Kim Monson Featured Articles

I attended a business seminar in Denver years ago and one of the many speakers was the best-selling author and sales trainer, Tom Hopkins. He said a word that stuck with me, and I have used it myself successfully for years. He said when he takes a trip on a plane and the flight attendant greets him as he enters with “How are you?” most people reply, “Just Fine” or “I’m OK.” Not Mr. Hopkins. He replies, “Unbelievable.” More times than not the Flight Attendant will say, “I’ve never heard that before” or “That could be good or bad.” Mr. Hopkins will continue, “You are correct, I’ll let you decide.” That short interaction and a bit of laughter by both the flight attendant and Mr. Hopkins, makes him stand out as he boards the plane. He receives better service and a positive interaction with the flight crew, plus, it’s memorable. I can prove it; I am retelling this story to you now.

I have often thought about how one or two words can create a positive interaction. Remember all the words you learned as a kid. You were taught to say, please, may I, thank you, yes sir, or yes mam. These words show respect for the person you are speaking to. This is something our culture has moved away from. We have become lazy with our language. I am no Grammarian with words, yet using better words that demonstrate your ability to speak well shows a level of maturity and mastery.

How are you being “unbelievable” with the words you use? According to a Harvard University and Google project to digitize books, researchers estimated there are a total of 1,022,000 words in the English Language. Many of these words are archaic and not in general use any longer. According to the Oxford English dictionary there are about 600,000 defined English words, again many out of everyday use. According to an article in English Live, most adult English speakers have a vocabulary of 20,000-35,000 words. This is an enormous number of words to choose from, especially when you think that we have only twenty-six letters in our alphabet!

I often find myself using repetitive words when I write. This is why I usually have a thesaurus by my side to look up words that have a more meaningful impact on what I am trying to express. In addition, I could never pronounce the word thesaurus until my wife taught me to place my tongue under the roof of my mouth behind my front teeth and say the “th” sound. Try it; It works.

The word thesaurus comes from the Greek word meaning “treasure,” or “storehouse.” Indeed, words in a thesaurus are a treasury of knowledge that can enhance our ability to communicate clearly and concisely. Even though many words are added to our language every year there are thousands that have their origins in ancient languages.

An example is the word laconic, which can be said of a person, or speech, or style of writing. This word’s origin comes from the region in Greece that includes the ancient city of Sparta. The Spartans were known for their concise wit as opposed to the verbose orators of Athens. There is a story told of the Spartans correspondence with the Macedonian King, Phillip II, the father of Alexander the Great. Sparta was the only Greek city not subjected by the Macedonians. When Phillp asked the city’s council if he would be received as a friend or foe, the response was “neither.”  Phillip then sent this reply to the Spartans, “If I invade Laconia, I shall turn you out.” To which they replied, “If.” The word laconic conveys complex ideas concisely.

At a Toastmasters workshop presented by two by World Champions of Public Speaking, Darren LaCroix and Mark Brown, I was chosen as the first volunteer to give an introduction to a speech. When my name was called my mind went blank. All I could think of was the opening of a song I wrote for a program teaching children about flowers. Along with hand gestures I sang, “I have a little seed. I put it in the ground. I covered it with earth. And watered it around. Up comes the stem. Out comes the leaves. Then UP pops the flower that comes from the seed.”  I was stopped before the next verse by Darren LaCroix. He said, “Let’s give Brad a hand for being brave enough to start us off, and for separating himself from anyone else by trying to sing.” There was a great laugh from the audience, including me.

Darren continued, “Brad why did you use “I” as the beginning of your sentence? Why not the word “You”? Darren was pointing out I was speaking to an audience, and it was more important to address them than to talk about myself. An excellent observation I would never have been aware of had I not been challenged by a perceptive evaluator. The difference of using “You” rather than “I” connected my song emotionally to the audience.

The skill of curating your words to become more impactful and persuasive is something everyone can implement into their daily lexicon. In a word, you too can be “unbelievable” by being observant, listening to the lyrics of words, and crafting ways to be memorable with your language.

Colorado Republicans are in a dog fight at the State Legislature, one that has been one-sided for far too long. Extremist Democrats have had the power to force nearly any progressive policy issue they want – from taxpayer funded abortions, to firearm restrictions, attacks on TABOR (Colorado’s Taxpayers Bill of Rights) and parental rights. Republicans have been unable to stop these overreaching, onerous, and many times unconstitutional pieces of legislation. This ineffectiveness has frustrated Republicans across the state and instead of acting as a uniting force, it has instead created rifts that have only gotten deeper and wider throughout the years. Republicans are now in an identity crisis that has been mostly centered around the concept of what defines a Republican, who gets to decide who is in that group, and what do we do with the fringe?

Categories have always been a difficult concept for humanity throughout our history. Even a brief look at the fractious nature of our religious ideas shows how difficult this concept has been for mankind. The problem arises from the fact that categories are by necessity rarely rigid. We tend to want to treat and create categories similar to how we create proper sets and subsets in mathematics: with fixed and clearly defined sets of features. These proper sets are even self-defined by these features similar to a square: four equal, straight lines each set at 90 degrees. It is easy and self-evident in math to allow the features to be the standard by which concepts are categorized. However, in real life, categories are much more nebulous and similar to how we define and categorize colors. It is much easier to understand that there is a central idea and standard for what the color red is, and it is easy to appreciate that there are fringes to that color. When does red stop being red and instead is called orange? When does it instead change to pink? Such a simple idea and category, the color red, instead has a fringe and a different concept depending on whether you are painting or trying to match your prom date’s vermillion dress.

This categorization by no means eliminates the necessity of an ideal, in fact it only reinforces it. There needs to be a centralizing ideal to aim at and encourage movement towards. However, we cannot ignore the fact that there will be a fringe around that ideal and that the ideal Republican cannot be defined by a simple list of features. The very idea that a simple list of features could define a Republican necessarily begs the question of who gets to determine the list itself (another idea that Colorado Republicans are fighting over). And as independent thinkers, the idea of handing over the definition of our ideals is not a natural one. The fringe is a good and necessary factor as it creates debate and movement around the ideal. It helps define and reinforce the centralizing goal. It even helps define the Overton window. It should allow us to debate ideas and to help Republicans become more persuasive not only within our own party but to take those persuasive ideas outwards to the general populace. Instead of debating what centralizing ideas define the Republican party, we have instead turned the argument into who gets to label and define what theses groups are and who gets to be included in them.

Republicans in Colorado have turned the fringe into those that need to be cast out and something the party needs to be purified of. The MAGAs versus the RINOs are arguing that neither should be included in the circle. Instead of debating and uniting around the ideals of Liberty and Freedom, we have instead turned toward the progressive idea of labeling others and then casting them out. We have been arguing more over who has the power to create the list of features that will define a conservative, a republican, or even a liberty lover instead of embracing the challenge of persuasion. An R behind one’s name has become a data notation instead of a like-minded individual with the same ideals that will promulgate a path towards more liberty. We are in a desperate war of ideas against those who seek to destroy our founding principles and yet we are instead devolving the war internally against those we deem to be on the fringe. To use a color metaphor, we are more interested in debating whether amber should be included in red than we are in stemming the blue wave overtaking our state. While it is essential to point the fringe towards the ideal, we have changed what should be an encouragement towards the goal into a kick into a category that is simply “other than me.”

When are we going to get serious about winning elections in Colorado? Is the goal of purifying the fringe and casting people out of the Republican party going to help Republicans win when we then have to ask for their vote in the general election? How does using the power of the party to enforce our ideals create lasting change in the hearts and minds of those we disagree with? We pay credence to the idea that any Republican is better than any Democrat and yet we have turned most of our ire and passion towards attacking fellow Republicans. The Liberty Scorecard has prior scorecards going back to 2019. In every single year, every single Republican rated higher than every single Democrat (except for Republican turned Democrat Kevin Priola). Does that mean we do not push those Republicans who rank the lowest back towards the ideal? Of course not, it is our job as citizens. But it is the extremists who have taken over the Democrat party who have been pushing an agenda antithetical to our founding principles, and it is the extremist Democrats who deserve most of our angst and passion. Let us fight their progressive agenda while we persuade the fringe back towards the center. The war on our constitutional republic is a long one, where many battles for principles are won and lost. It requires not only vigilance but also volume. And perhaps more importantly, it requires that we embrace the fringe and the “others” and point them towards the self-evident truths we are desperately trying to defend.

As a firearms educator, I have taught many students across Colorado how to protect themselves and their loved ones with firearms. I have seen lives change when people discover that they hold the power to refuse victimhood, and to love themselves enough to embrace their God given right to self-defense.

On April 10, 2025, Governor Jared Polis signed into law SB25-003 — one of the most sinister, elitist, and discriminatory gun control bills America has ever seen. And he did it behind closed doors, surrounded by Moms Demand Action, without a single voice from the 2nd Amendment community present. Not one voice for freedom. Not one representative from the people this law actually affects.

That should tell you everything.

Under SB25-003, you will now be required to obtain a state-issued license just to purchase a semi-automatic firearm — the most commonly owned type of firearm in the country. The bill mandates 16 hours of state-approved training every five years, includes a written test, at least 2 days of in person class time, a mysterious “licensing fee,” and a mandatory 72-hour wait after you are approved. Instructors are now forced to discuss “victim awareness and empathy,” “firearms deaths associated with mental illness,” and red flag laws.

Let’s be clear: the vast majority of gun crimes are not committed by tax paying, law-abiding Coloradans buying guns legally. SB25-003 will do nothing to stop crime — but it will stop you from protecting yourself.

Who does it hurt most?

This bill is the very definition of systemic discrimination. It weaponizes bureaucracy to deny civil rights. That is not safety. It is tyranny.

Let us not pretend this is new. Gun control in America was never born from a place of public safety — it was born from fear and prejudice.

Later, during the Jim/Juan Crow era, states required permits approved by sheriffs — who conveniently denied people of color while additionally imposing licensing processes that were difficult and highly arbitrary in nature.

Again: systemic disarmament under the guise of “law.”

SB25-003 is cut from the same cloth. It doesn’t say it is racist. It doesn’t have to. The burden it creates will disproportionately fall on communities of color, people with disabilities, women, and working-class Americans — the very people who need their rights most.

It is a 21st-century poll tax for the 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment was not written for duck hunting or target shooting — but for self-defense, especially against the possibility of tyranny.

Let me ask you — what happens when a woman with a violent ex-boyfriend needs to defend herself tonight? What happens when a disabled veteran cannot physically complete the training the state demands? What happens when the poorest neighborhoods, already terrorized by crime, are told to just wait, disarm, & hope the police make it on time?

The answer? They are left defenseless. And Colorado Governor Jared Polis couldn’t care less.

This is not just policy. This is personal. I have looked women in the eye who escaped abuse. I have trained people with PTSD who are reclaiming their strength. I have helped grandmothers pick their first firearm after a break-in. I know what freedom feels like — and I know what it looks like when it is taken away.

To everyone reading this — whether you are a gun owner, a parent, a veteran, a student, a first responder, or just someone who values liberty — we need you. This is not just about Colorado. This is a test run for America. If they can get away with this in Colorado, they will export it everywhere.

Join me. Get trained. Get informed. Support organizations, like, The 2nd Syndicate, our grassroots 2A movement. Show up. Speak out. Refuse to comply with unjust laws. And let every politician know: we are not going away.

The Founders did not write the 2nd Amendment for hunting season. They wrote it for this moment — and we are ready.