirk reveals the origins of U-Turn, which began around a kitchen table with six people. She discusses around the 3:50 to 4:50 mark how the other group members feared community backlash for forming a group that protects “free speech” rights. So, as a tenured college professor, without concerns about the impact on her family, she became the face of U-Turn.

In her words, Dr. Dudash believed that whatever criticism she would face would be surmountable because she didn’t have to worry about losing a job or having her children insulted at school. Yet, the actions of U-Turn members have not been to be professional or to deal with people based on ideas. Often, their members have turned to smear campaigns against mothers, fathers, grandfathers, and people who are not organized and who do not belong to a non-profit or a political action committee. 

Members of U-Turn have trolled accounts for me and Right To Win Ozarks for publishing news articles. The trolling became so disgusting that I had to report one member and block this member on social media and here. While they claim the fear of personal persecution, such as Dr. Elizabeth Dudash-Buskirk did at the last Library Board meeting, it is not persecution to expose their ideas as patently false or misleading as we have done through our work at HickChristian and Right to Win Ozarks. 

In this same podcast, we learn much about U-Turn's purpose. Dr. Dudash-Buskirk upholds that Fun Home doesn’t have any problematic images. She claims at the 23:25 mark that she would never tell anyone what to do at a Junior High library because she has no education there. She is falling for a logical fallacy. One does not need education to know if something is right or wrong. This is the fallacy of authority. I do not need to be an expert in nuclear engineering to know that I should not irradiate an entire city with Cesium-137. One does not need to be an education expert to know that putting child porn into a Junior High or High School library is like putting Cesium-137 into the water supply. It will cause moral cancer to spread among young students. 

Let’s look at Fun Home to understand what she claims she couldn’t see.

Fun Home isn’t just about a young girl who is seduced into being a lesbian at college who grew up with a gay father. It’s a graphic novel depicting sexual acts with graphic descriptions of sexual abuse. This isn’t material that is appropriate for the development of young minds. Dr. Dudash-Buskirk makes a complaint in the podcast. One complaint is that the parents who asked for the book to be restricted or removed hadn’t read every single word in this book. She assumes that the book must be maintained in the library if it has any literary quality. Cesium-137 also has a purpose and can be used for treating cancer or for industrial purposes. Just like sex has a purpose and does something necessary for us all, but sex in the wrong place at the wrong time is dangerous. Exposing children to sexually explicit material that condones or appears to celebrate sexual abuse will harm a child. 

U-Turn in Education wasn’t formed to protect the Free Speech rights of a child to read any book a child wants to read, even if the book will harm a child irreparably. It was formed to protect the rights of Publishers to produce and distribute material like Fun Home in the taxpayer-funded libraries of our schools and communities. In many ways, U-Turn in Education props up a broken, crony market system that has moved from capitalism to fascism. Non-government organizations like the American Library Association give U-Turn in Education in-kind donation support through online material and training, which helps turn them into effective activists. The ALA are paid stooges who need the Publishers to exist but also work closely with the government to control how much people are learning. The goal is to remove classical books and replace them with this premodern literature that is focused on gender identity, sexual impulses, pagan idolatry, and Marxist ideology.

U-Turn represents one of the necessary tools in this new system. They are essentially cheap marketing and PR arms for publishers of books like Fun Home and Gender Queer. I do not know why women fill the ranks of organizations like U-Turn or why women see this as an existential fight to save marginalized communities and help them find their true selves. I don’t know their motivation and can only guess why U-Turn has decided to promote sexually explicit and racist books as a PR firm for Publishers and the ALA. Yet, they do and participate in propaganda to mislead their local communities because they believe they have moral justification for doing so. The next part is the nonprofits like Sheila Michaels Book Bag program.

The Removal of Classical Literature

Sheila Michaels positively gushes about the Book Bag program, her receiving the Nexstar’s Remarkable Woman of the Year Award for 2024 for Springfield (along with her other awards) in this video. The Book Bag program has been used to weed out many of the best books from the collection of our local libraries through the Friends of the Library.

The Friends of the Library take book donations to the library or older books the library has decided to curate from the collection and then sell them to the community. They then take the proceeds and return the money to the Library. 

Yet, with the Book Bags program, the books are donated directly to children “in need” of books and period bags (for girls and possibly boys pretending to transition to girls). This seems like a fantastic idea for young children to get great, lightly used books to read. 

However, the purpose is darker. The radical education of Dr. Dudash and others, as well as Dr. Dudash’s two YouTube channels (Kritik 1999), reveal a lot about both organizations' radical beliefs. To further understand what is occurring, here are the words of Lorena German, author of “The Anti-Racist Teacher.”

"So, let us be honest, the conversation really isn't about universality … . This is about an ingrained and internalized elevation of Shakespeare in a way that excludes other voices. This is about white supremacy and colonization."

Though I don’t have direct evidence, I believe the local progressives wanted to curate these colonial books without being accused of censorship. Besides the comments by German, we have other examples of Libraries removing books published before 2007. I will credit them for being fiendishly clever in the conception of the Book Bag program–it is deviously brilliant. While Dr. Dudash has many YouTube videos, I could only find this one research article she wrote with two other authors in 2018 highlighting her radical academic feminism. 

Until the social construction of woman-as-speaker changes discursively, and until this change is accepted, researchers will continue to question the success or failure of campaigns as hinged on gender stereotypes. Future study of mixed-gender campaigns as they are represented in the media may use the results found here as a place to start, with the rejection of essentialized gender differences and the acceptance of rhetorical constraints tied to the political act.

In the conclusion of their study, after starting with the premise that women can’t win because of the media, they conclude women can’t win because of the media. It’s ground-breaking research. I will find misogyny, and look, there it is. I don’t think it’s a stretch for me to conclude that the same people who speak out against Racism and Homophobia at the Library Board meetings start without the evidence and then easily find it because it must exist. 

Books, the books that uplift us and make us better than we were, are dangerous. They violate the cardinal rule of the progressive leftist–make everyone into a base animal. The push of sexually explicit material is designed to lower our views of ourselves and others. Our horizon shifts from the noble purpose and higher calling of grand adventures to our groin. Our stomach compels us forward as we try to eat our ouroboros tail. 

That is the purpose of postcolonial and antiracism in book curation. The Book Bag program started by Sheila Michaels isn’t about empowering young children with good books but removing, as quickly as possible, under the guise of charity, the best books in our community so they can replace them with books that leave us stunted and twisted goblins. The Book Bag program is a trojan horse for their activism, so most parents aren’t aware of what is happening, but they gratefully accept the books, believing their children are being lavished with gifts. This trojan horse is impoverishing the community of valuable books and materials paid for by the taxpayers.

Beware Purple-Haired Wokesters Bearing Gifts

U-Turn is closely tied to Sheila Michaels's Book Bag program, which created a fundraiser that helped them raise nearly $8,000. 

On the one hand, you have the local PR firm for the ALA and the publishers operating alongside the Christian County Library (a government organization) telling you that these books don’t have sexually explicit material in them and that they are appropriate for children. 

On the other hand, you have the Book Bag program working as a charity (without a 990 or 501(c)(3) that I could find), taking books out of your Community library to give away for the progressive purpose of decolonizing your library. 

For example, should the Clever Library branch partner so closely with Book Bags, an associate of U-Turn in Education? What does that say about the relationships between a non-profit tied to the ALA and another non-profit working with our taxpayer-funded entity to remove books and hand out period products at a library? Would the period products be more appropriate at the health clinic? Why doesn’t Sheila Michaels go there and put her period products on display at that location?

It’s not about the books or the period products. It’s about virtue signaling. It’s about the Clever Library branch communicating with the community that we associate ourselves with the radicals in our community.

U-Turn and the Book Bag program are working closely together to gain recognition, success, and even awards, which lead to more non-profit gifts.

Following the money exchange between the powerful and the activists is essential. Dr. Dudash-Buskirk has complained about harassment in the community, though she hasn’t produced records. We have shown that the elite in the community have given thousands of dollars to U-Turn and to the Book Bag program. Outside groups have funneled money to them through the award programs that Sheila has received. 

UPDATE [2/1/2025]

Remember what I said about post-colonial books? Big Jim and the White Boy: An American Classic Reimagined is rewriting an important American classic, Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain. This is a direct example of the type of assertion I was making, but didn’t have evidence for at the time. The other books for teens are about DEI, violence, and witchcraft. While she served on a council with others to choose these books, she lent her voice and credibility to making the decisions that included these books on the award list.

The Nexstar Award provided social status and $1,000 to a Charity of Sheila Michaels’ choice. The Missouri Association of School Librarians provided an award, but it doesn’t appear to have a monetary award on its website. In 2023, Sheila Michaels was awarded the 2023 Young Adults Librarian of the Year Award, which awarded her $500 and $500 for her library. This was a gift from the American Library Association. In 2024, Shiela Michaels received the Community Foundation of the Ozarks Humanitarian of the Year award of $5,000. In the non-profit world, nothing attracts money like money. Winning awards and recognition will attract more money to your non-profit. 

Dr. Dudash-Buskirk is also connected to the Community Foundation of the Ozarks through her Be Civil Be Heard (at KSMU) Foundation, which practices “polite conversations” or ways to suppress free speech in our community. Free Speech isn’t always polite or civil. Yet, Dr. Dudash-Buskirk is working hand in hand with the Community Foundation of the Ozarks to suppress our speech in our community.

The connections spread out to the Christian County Library which is tied to Missouri State University and Community Foundation of the Ozarks through podcasts and grants, all tied to staff and family members of staff. All of this is tied to the Communication Department taht Dr. Dudash-Buskirk works at at MSU. And it’s just a coincidence that she has become an activist at the CCL. Remember that conversation about the start of U-Turn? Who was at the kitchen table that she was protecting? Would it include library staff?

As recently as the last board meeting, I observed a staff member whispering to the KSMU reporter Chris Drew behind him in a close manner, signaling a friendship with each other based on the touch on the shoulder and the closeness of the two heads. The staff member in question is Nick Holladay. Is he related to Dr. Holly Holladay at MSU?

The genesis of U-Turn with six people at a kitchen table gives you an idea of how quickly a small group of people can affect their local community. Yet, U-Turn hasn’t won any significant battles. They have received outside funding, recognition, and support. The influential NGOs, publishers, and government agencies need U-Turn and Book Bag to win, but relatively disconnected individuals have stood against U-Turn. 

What has connected those who have stood against sexually explicit material, the decolonization of whiteness (racism, folks, it’s just racism), and fascism has been faith and prayer. There is little more than that holding us together. So be encouraged. You don’t need to win awards from foundations with $427 million in assets to be effective, and you don’t need to require people to call you a Doctor. 

The power of the individual is still a threat to the hive mind. The power of one lone person, willing to defiantly hold the banner of truth and deny the system its victory, is undefeatable. U-Turn and Book Bags will likely continue to receive awards and recognition for their brave and stunning work. They will likely continue to raise thousands of dollars in fundraising. Yet, their victories are all pyrrhic. They can’t cross the Rubicon–they can’t enter Rome itself and defy an Emperor with the truth like Paul and Peter. Not when they are helping Nero burn down the Imperial city and telling everyone they are the firemen sent to protect the looters and iconoclasts. 

When the Rain Comes

There is hope that will squelch a fire, though, when divine rain comes down from Heaven on a parched land. Like a spider trying to climb a drainpipe in a storm, our local itsy-bitsy spiders find themselves in an increasingly precarious position. Each carefully constructed strand–from U-Turn's suspicious Expedia donations to Sheila Michaels' cascade of self-reinforcing awards–becomes visible when caught in the light of scrutiny. The web that once seemed so cleverly engineered now glistens with obvious intent: a pattern of self-enrichment masquerading as public service.

The delicate spider's most significant miscalculation wasn't in spinning such an elaborate web but in assuming the rain would never come. Yet here it is–not in violent revolution or dramatic expose, but in the steady drip of truth that reveals each connection, each donation pattern, each award ceremony for what it really is. The gossamer web that connects the CFO's $427M to MSU to Springfield Daily Citizen to Reporting on Christian County Library, that links Michaels' humanitarian awards to her husband's financial positions, begins to dissolve under this persistent storm of facts.

No desperate spider can flee up this waterspout. No amount of awards, no carefully structured donations, and no pretend proclamations of doing good can help them ascend against this torrent of truth. Like the itsy-bitsy spider of childhood rhyme, they may try again and again, but each attempt only makes their pattern of self-dealing more visible, their web of influence more obvious.

The sun they're waiting for–the one that would dry up all these inconvenient truths–isn't coming. Because the rain that reveals their web doesn't fall from natural causes but from divine purpose. We were meant to see this dangerous web, not to be caught in it, but to witness its existence and understand its intent. However, our role was never to destroy the web ourselves–that power belongs to a higher authority. Our assigned task was more straightforward yet profound: to recognize the trap through faith, to understand its nature through prayer, and to warn others who might mistake these silken strands for safety lines. What appeared at first as a potential disaster–our community's collision with their web of influence–was, in fact, divine revelation. The spider's web wasn't meant to catch us but to be caught itself, exposed in the cleansing torrent of heaven's rain.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

Part One Link Above

This investigation reveals a more troubling picture of how Donor Advised Funds (DAFs) are a critical control mechanism. The Community Foundation of the Ozarks has $427M in assets and $58M in annual revenue. The CFO also operates DAFs and Legacy Trusts, allowing them to influence current and future charitable giving in the community and assess how people think now and far into the future. 

While DAFs technically give donors "advisory privileges" over charitable giving, the Foundation shapes these decisions through a sophisticated institutional control system. A system is created where the families or boards need a narrator to help guide them. In this case, the CFO is favorable to their self-generated Focus Report, so they will focus on charities that fall within their guidelines. 

The Focus Report, developed with the help of the Chamber of Commerce, cannot be criticized or questioned by the media--it must be accepted at all costs because it will be the framework for all the progressive architecture done in the community by the CFO and its partners during 2024. The Springfield Daily Citizen is not a newspaper but a significant public affairs firm for Springfield’s charitable organizations. It is a cheap political flyer like the one you receive in your mailbox during election season. It is written with the same intent and purpose: to influence every citizen's vote and way of thinking daily. It’s programming you subtly to change your point of view to vote their way, to give their way, and to support their radical opinions without even realizing what has happened.  

They need a relatively cheap political tract since they can't always trust the Springfield News-Leader's agenda to match their own. Their current assets are $427M, which means if they can get donations and grants from other organizations to help pay for it, they are out even less. The ROI for what they spend on SDC (about $1M) makes it a relatively cheap way to:

* Control community narrative

* Protection of funded initiatives

* Directed public opinion

* Cover for institutional decisions

* Appearance of independent journalism

For less than .25% of their total assets, or 1.71% of their annual revenue, the SDC becomes efficient and cheap political propaganda for every progressive group in Southwest Missouri. At the same time, they can paint any opposition to their goals as nefarious or dangerous. The SDC is some of the cheapest marketing an organization their size could pay for—especially when they can get other donors to subsidize it. 

The propaganda doesn't benefit the CFO alone. It affects every local Chamber of Commerce, which needs positive news stories about the Schools and Libraries so that voters will pass Tax Bonds. Tax Bonds lead to millions of dollars in interest payments over twenty years for each taxing entity and vendor dollars for the nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in contracts for goods and services.

Each community is indebted to banks, sometimes foreign banks like STIFEL, and without the incoming funds, the Chamber of Commerce would struggle to operate. The CoC needs positive reports from news organizations about Tax Bonds so that Real Estate values and Taxes will increase, and their specialized interests will make their community sound enticing to investments from banks, new families, and new businesses. It’s all about permanent growth and building wealth. 

Negative news kills the scores given to community rankings. They want to ensure all news amplifies how fantastic the community is, so their rankings are padded and statistics are ignored. Let’s ignore crime and pay attention to how safe Springfield is. Let’s ignore poverty and celebrate all the wealth in our community. Let’s celebrate our Humanitarians of the Year despite their progressive histories. Let’s whitewash all of our crimes.

The Long Shadow of Chamber Control

The Springfield Chamber's grip on local power didn't happen overnight. I outline this in this article, but I’ll do so again here. Since 1999, the Chamber has systematically influenced who sits on the City Council and who becomes Mayor, including Tom Carlson, who served a second stint from 2001-2009. 

Their strategy evolved through multiple vehicles - first through direct endorsements, then through their Good Government Committee (GGC), formed in 2010 in partnership with the Home Builders Association. When public scrutiny grew too intense, they shifted tactics, shuttering the GGC and announcing they would stop endorsing school board candidates. But this wasn't a retreat—it was a strategic pivot to their Committee for the Future (CFF), focusing on ballot initiatives while maintaining their influence through less visible channels.

The funding mechanism was simple: 10% of member dues went directly to political activities. When this became controversial, they adapted again. Now we see former Chamber leadership, like Jim Anderson (who ran the Chamber from 1988 to 2014), co-chairing new organizations like United Springfield alongside Gail Smart, wife of MSU President Clif Smart (both donors to Springfield Daily Citizen). Gail is running for Springfield Public School Board this April.

The stated mission of the United Springfield PAC is to counter what they call "partisan" and "dark money" groups–in other words, to fight against parents spending their own money to protect their children from radical ideologies in schools. Yet, if you follow their actions and money, Gail and Clif Smart are the holy saints of partisan dark money.

This shape-shifting ability to maintain power while appearing to respond to criticism exemplifies the Chamber's sophisticated control apparatus. When one method draws too much attention, it simply rebrands and restructures while maintaining its core influence. They've moved from direct candidate endorsements to ballot initiatives, from obvious political action to subtle institutional pressure. The faces change, the organizations get new names, but the underlying power structure remains intact.

The brilliance of their current strategy lies in its apparent retreat from politics while deepening its influence through institutional partnerships, Focus Reports, and coordinated community initiatives. They're no longer just endorsing candidates but shaping the framework within which local decisions are made. This isn't just about elections anymore; it's about controlling the metrics by which our community measures success, always aligned with outside standards from entities like the World Economic Forum rather than local values. Using boards through non-profits like the CFO and propaganda firms like SDC is just their newest way of shaping the agenda of the Chamber of Commerce to get people in Springfield to adopt their radical and progressive views. Yet the pressure doesn’t just apply through the news. They shape how donors give money to organizations and non-profits by shaping the narrative at the CFO.

Funneling Funds to the SDC

The system's sophistication appears in the details. How does the CFO manage to continue to direct funds toward the SDC? There are multiple ways they can, but by examining the donor list, you can see one type of connection. 

The Prater family, for instance, appears both in the Legacy Society and as DAF donors, while the Daily Citizen operates through institutional support that masks its actual operational costs. The Foundation maintains plausible deniability through technical donor advisory privileges while, in practice, directing funds toward preferred initiatives and organizations. 

A donor-advised fund acts in many ways, like a stockbroker for a family, giving advice on which charities (stocks) are the best picks, have the best track record (performance), and will be the best investment of their money. This is a trusted relationship for the family and allows them to avoid creating a board to manage the funds left behind by a loved one. It can be a time-consuming task choosing worthy nonprofits out of the tens of thousands in operation every day. A DAF gives some of that responsibility to the Foundation. If they act in the best interests of everyone, then it’s a good relationship. If they have an ideological bent, choosing and picking winners, then the family is often unaware.

Keeping Money in the Family

For the family, donor-advised funds are marketed as vehicles for charitable giving; savvy families have discovered they're also powerful tools for maintaining control of wealth while reaping significant personal benefits. The playbook is elegant in its simplicity: Convert taxable assets into "charitable" funds, then leverage the structure to keep the money working for the family.

Here's how it typically unfolds: A family transfers millions in appreciated assets into a DAF, immediately claiming a hefty tax deduction and avoiding capital gains taxes. But rather than rushing to distribute the funds to charities, they maintain control through "advisory privileges" – a soft term for what amounts to de facto control over the money.

The real magic happens in how families extract ongoing value. They'll place family members in paid positions managing the fund or serving as "expert consultants." The DAF's assets conveniently find their way into family-connected investment vehicles, generating management fees. Meanwhile, the power to recommend grants becomes a form of social currency, building political capital and influence in the community.

The beauty of this arrangement is its technical compliance with nonprofit rules. While direct self-dealing is prohibited, the indirect benefits flow freely. The family reduces their tax burden, keeps their money under their influence, generates ongoing income streams through various fees and salaries, and shapes their community through strategic grant-making—all while maintaining the appearance of charitable giving.

In essence, DAFs offer wealthy families a way to have their cake and eat it, too: converting private wealth into charitable assets while retaining control and extracting value in ways that may honor the letter of the law, if not its spirit.

Following the Money: How DAFs Benefit Their Managers

Behind every donor-advised fund stands an institution, like the Community Foundation of the Ozarks, quietly building a lucrative business model. While these foundations present themselves as charitable facilitators, they've discovered a remarkably stable revenue stream in managing other people's philanthropy.

Consider a typical community foundation that oversees hundreds of millions in donor-advised funds. For every $1 million a donor places in a DAF, a foundation collects annual management fees—usually between $5,000 and $10,000. These fees compound as the funds grow through investment returns, creating an ever-expanding revenue base. The foundation's incentive becomes clear: the longer money stays in DAFs and the more it grows, the more fees they collect.

The real power lies in investment control. When a wealthy donor places $10 million in a DAF, the foundation decides how that money is invested. They can direct it to preferred investment partners, potentially receiving additional benefits or fee arrangements. By pooling multiple DAFs, they gain access to exclusive institutional investment opportunities typically reserved for major players.

This dynamic creates a form of perpetual capital. Take the case of a community foundation with $427 million in assets. If just a quarter of that sits in DAFs, they're collecting over $800,000 annually in management fees alone—before considering any additional investment-related income. Since donors typically recommend grants slowly over time, the principal largely remains invested, generating fees year after year.

For these institutions, DAFs represent the perfect marriage of charitable purpose and financial self-interest. Every new DAF they attract, every dollar of investment growth, directly benefits their bottom line—all while maintaining their charitable status. They've effectively turned philanthropy into a sustainable business model, where managing other people's giving becomes a reliable path to institutional wealth.

Often, nonprofits are forced (groomed) to follow the ideological whims of the donors who demand the platforming of ideas such as diversity, equity, and inclusion before a nonprofit is even considered. Foundations can change the ideological views of nonprofits or families participating in the Donor Advised Funds.

The combination of DAFs, Legacy Trusts, coordinated media coverage, and institutional partnerships creates a self-reinforcing power structure that shapes community decisions while maintaining the appearance of neutral charitable giving. One has to wonder if DAFs and their managers are stock brokers rather than charities–hiding tax burdens for wealthy families under a thin guise of charity and using their wealth and clout to further progressive ideas.

The CFO curates the appropriate charities and picks winners and losers. The CFO’s progressive policies and radical ideas benefit these winners and losers.

Gemini (Google’s AI) clearly outlines how closely the Springfield Daily Citizen is tied to the Community Foundation of the Ozarks. The CFO might as well be the SDC’s parent organization. 

The Power of Philanthropic Inertia

An article like this will expose the connections, but it will take the public’s awareness and actions to impact a foundation as large as the CFO. $427M is money on a scale that is hard for me to fathom. How do you even change the direction of that much inertia? The progressives have, but it took them a century of corrupting churches, seminaries, and universities. 

SDC has kept its sources anonymous. We discovered a $250,000 gift from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2019—it was their only gift ever to the CFO, marked for "Public Analysis." Two years later, they found the SDC with a former mayor who hasn't amounted to much. But now they are flush with this cash while hiding their donors. Why are they hiding their donors unless they fear admitting who is bankrolling them? Has the Gates Foundation continued to help fund them?

Is the guy who went to Epstein Island and also who wants to vaccinate us all through our food helping to control the news in Springfield, MO? We have a right to know that, but because the SDC is hiding it, we don’t know. They have unique protection as a 501(3)c, and no one can Sunshine Request anything from them.

It’s strange that the Community Foundation of the Ozarks received this one-time gift of $250,000 for Public Awareness and Analysis. It is also odd that a fledging non-profit is hiding its donors. Money attracts money in grantmaking. It’s one of the most crucial rules in grantmaking for a new organization. 

Conservatives need to understand that they must serve on these boards. However, the people who serve on these boards are the powerful and elite. The bigger the board, the more elite the people are. Brian Fogle, who stepped down from leading the CFO, was the father of Betsy Fogle, the progressive Democratic state rep, who won eastern Springfield (despite being a very Red City) because of money from the CFO's connections.

Progressives have learned you don't need the government to control people. You can use these charitable organizations to control people. And they do less good. In many ways, they do far more harm than government services of a welfare state. Their socialism only enriches themselves and impoverishes everyone around them. 

From Nickson’s Recent Article, “It’s Over Lefties: Even the High-End Escorts Have Abandoned Davos.”

Their radical progressive values take money away from families struggling to buy groceries when their initiatives focus on the SDC or DEI (as I will demonstrate in a few paragraphs)–nor does the CFO’s impoverished righteousness provide food stamps. The government, as incompetent as it is running a welfare state, at least gives back something after it takes because it has to be held accountable by the voters. Organizations like the CFO throw out a few food banks, but that $427M stays locked up, growing into even more astronomical amounts rivaling local governments. They, the progressives, tell those who are impoverished that it's business owners who are at fault for causing the poverty. They encourage the poor to take from the rich but exclude themselves because they are the professional class that generates wealth not from building anything but from managing money. They are isolated from criticism and taxes as a non-profit while they point to the creation of their “charities” as proof of their magnanimity. 

To consider the scale of their power, let’s compare them to Queen City. Springfield, MO's budget is $650 million. While the city must provide actual services with public oversight, voting, and transparency requirements, the CFO operates with hidden donors and private decision-making while controlling assets equivalent to about 66% of the entire city's annual operating budget. 

The CFO’s focus on progressive needs in the community does even less good because their chosen minority communities have small footprints requiring smaller amounts of resources. An LGBT chapter might only have 100 members. However, a food bank may need to serve 10,000 families. By meeting the "needs" of the LGBT group by setting up a blood drive (and getting donations for it), they minimize how much they have to give away for the food drive. 

For example, I found an SDC article in which the CFO gave away $120,000 in DEI resources. Yet, Springfield, MO's population is 85.2% white, with a total minority population of less than 15%. In a city of roughly 170,000 people, that means these DEI resources were ostensibly directed at serving about 25,000 people—while poverty affects a much more significant portion of the population (42,500 in 2022 or 25% from the CFO’s own report) regardless of race. Any resources directed at this issue aren't about solving racism in our community but an attempt to give away money towards something that won't drain their resources year after year.

This strategic approach allows them to appear progressive and engaged while minimizing actual resource distribution. They can maintain their progressive credentials and generate positive press while avoiding addressing costly systemic issues—all while their endowment continues growing beyond the scale of local government resources.

A perfect example of how this fascistic system [private organizations working in collusion with media and government to control the populace] operates through charitable structures appears in a 2024 Springfield Daily Citizen "opinion" piece about PrideFest. The story begins by framing conservative Greene County as the antagonist: "As if sponsoring Ozarks PrideFest was not difficult enough in conservative Greene County." 

Before we even get to the actual news—that a registered sex offender attempted to volunteer at a church booth—the narrative is already established. The community, not the lack of vetting procedures, is positioned as the problem.

The author then bizarrely connects this incident to last year's drag show controversy: "Back in 2023, if you recall, some folks were outraged there was a drag show on the main stage at PrideFest." Why include this? It has nothing to do with a sex offender attempting to volunteer. But it serves to paint any community concern, whether about drag shows or sex offenders at festivals, as equally unreasonable. This isn't journalism—it's narrative manipulation funded by the CFO, which gave the GLO Center $21,000 for their "inclusion project" while also supporting the Daily Citizen.

Follow the money and messaging: CFO funds GLO Center→CFO supports Daily Citizen→Daily Citizen writes an "opinion" piece protecting GLO Center while attacking community values. 

Rather than asking hard questions about vetting procedures or public safety protocols, the article focuses on hypothetical "public-relations nightmares" and community intolerance. The actual news–that organizations successfully prevented a sex offender from volunteering at a festival–gets buried under ideological messaging. When foundation dollars control organizations and media coverage, public safety concerns become less important than protecting progressive narratives and funded entities. That's not journalism or charity—it's fascism wearing a philanthropic mask called propaganda or psyops. 

The Global Blueprint

In her article, Local Control highlights the links between the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and The World Economic Forum (WEF). The WEF frames childcare as an "$11 trillion opportunity." At the same time, NonProfit Quarterly declares, "Women were forced to leave work in those numbers [4.2 million] due to cultural factors, such as disproportionate care responsibilities." Language and the choice of words are everything for the ruling intelligentsia: family choices become "cultural factors" that need fixing. In contrast, childcare becomes an “opportunity”–not for families, but for institutions.

This re-purposing of language is reinforced by UNICEF's warning that "the pandemic is making a global childcare crisis even worse," creating urgency for institutional solutions while dismissing traditional family and community care structures. The message is clear: family-based childcare is a problem; institutional childcare is the solution. Families cannot be allowed to care for their children despite what human history has allowed for all of human history. We must use public-private partnerships to save children from their families. 

This isn’t about Child Care. This is similar to removing children from their parents, as we see in The Future of an Illusion by Sigmund Freud, to prevent religious “neurosis” from developing by replacing it with something else. To think that the UN, WEF, CoC, or non-profits are genuinely concerned with education and poverty is wholly naive. There are “cultural factors” at play and money to be made, while at the same time erasing the bond between parent and child so the child becomes a malleable resource of the State.

The Chamber Network: Creating "Consensus"

The machinery moves down to the state level, where the Missouri Chamber manufactures urgency from startlingly thin evidence–a survey of just 312 people in a state of 6.1 million. As Local Control MO observes: "The Chamber and progressive lawmakers are yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theatre. It's irresponsible and potentially dangerous."

This global agenda flows through the U.S. Chamber of Commerce network. The Hill reports that the National Chamber spent "more than $1.2 billion on lobbying, making it by far the nation's largest lobbying organization." Their president, Tom Donohue, revealed their actual function when he stated that the Chamber's role is to provide "reinsurance" to companies for positions that "aren't publicly or politically palatable." Further, Donohue points out that the Chamber can “do the dirty work for its members without them leaving their fingerprints behind.” If this is true at the national level, it seems true at the state and city level.

The machinery moves down to the state level, where the Missouri Chamber manufactures urgency from startlingly thin evidence–a survey of just 312 people in a state of 6.1 million. As Local Control MO observes: "The Chamber and progressive lawmakers are yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theatre. It's irresponsible and potentially dangerous."

The Chamber benefits directly from this collusion, even if their values are conservative. They build the libraries and schools purchased with tax bonds. The new “Child Care” crisis means billions, not millions, of dollars in new construction over the next twenty years as each school must develop preschools and early childhood centers. Each of these schools must hire new teachers, which means the Universities will gain new programs and new students to train. 

The subsequent businesses that will develop or benefit include Special Education Law to Disability insurance for teachers to Curriculum, which means trillions, not billions of dollars, to be moved from the Tax Payer to the Government and then back to the Businesses that profit. The Chamber of Commerce has learned how to take from taxpayers through moral conviction and social intimidation as quickly as the threat of an IRS agent. What’s insidious is they use non-profit propaganda from non-neutral news organizations like the Springfield Daily Citizen to convince you to vote for it so they can take the money by social moralizing.

Nonprofit Sector: Legitimizing Control

NonProfit Quarterly's framing reveals how charitable institutions legitimize this control: "When women become parents, they see their pay drop by 30 percent, while men see a 20 percent increase in pay." Rather than questioning this disparity or supporting family choice, they advocate for institutional solutions: "Until Congress passes robust funding increases for child care, states will be left to fill the funding gap." There is no further examination of why this occurs, but to state that there is inequality in the job marketplace for men and women. 

The Quarterly doesn’t dig deeper but parrots numbers as if they are facts without evidence to back them up from the National Women’s Law Center, a left-of-center social policy non-profit. In other words, they are an advocacy group that doesn’t need to get their facts right to tell a story. 

Not because they are left-of-center but because they are an advocacy group. Essentially, they are a lobbyist group aiming to change policy. I wouldn’t trust my math from a lobbyist group seeking to influence policy. Yet, this is how it works. Data is created, then data is shared, and then data is parroted by everyone as if it is true without anyone considering or testing if it is.

The Local Implementation Machine

In Springfield, three institutions work in concert to implement this agenda:

* The Chamber's Focus Report lists childcare as a key challenge requiring immediate action, echoing their parent organization's priorities.

* The Community Foundation of the Ozarks ($427M in assets) directs funding toward preferred solutions, using Donor Advised Funds to shape community priorities

* The Springfield Daily Citizen launches their "Child Care Crisis Project" with coordinated coverage:

*   "Child care waitlists are crazy long"

*   "Desperate parents seek help"

*   "Gov. Parson proposes boosting child care subsidies"

*   “Springfield leaders discuss child care crisis and its effect on workforce"

Each article title reinforces government and institutional solutions while ignoring family-based alternatives. Can we not solve these issues on our own or without government assistance? Are we not capable of surviving without the government? As Local Control MO notes: "They are only pushing for Business Tax Credits. Nothing to help the parents that choose to stay home with their children for the formative years."

The Bipartisan Facade

The system works through both parties, demonstrating this isn't partisan politics but institutional control. Former Republican Governor Parson championed business tax credits while Democratic lawmakers pushed for subsidies. The Springfield Daily Citizen announces: "Missouri child care crisis a top priority for the governor, a bipartisan group of lawmakers."

To run for Governor, Mike Kehoe skipped grassroots Republican events but received favorable media coverage. The Springfield Daily Citizen gave Kehoe a chance to attack his opponents. Bill Eigel was Kehoe’s most prominent opponent, yet they criticize Eigel for wanting a policy for illegal immigration. 

Never once in the interview does the SDC challenge Kehoe. He is given the best interview and the best light possible. Kehoe can praise himself unabashedly. SDC even points out how large Kehoe’s war chest was before the primary without questioning where that war chest came from (Steven Tilley and Rex Sinquefield). It reveals how the system selects and promotes politicians who advance institutional priorities regardless of party label.

Republicans and Democrats work together because Republicans control Jeff City, but the Democrats control the universities, the nonprofit boards, NGOs, city governments, and many corporations. 

Cindy O’Laughlin, Senate Pro Tem, addressed the Senate yesterday, January 10th, 2025, making Childcare a priority for this year’s budget. 

Jon Patterson, who bought the Speaker of the House seat through his expensive donations to the House Republicans Campaign Committee (HRCC), also spoke about how vital childcare is on the day he was elected. 

Other unfinished business, Patterson said, is legislation to encourage businesses to provide on-site child care and expansion of existing child care centers.

“Missouri’s families continue to be burdened with trying to find childcare spots that are too hard to find and too expensive,” he said.

In the Senate, O’Laughlin set an agenda focused on issues affecting children, including the foster care system, education, and health. 

“When families and communities are strong, when children are well nourished and well educated and when our streets are safe, Missouri thrives,” she said.

Between Kehoe, O’Laughlin, and Patterson (they hold arguably the three most powerful political offices in the state of Missouri), I don’t think you could find a single conservative policy. They have aligned almost perfectly with the same progressive policies that we see espoused by the Springfield Daily Citizen and the Chamber of Commerce. So much so that when Patterson was installed as the Speaker, all 52 Democrats voted for Patterson instead of voting for their own Democrat Speaker after the Democrat candidate, Ashley Aune dropped out in a grand spectacle to endorse Patterson. This is the perfect alignment between media, government, and non-government organizations on a manufactured crisis to socially engineer us. 

Yet, is there a crisis?

Surprisingly, there is, but it isn’t the one they are claiming it is. To admit to the real crisis (falling birth rates), they would have to fight abortion, which the three of them have done their best to enshrine this past year as a constitutional amendment. The three of them will make sure abortion remains a constitutional amendment for up to 9 months with some of the most radical language in the entire country. We are not a Supermajority of Conservatives. Fascists captured us and claimed they were part of a Constitutional Republic.

The Birthrate Crisis

First, you need to understand that the leading cause of death throughout the entire world is Abortion. From surgical abortion to the Plan B pill, we are aborting children at an unimaginable rate. 

In January 2024, Worldometer, a live statistics website, reported that 44 million elective abortions were performed in the year 2022, thereby making abortion the leading cause of human death.

According to Worldometer, the second leading cause of death in 2022 was communicable diseases, causing almost 13 million victims. Deaths attributed to infectious diseases and cancer accounted for more than 8 million deaths, while smoking caused approximately 5 million deaths. Alcohol contributed to 2.5 million deaths, and AIDS resulted in around 2 million deaths. All these combined still fall short of the number of lives lost due to abortion in 2022.

Legalized Abortion in Missouri will see our State’s birth rate fall tremendously. It is already precipitously low. 

First, you need to understand that the leading cause of death throughout the entire world is Abortion. From surgical abortion to the Plan B pill, we are aborting children at an unimaginable rate.

In ten years, our birth rate has dropped from 75,400 children a year to 68,954 children a year. Our population has increased from about 3M in 1910 to about 6.2M in 2020. For the last 10 years, our population has been relatively stable, without much change. We’re not increasing or busting at the seams with new children. 

The push for easy abortions is having an effect. Fewer and fewer individuals are coming up through the school system. You can see the immediate impact Roe V. Wade had on the age group about 50 years ago. There are far fewer people in the age group of 45-49 than in any other group. That’s my age group. We were aborted eagerly by our parent’s generation for their Free Love. We should be furious. Look at what’s happening to the youngest group under 5. They are being aborted, too. 

Why do politicians talk about it like it’s a childcare crisis then when fewer children need childcare? They see that the largest group is preparing to leave high school schools across the nation, which are going to look empty, and one of the largest unions in the country will have teachers who aren’t employed. 

This isn’t about the children. This is about keeping jobs and Union dues up. This isn’t even about keeping teachers employed. This is about the influence that Unions will have over policy decisions. This will be about the School Bonds that won’t be passed or the new buildings that won’t be built. Schools will sit empty if they don’t act now. Billions of dollars will not be spent on interest payments. International banks will not fill their coffers with easy, dependable US taxpayer money collected from the wealth of personal and real estate taxes across our nation. 

Kehoe, O’Laughlin, and Patterson are participating in the fascistic enslavement of us and our children because they don’t have the backbone to say that it is wrong to abort children even as a national policy, much less as a moral issue.

To attempt to save a broken and bloated system, they are forced to capture more children in the dysfunctional entrapment system we call Public Schools. Our children will be destroyed and oppressed even earlier by a mind-numbing loss of creativity and autonomy to produce and serve the state.

Modern Fascism: The Partnership of Power

This demonstrates modern fascism's evolution—the merger of corporate and institutional power happening not through direct government control but through seemingly benevolent organizations:

1. Global institutions set the agenda (WEF, UNICEF)

2. National organizations create the framework (US Chamber, Biden administration)

3. State actors manufacture the crisis (Missouri Chamber's survey)

4. Local institutions implement control:

   - Chamber shapes priorities through Focus Report

   - CFO directs funding ($427M in assets at their disposal)

   - SDC provides media coverage ($1M annual budget)

   - All while maintaining the appearance of independent action

In the video linked to this X post by Wall Street Apes, an EPA employee talks about the $50 billion they have madly funneled away to NGOs and Nonprofits so that the EPA employees can have jobs when they leave. This will guarantee that NGOs and Nonprofits continue the work of the EPA employees of the Biden administration through the Green New Deal, fighting against the Trump Administration until they can be redeployed by a friendly administration sympathetic to their radical and progressive views. This is how the circle of life works for Nonprofits and NGOs now–feeding on American Taxpayers like a bloated tick until it falls off and seeks out its next target, not caring that it has weakened its host or that it’s one of thousands feeding off the same defenseless target. 

The "Cultural Factors" Weapon

The weaponization of the non-profits occurs when they redefine family choices as "cultural factors" that need institutional correction. When NonProfit Quarterly talks about "cultural factors" forcing women from work, they create a problem only institutions can solve. Cultural Factors are too complex for a family to solve. How can a family solve cultural factors when raising their children? Families need something much grander than themselves. Traditional family structures become barriers to overcome rather than choices to support.

This explains why the childcare "crisis" focuses exclusively on institutional solutions:

* Government funding

* Corporate tax credits

* Institutional childcare

* Workforce participation metrics

* Never family support or community-based solutions

The Result: Institutional Control

The outcome is a system where:

1. Global agendas become local policies

2. Family choices face institutional pressure

3. Media amplifies preferred narratives

4. Funding flows to institutional solutions

5. Opposition appears backward or selfish

This is a massive coordination in plain sight, documented through their own words and actions. The question isn't whether this institutional control exists but whether we'll continue accepting it because it comes wrapped in charitable giving and community good.

The system works because it's not partisan—it's class-based. Elite interests transcend party lines, using both Republican governmental power and progressive institutional control to achieve their goals while maintaining the illusion of a democratic process. This explains why addressing it solely through electoral politics fails—the real power operates through seemingly benevolent private institutions working in concert with government actors of both parties.

The Machinery of Modern Tyranny

What we've uncovered in Springfield reveals a sophisticated system of control that operates through seemingly benevolent institutions. The Community Foundation of the Ozarks, with its $427M in assets, the Chamber of Commerce, hiding its true membership, and the Springfield Daily Citizen, their curated media voice, work in concert through the Focus Report to shape community life. This isn't random–it's a carefully orchestrated effort to reach into the home of every "good" Springfield citizen and nudge them toward predetermined conclusions.

The genius of this system is its invisibility. The Chamber (which keeps its true membership hidden) works hand-in-glove with the CFO and SDC, using the Focus Report - whose origins and accuracy remain conveniently unexamined—to set Springfield's agenda year after year. Through DAFs, institutional partnerships, and coordinated messaging, they create the illusion of organic community consensus while advancing agendas that often counter local values.

George Orwell and Aldous Huxley got it wrong. 

It wasn't the government we needed to fear but the do-gooder. CS Lewis had it right instead when he said, "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." In this system, the do-gooder’s ally is the church. 

The CFO, the Chamber, the SDC, and even Second Baptist are precisely the moral busybodies that Lewis warned us about. They utilize the mechanisms of government control without its visibility, creating a fascistic tyranny so subtle many don't recognize its existence. Through their coordinated efforts, non-profits, charities, and good-doers have done more to advance Marxist ideology in our rural communities over the last twenty years than any direct political movement could have achieved.

Even the traditional churches are in on their shell game of progressive politics. This is why Second Baptist Pastor Dr. John Birchett supported Sheila Michaels, an outspoken progressive liberal for CFO’s Humanitarian of the Year. Not only did the crown jewel of the fundamental Baptist Church in the Missouri Baptist Convention support her, but so did Kings Way Methodist Church and the Council of Churches of the Ozarks. They co-opt the church, who are either willing participants in the corruption of Springfield or they are ignorant participants.

The CFO, the Chamber, the SDC, and even Second Baptist are precisely the moral busybodies that Lewis warned us about. They utilize the mechanisms of government control without its visibility, creating a fascistic tyranny so subtle many don't recognize its existence. Through their coordinated efforts, non-profits, charities, and do-gooders they have done more to advance Marxist ideology in our rural communities over the last twenty years than any direct political movement could have achieved. They've nudged our Churches away from Christian Acts of Charity toward secular humanism, introduced ancient and hateful theologies, and secured a stranglehold on our education, our minds, and our children.

We are not dealing with our better angels but confronting individuals and organizations who hide in the darkness and seek to manage our lives, controlling our actions and benefiting from the production of our wealth. They can’t trust us to make our own decisions without their input. 

Their tyranny is more insidious because it comes wrapped in charitable giving and community good, making resistance appear selfish or backward. While we've been watching for government overreach, these institutions have quietly constructed a system of control that operates through tax-exempt donations, grant-making, and carefully managed public discourse.

The power to challenge this propaganda begins with recognition. This web of control isn’t unbreakable because it is thinly constructed. We can start to resist only by understanding how these systems work–how DAFs direct money, how Focus Reports shape priorities, how media coverage controls the narrative, and how it serves global rather than local interests. The question isn't whether we live under tyranny but whether we'll continue to accept it dressed in charitable clothing.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

C3, a Church in Maryville, MO, has moved from its Charismatic, more orthodox roots to applying modern culture, victimhood, radical feminism, and Eastern mysticism to the faith.

Under the pastor and his wife's leadership, the church has fallen deep into a cult of modern American heresy, where power and wealth are only a few thoughts away through positive energy and manifestation.

Christ is a backdrop for false teaching and worship services at this church rather than the center.

You can find Nick and Barb's podcasts here and here.

Nick and Barb Terry’s Social Media

Dobbs Decision?

iSuggestive Texts

Links

Barb Terry’s Book, Foul-Mouthed Refined Language Kingdom

C3’s Focus on Youth and College Students

Barb Terry’s in the news about her School Contract.

Nick Terry in the news about his Human Service.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com

Gretchen and I cover the issues in Susan Wade’s stories of the Christian County Library. Susan Wade’s narrative has created a weak rendering of the Christian County Library, which is only a shadow of truth.

We range back and forth over what must be done (legalism) and what ought to be done (morality and faith). So many of the library issues are hidden behind a veil of narrative and misdirection by journalists like Susan Wade.

We’ve been lied to through their propaganda-their masters seek to undermine reality through lies about biology.

Opening Questions:

1. "Could you share your journalism background and credentials?"

2. "How did you become involved in covering the Christian County Library issues?"

Media Representation & Documentation

Credentials & Coverage:

3. "Wade prominently displays her journalism credentials in presenting this coverage. How would you compare your approach to documentation and sourcing with hers?"

4. "The article primarily identifies you as 'Garrity's wife' rather than a journalist. How does this type of characterization affect public perception of your work?"

Documentation Issues:

5. "The article claims people haven't provided lists of concerning books. Could you explain how you've documented these materials?" 

6. "What happens when you try to show the actual content on traditional platforms?"

7. "You've faced restrictions trying to show evidence of inappropriate content. Could you explain this ironic situation?"

* Wade provides narrative-driven explanations for reporting but often fails to provide context, key details, or key witnesses. Can you explain the difference between her approach and investigative journalism?

Language & Narrative Control

Framing the Debate:

8. "How has the term 'censorship' been redefined in this debate?"

9. "How does the ALA's definition differ from traditional understandings?"

10. "Why is the distinction between censorship and age-appropriate content crucial?"

11. "How has the real issue of parental rights been lost in this narrative?"

Coverage Choices:

12. "Wade portrays Tuckness's resignation as simply about family time and mental health. What significant events and statements did this coverage omit?"

13. "The article presents the lawsuit primarily about meeting notices and bylaw technicalities. How does this narrow focus affect public understanding?"

14. "Wade presents technical details about meeting notices but doesn't explore why leadership changes were being sought. Can you discuss this coverage gap?"

Professional Standards & Relationships

Objectivity and Relationships:

15. "How has Wade's relationship with library staff members affected her coverage?"

16. "Her background includes public relations training. How might this influence her coverage choices?"

17. "How has her political advocacy (like requesting Harris campaign materials) affected her coverage?"

Journalistic Practices:

18. "The article relies heavily on direct quotes from library staff while summarizing or paraphrasing parent concerns. How does this pattern affect public perception?"

19. "As someone with journalism training yourself, what do you see as the key differences between advocacy journalism and what's happening in Wade's coverage?"

Documentation & Evidence

Evidence Handling:

20. "What kind of documentation have you provided that's been ignored in mainstream coverage?"

21. "How does your approach to evidence differ from Wade's reporting?"

22. "Can you walk us through specific instances where you've provided evidence that wasn't included in Wade's reporting?"

Broader Implications

Impact & Understanding:

23. "What does this situation reveal about local journalism and narrative control?"

24. "How can parents and community members get accurate information when local coverage is biased?"

25. "How are progressive parents being pitted against other parents in this debate?"

Susan Wade’s Biases

HickChristian is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hickchristian.substack.com