Library Board of Trustees Meeting on Tuesday

 

How the Christian County Cabal Selects Candidates

 

Missouri House (Tim Bommel/MO House Communications)

By Gretchen Garrity

“CABAL: A cabal is a group of people who are united in some close design, usually to promote their private views or interests in an ideology, a state, or another community, often by intrigue and usually without the knowledge of those who are outside their group.” Wikipedia

In September 2023 when Missouri state representative Brad Hudson announced he would run for the state senate, local Republican leaders in Christian County began casting about for a candidate—even though the 138th District is composed of only 25% voters in Christian County, and 75% in Stone County. The announcement may have caught the local political machine off guard as they scrambled to find a candidate they would later present to the voters.

At the venue of Hudson’s announcement for the state senate seat, numerous attendees including Steve Stewart who was in leadership at the Christian County Missouri Republican Assembly (MRA), approached Burt Whaley and asked him to run for Hudson’s seat in the 138th District. Whaley was very active in local politics. Christian County Republican Central Committee Chair Don Carriker was present when Stewart asked Whaley to run.

 

A month later in early October, a local businessman, Tom Franiak, announced he would enter the Republican primary as a candidate for state representative. Even though he lost in a landslide against Whaley in 2024, Franiak is again running to unseat Whaley in 2026.

Stone County 2024 primary results

Christian County 2024 primary results

While Franiak asserted he had “helped put together the Young Republicans” (see the latest issues with the national Young Republicans) there seems to have been almost no political involvement before his entry into the race in 2023. He rarely, if ever attended political meetings, was not a member of any local political organizations, and apparently did not even know in which district he lived (there was recent redistricting).

Rep. Bob Titus

Franiak publicly announced it was Rep. Jamie Gragg (140th District) who urged him to run for Hudson’s seat. According to a 2024 voter guide for Stone and Taney counties Franiak stated, “I have regular conversations with many of the current Missouri House of Representatives including Brian Seitz, district 156, Taney County, Jamie Gragg, District 140, Ozark, Jon Patterson, incoming speaker of the house, Alex Riley, incoming House Floor Leader and Chad Perkins, candidate for speaker pro-tem.”

Note that Franiak did not mention conversations with his own representative Brad Hudson or his senator Mike Moon, or Rep. Bob Titus (139th District). Titus, who is a strong conservative and well liked by his constituency, is currently facing a primary opponent in Sandy Karnes. Karnes, who is vice chair of the local central committee and the committee chairwoman of the 7th Congressional District for Christian County, recently announced a primary challenge against Rep. Titus.

Karnes was involved in helping to shut down voting of the grassroots platform at the 2024 state GOP convention. Her husband, Jack, signed one of two challenges to overturn the grassroots slate of officials who had been voted in at the convention. (Lots of background on the events surrounding the 2024 GOP Convention debacle HERE and HERE and HERE, HERE and HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE and HERE.)

Locke and Smith's Legiscore

PRIMARY CHALLENGES AGAINST TWO POPULAR  INCUMBENTS

Ponder for a moment why local GOP leadership would run primary opponents against respected and popular conservative incumbents like Representatives Titus and Whaley. Titus has a 100% rating with CPAC, and is ranked 7 of 163 in the Missouri House of Representatives with the conservative Locke and Smith’s 2025 Legiscore scoring. Whaley, having just finished his first term, is ranked 6 of 163 with Legiscore.

Back to Tom Franiak’s candidacy in the 2024 primary. Some time in September or early October of 2023, Rep. Gragg, central committee vice chair Sandy Karnes, and Les Overall, president of the local MRA in Christian County, interviewed Franiak as a potential candidate to replace the departing Brad Hudson. Also, and this is very important, not one of those who were involved in interviewing Tom Franiak as a candidate for the 138th District actually live in the 138th. Not Don Carriker, not Jamie Gragg, not Sandy Karnes. Yet they were the individuals advocating for one candidate right from the start.

In fact, it was central committee Chair Carriker who asked Gragg to interview Franiak as a potential candidate. Very soon after that interview, Franiak filed papers. Essentially, Christian County political leaders--independently from Stone County--promoted a candidate who would have been the only voter choice on the primary ballot if not for Burt Whaley’s decision to enter the race. Notably, Franiak was also presented as a candidate in Christian County before he was presented in Stone County.

Franiak later spoke at the Stone County MRA’s meeting in October. According to sources, Franiak announced he was doing citizens a favor by running to represent them. It was after this meeting that Burt Whaley was again approached by others and asked to consider running for the 138th District. He continued to mull it over and after prayerful consideration and discussions with Leah, his wife, he announced his candidacy on Dec. 1, 2023.

WHALEY’S LANDSLIDE VICTORY

In a video (HERE), Franiak notes he didn’t need “two months” to consider his run, but knew that God had chosen him to run. Incidentally, Burt Whaley, who did take two months in prayer and consideration, ended up winning in a landslide in both Stone and Christian counties.

Rep. Burt Whaley

Whaley has a long history of public service, from his 20-year career in the U.S. Army to a 28-year career as a teacher, as well as the founder and principal of a successful alternative school.

Whaley was also involved in local Republican politics as a founding member of the Stone County Missouri Republican Assembly (MRA) as well as interim chair of the Stone County Republican Central Committee. As interim chair, Whaley conducted the local Stone County GOP caucus in 2024.

In the same voter guide Whaley had this to say, “I visited [Brad Hudson] in Jefferson City multiple times over the last four legislative sessions. He introduced me to various legislators and staff, several of whom I have built a working relationship with...In 2022, [Congressman] Eric Burlison asked Brad and me to start a Missouri Republican Assembly (MRA) Chapter in Stone County…”

Whaley stood his ground against the internal party opposition and went on to win the election in a landslide. But what happened behind the scenes in 2023-2024 is illustrative of how state and local party politics affect who runs for office. Watch how the Texas grassroots campaign of Theodis Daniel is being systematically undercut by his own party:

Today, we filed a formal ethics complaint against the Harris County GOP for their blatant bias and unfair practices. They’ve failed to share debate locations, denied equal access to resources for Republican members, and the chair even demanded I drop out to back my opponent just… pic.twitter.com/UBSxecogDx

— Theodis Daniel For Congress (@Theodis4Texas18) October 10, 2025

I’ve stayed quiet long enough. It’s time the people know the truth.
Cindy Siegel, the Harris County GOP Chair, personally asked me to drop out of this race because she’s friends with another candidate. That’s not leadership that’s corruption.

I’m not here to play political games… pic.twitter.com/dMPFhTAjZW

— Theodis Daniel For Congress (@Theodis4Texas18) October 11, 2025

Tonight we break the silence.

The people deserve to know the truth about what’s been done to this campaign the bias, the obstruction, and the improprieties inside the Harris County GOP.
We go LIVE at 7:30 PM Pacific.#TeamDanielTX18 #TruthMatters #WeThePeople #TexasStrong 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/Kw2XjWgzlr

— Theodis Daniel For Congress (@Theodis4Texas18) October 10, 2025

These are not isolated incidents, but are being replicated in districts all across our nation, including Missouri. The GOP establishment, which is one wing of the Uniparty that ultimately controls both sides of the aisle, is fighting to maintain dominance. Much like when the establishment infiltrated and destroyed the Tea Party, we are seeing a national attack plan to remove grassroots conservatives and replace them with establishment office holders.

Like Texas, the Uniparty rules in Missouri. It is why a “Republican Super Majority” still manages to be “helpless” while statist and globalist policies across the state and in local areas are implemented. The Uniparty is comprised of the powerful and the rich, and those they seek to place in elected positions.

Bills introduced in the legislature are written by lawyers and lobbyists whose loyalty lies with their paymasters in business and politics. They advance the interests of the powerful and wealthy and most legislation has little to do with advancing freedom or preserving liberty. The legislative games played are for another article, however.

THE LOCAL CABAL
 

Back to local politics. As soon as the largely unknown Tom Franiak announced his run in Oct. 2023 (MEC papers were filed on Oct. 9), he was being promoted by the establishment. In fact, after Burt Whaley announced his candidacy he spoke with central committee Chair Don Carriker, who urged him not to run against Franiak. The exact same talking points he used were later used by other politically-aligned activists who spoke with Whaley and urged him not to run.

In fact, both Titus and Whaley were integral members of the conservative contingent called the Brave Ten, who defied the GOP establishment in Jefferson City to support Justin Sparks for House Speaker, rather than RINO Jon Patterson. And now both conservative incumbents are facing primary opponents who are closely identified with the GOP establishment.

When Carriker could not talk Whaley out of running, he asked Whaley to consider paying Franiak for his campaign costs up to that point if Franiak dropped out of the race. Whaley declined.

Again, few politically active people had heard of Tom Franiak. The first time Whaley heard of him was in Oct. 2023 when he got a call requesting he invite Franiak to the October meeting of the Stone County MRA. Also, it was Whaley who first introduced Franiak to Sen. Mike Moon at that meeting.

Tom FraniakSpringfield Business Journal

REPUBLICAN BONAFIDES

It is interesting to go back and note who Franiak said he regularly spoke with, including representatives Jamie Gragg and Jon Patterson, incoming speaker of the house. Who put Franiak in touch with Patterson, widely considered to be an establishment politician? One connection may be Axiom Strategies, a Republican organization that helps plan and execute campaigns for political candidates.

How and why did Christian County political leaders settle on Tom Franiak who was mostly unknown in local political circles before his announcement? He had little to no active engagement with local grassroots groups or political organizations, although he was active in community life. Franiak’s candidacy would have caused few waves, except for the way he was promoted by the local cabal over grassroots candidate Whaley. Why oppose voter choice for the best candidate when there was no incumbent?

WHEN LIFE BEGINS

At a February 13, 2024 CCMRA meeting, Franiak and Whaley both spoke. One of the questions revolved around when life begins. It became apparent that the candidates were divided. Although Franiak stated that life begins at conception, he elaborated by saying, “[Life] begins at conception, yes, for my religion. But there is no way to detect it medically so I will be very transparent here and say if Missouri was to pass a Morning After Pill I don't see it being much different than any other contraceptive, because we cannot detect a heartbeat. We cannot tell whether the cell has been divided, um, I believe that in order to be a great legislator you're going to have compromise. I can plant my feet in the ground and I can say absolutely no compromise, but we'll never win that battle. The liberals will come after you every time. So, in order to be a great legislator in Jeff City you're going to have to be open to some compromise. But one thing I will do is stand up here and tell you exactly where I will compromise and that's one of them.”

Whaley, who taught biology during his career as an educator, stated that life begins at conception, which is typically between 12 and 24 hours. Whaley would not compromise on that point.

At that same meeting, Don Carriker complained that Whaley had too much power in Stone County because he was president of the MRA and was the temporary chair of Stone County central committee (until a new chair could be elected). In light of primary challenger Sandy Karnes and her influential positions with the local and 7th Congressional District’s committees, this concern of Carriker is interesting.

Soon after that meeting, Rep. Gragg invited Franiak and Whaley out to the restaurant Rosie Jo’s in Ozark to resolve any possible division that may have occurred. It was also at this meeting that Gragg noted to Whaley it was Carriker who asked him to confer with Franiak, Karnes and Overall about a possible run for representative of the 138th District.

THE MOU IS DOA

When it came time for candidate endorsements the Stone and Christian County MRA chapters met to come to an agreement for the 75% of the voting populace who resided in Stone County. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was hammered out to give the endorsement responsibility to the Stone County MRA. This MOU was written and approved by the 7th District MRA for the March endorsements. Make note that Sandy Karnes voted against the MOU at that time.

Sandy Karnes

However, the MOU was rescinded in a Feb. 16, 2024 MRA memorandum sent by 7th District Second Vice President Ronnie White. Stating the MOU  "...may not be fully aligned with the State MRA Bylaws," the rescission came three days after the February meeting at which Carriker complained about Whaley wielding too much power.  

 

There was a Board meeting but it is not clear how the decision came about at the State level--whether there was a vote or simply a discussion and decision. According to sources, Carriker made an issue of the MOU and was supported by Steve Lampley, who was MRA President at the time. It was believed that Whaley would win the endorsement of the MRA, and it seems obvious there was establishment opposition to it.

That is not all. The 7th District’s Convention occurred on March 23, 2024. During the convention, local MRA leaders Ron Sanders and Ronnie White proposed a procedural change for endorsements to allow the MRA to do what the MOU would have done. The proposal passed. The Stone County MRA members in the 138th could now vote on the endorsement, and indeed Whaley was overwhelmingly endorsed at the next meeting on April 18, 2024.

Note that Tom Franiak’s wife, Donni, had just become a brand new member of the Christian County MRA. It was Donni who nominated her husband for endorsement at the Stone County MRA. Donni Franiak currently serves as the secretary of the Christian County central committee.

THE VETTING QUESTION

At an April 2024 patriot group meeting in Barry County, Don Carriker questioned Whaley on the vetting of candidates. Carriker was wearing a Tom Franiak campaign shirt at that meeting while Chair of the central committee at the time. During the question-and-answer portion of the meeting, central committee Chair Carriker asked central committee Temporary Chair Whaley why Stone County did not vet candidates like Christian County.

That turned out to be a great question, considering that Carriker and his father originated the vetting survey for REPACCMO, the Republican Association of Central Committees of Missouri. There have been many questions to date about the “survey” used to vet local candidates: who was carrying out the vetting, whether the actual questions constituted a professional survey or a test (two distinct things), and how the survey was prepared.

 
VETTING USED AS A WEAPON?

 

On June 27, 2024 the Christian County central committee, through Chair Don Carriker, filed suit against Christian County Clerk Paula Brumfield for allowing Christian County Highway Superintendent Brent Young to file as a Republican on the ballot for the upcoming election for Western County Commissioner.

What may not be well known is that Carriker and Young, in his capacity as highway superintendent, reportedly had a conflict over bridge construction that happened to impact some of Carriker’s property. 

 

Yet Young was still forced to go to Carriker’s home for the vetting process instead of a neutral location. He was told he failed to make the benchmark scoring as a Republican. He was called in to a meeting with central committee members, who later determined Young “was not Republican enough.” This, even though Young had been vouched for by a member of the central committee and was a lifelong Republican. At the time, not all of those members themselves had taken the test or were vetted.

 

When Young filed with the County Clerk’s office anyway, the Central Committee "by and through Don Carriker, Chairman" sued. The suit, which also named Susan Pathkiller (a public administrator in Christian County) was dismissed after Carriker and his attorney failed to appear for a court date. A later motion by Carikker to set aside the dismissal was denied. 

 

Young later lost a close race to Johnny Williams.

From: Missouri Ethics Commission

Meanwhile, back in February 2024, Whaley was not allowed to have someone other than Carriker vet him, even though it was clear to Whaley that Carriker was supporting Franiak, indeed had contributed to his campaign (see above). Whaley was well conversant with how a survey should be written and conducted. He asked Carriker a series of questions about surveys, and found that the survey was not properly formulated.

Carriker admitted that he did not have 50% Democrats beta-testing the survey, which would have been needed in order to validate it. The vast majority of beta-testers were Republicans—taking a Republican test. There was no control group, no variable group to test against. Carriker controlled the vetting process in Christian County and was unwilling to allow another individual to vet either Whaley or Young, even though there were obvious conflicts of interest. 

  In a a strange twist of events, Carriker was kicked out of REPACCMO's chat group in early 2025 after some apparent divisiveness. David Rice, of Hick Christian, shared a text message from Carriker, complaining about Rice.

 

GRASSROOTS VS ESTABLISHMENT

The type of maneuvers and strategies the political parties engage in can be disheartening to citizens. Some politically active individuals consider themselves operators and power brokers. They toady up to moneyed interests,  seek their own self-interests, and forget that civic action should benefit all the citizenry and not just a few individuals and groups. The GOP has an entrenched establishment cabal, even in Christian County, that seeks to wrest control back from two actual grassroots conservatives who have servant hearts (listen to both Titus and Whaley on a recent radio show).
  

The local cabal is desperate enough to attempt to unseat two popular representatives who rank high for their conservative voting records. Most of all, they count on the average Missourian to be ignorant and too busy to see what is going on.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Sam Britton's Missouri Liberty Radio Tonight: 6-9 p.m.

 

 

Representatives Bob Titus (139th District) and Burt Whaley (138th District) will be guests during the 8 o'clock hour at Missouri Liberty Radio. Tune in to find out what is happening in SWMO.

The Big Lie

"Gender is assigned at birth." That's what we're told.

But then there's this:

This is what "gender affirming care" looks like. They remove tissue from the arm to create a Frankenstein like appendage for female to male transition.

Complication rate is 100% for these surgeries. Regret rate will approach 100%.

This is madness. True madness. pic.twitter.com/nz3C7jVlzv

— Andrew Zywiec, M.D. (@AndrewZywiecMD) October 15, 2025

 There's still lots of books pitching this crap in our Christian County Library.

Should children be exposed to an agenda with these results?

The longer I’ve been involved with the movement to protect girls and women, the more I see that much (most) of it is really a thinly veiled push to abolish child safeguarding. Girls being forced to undress in front of boys, children being taken from their parents for not… pic.twitter.com/g0gXzKb8nN

— Carilyn Johnson (@CarilynJohnson) October 9, 2025

The practice of breast binding can have catastrophic physical effects. Frankly, it is horrifying. Books that promote this via gender ideology do not belong in the children's or teens' sections of the library. The ALA's "Library Bill of Rights" states in part, "A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views."

No one is denying children the ability to use a library. But most people can agree that using taxpayer dollars to promote a harmful agenda to children is wrong. The next time an extremist activist tells you that it's about the First Amendment, or free speech, show them this picture. The real agenda is anti-human. It clothes itself in the flag and free speech, but it desires to end us as sexed individuals. It is an attack that goes to the deepest level of our biological reality and seeks to destroy it by mental and physical manipulation. It is deeply evil.

This agenda does not belong in the children's sections of libraries. Dozens of books in our library system promote to children that one can change one's sex. Colorful illustrations with smiling people are meant to encourage children to accept ideas that oppose reality itself. Don't fall for it.

Breast binding permanently damages the bodies of women and girls. It is not a “piece of clothing.” The damage is not reversible.

Why is everyone on BOTH sides so committed to downplaying the brutal effects of breast binding? https://t.co/vJacJXySLW pic.twitter.com/5fk0Sk1vWP

— Maia Poet🦎 (@thepeacepoet99) October 9, 2025

The Strategy

 

"It's an absolute travesty, but it would appear that you won't be stopped until, hopefully, the lawsuits begin in earnest." --Amy Jane Hoogstraet Safley

By Gretchen Garrity

The battle to make libraries safe again for children is a minefield. Organizations like the American Library Association (ALA) are extremely organized and well funded, and they often offer resources to those who oppose parental rights and the protection of children from age inappropriate and sexually explicit materials.

The political agenda to sexually indoctrinate children and demoralize them is well documented in books like "The Naked Communist," by W. Cleon Skousen. I want to thank the Christian County Library staff for purchasing this book for its collection.

While court decisions are beginning to move in a direction that recognizes the rights of parents, and the rights of public libraries to curate their collections without forced book shelving, the battle is still deeply engaged.

A recent case in Wyoming illustrates how complex the issue can be. A library director, Terri Lesley, was fired in 2023 and later sued under federal law. According to an article just published, "Lesley claimed that she was discriminated against because of her association with and advocacy for the LGBTQ+ community.

Three more claims alleged that the commissioners and library board violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, which protects people who oppose discriminatory practices against, advocate on behalf of, and associate with protected classes."

Not only did Lesley sue her county commission and the library board, but she has also sued a family in the community in a separate suit. While that suit is in the discovery phase, the suit against the library board and commission has been settled: "According to a settlement agreement provided to the News Record, the commission and the library board settled with Lesley for $700,000. The settlement agreement 'is not to be construed as an admission of liability by any party,' according to the court document."

Lesley had filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in 2023, which this year gave her a notice of right to sue. These things take time to shake out.

In exchange for the money to be paid out to Lesley and her attorneys, the former director agreed to dismiss the suit. This is common in such cases, because insurance companies are hesitant for lawsuits to go forward with expensive litigation costs.

Note that while the legal arguments were based on personal discrimination claims against the library director, Lesley's lawyer stated: "...that she hopes this sends the message that 'elected and appointed officials need to represent the interest of their entire community, not just a small band of activists.'

“'It is really important to remember the ideals of America,' she said. 'We do not discriminate, we believe in the First Amendment.'”

Of ten claims, only two mentioned First Amendment violations: "The seventh and eighth claims for relief had to do with the First Amendment. They argued that as a public employee, Lesley could not suppress the First Amendment rights of library users 'by censoring books based on disfavored content or their association with historically marginalized minority groups.'

They also alleged that the commissioners and library board participated in 'viewpoint discrimination and retaliation,' meaning they engaged in 'censorship based on their disagreement with the content of Ms. Lesley’s protected speech and association.'”

Of course, none of these claims will be heard in court because the case has been settled. However, court cases like Little v. Llano and Peter Parnell v. School Board of Escambia County, Florida, and The Roxbury Moms are bringing clarity to the issue of age inappropriate and sexually explicit books in school and public libraries. The Parnell suit is being appealed to the 11th Circuit Court.

 "If appointees have, indeed, engaged in unlawful activity, what is the most effective action that a citizen can take to ensure that taxpayer funds are not used to defend trustees engaging in personal activity that does not serve the best interests of our county?" -- Greg Swick

Note in the two screenshots I provided that local activist citizens are suggesting lawsuits or other actions may or should be taken against the Christian County Library District and/or the board members. These are not the only examples that are out there. This is an aggressive strategy being used all over the United States to force a viewpoint, to force shelving of books, and to deny parental rights--not to mention the protection of children.

Mr. Swick is a retired teacher who seems to hope that actions be taken against the board of trustee members as individuals outside of their official actions as a board, thereby depriving these unpaid volunteers of legal costs protection. Incidentally, Mr. Swick's Facebook comment was very quickly deleted from U-turn in Education's page. However, a screenshot was obtained.  U-turn in Education was founded by MSU professor Elizabeth Dudash-Buskirk.

Exploiting children through sexualized books

 

 "Once the child is exploited that way there is major damage." --Jaco Booyens

🗣 It's #BannedBooksWeek! So let's talk about explicit books & what you can do.

In 2022, @marissastreit of @prageru & @BooyensJaco, anti sex trafficking advocate, discussed the seriousness of explicit books & how they harm children. Watch 👇 #ProtectKidshttps://t.co/VL5zvNgioH pic.twitter.com/C3GJK31niF

— Arizona Women of Action (@azwomenofaction) October 6, 2025

 Full interview below:

Exactly why transgender children's books are evil

 

Yesterday was a wonderful day.

I got to meet one of the people whose content gave me the courage to face the reason I transitioned in the first place.

I have been wanting to thank each one of these courageous people for fighting for people like me.

Yesterday I got the chance… pic.twitter.com/weGeBXh96S

— Airiel D Salvatore (@Sackless_Jack) October 3, 2025

Parents vindicated: UPDATE

 

COMPLETE VICTORY!!!! SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED!
ALL claims brought by the Roxbury librarian against Roxbury moms Christina Balestriere and Kristen Cobo dismissed!
"This was all protected expression of opinion,"
More to come!@CoboKristen @ChristinaMB122 https://t.co/qDY253ivIM

— John D. Coyle Esq. (@johndcoyleesq) October 3, 2025

BACKGROUND HERE:

"Roxbury, NJ parents, Kristen Cobo and Christina Balestriere stood up when the Roxbury school library began promoting sexually explicit books to children.

After becoming aware of a multitude of sexually explicit, vulgar books available to minor children in their public school district, these parents followed the appropriate steps to address their concerns. After speaking with the librarian and district administration proved to be ineffective, these mothers began speaking at Roxbury Board of Education meetings regarding their concerns; providing evidence as to why these books are inappropriate and pose a risk to the safety of minors. 

In response to the concerns raised by these parents, the school librarian doubled down and promoted these books, tweeting from the Roxbury Media’s page about “banned books week”, encouraging students to read these books.

When Kristen and Christina continued to speak up at school board meetings to exercise their First Amendment Right to petition to government at a public forum, the school librarian sued.  The librarian's husband is an attorney, so she is not paying legal fees.  This frivolous lawsuit is a transparent attempt to silence parents who stand up to question whether books with graphic sexual content should be promoted for reading by children."

 

UPDATE: Press release -- 

 

Breaking News

 

By Gretchen Garrity

Some very good news out of Florida. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida Tallahassee Division, has ruled in Peter Parnell, et al., v. School Board of Escambia County, Florida that schools have the right to include or exclude whatever books they deem appropriate. Local control at last!

The lawsuit revolved around the removal of the book "And Tango Makes Three," which tells the story of two same-sex penguins who raised an egg. Parnell is the gay author of the children's book. According to Wikipedia, "The book does not take a stance on same-sex marriage, but rather the validity of same-sex families.^"

Notice how 'clever' that statement is--it doesn't take a stance on same-sex marriage per se, but does take a stance on the "validity of same-sex families."

According to the Final Order, which liberally quotes the recent court decision regarding Little v. Llano County (reported HERE), "After a hearing on several motions to dismiss, the court dismissed all claims against the Florida Education Commissioner and members of the Florida Board of Education for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 151. It dismissed individual-capacity claims against the Escambia County Superintendent for the same reason. Id. It dismissed claims against the Lake County Superintendent in her individual capacity based on qualified immunity, and it dismissed official-capacity claims against her and the Escambia County Superintendent as duplicative of claims against the respective School Boards. Id. It dismissed claims against the Lake County School Board on the merits, based on Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978). Id. Finally, it dismissed for lack of standing Plaintiffs’ claims challenging the constitutionality of a Florida statute Plaintiffs contended caused their harm. Id. That left the Escambia County School Board as the sole Defendant, and it left only Plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims regarding Tango’s removal. Count One alleges that removing Tango violated the authors’ First Amendment speech rights by discriminating based on content and viewpoint. ECF No. 61. Count Two alleges that the removal violated B.G.’s First Amendment right to receive information. Id.This order resolves those claims."

Please note that so far, every single claim the plaintiffs brought were dismissed. That bogus ALA claim that someone has the "right to receive information" by forcing librarians, schools and library boards to carry specific books, is about to be gutted. Read on.

While the Court held that the student, B.G., had standing on Count Two, the Court eventually ruled, "The board’s lead argument is that school library curation does not implicate any students’ or authors’ First Amendment rights at all. Thus, the argument continues, even if the board removed a book based on its viewpoint, the removal would not be unlawful. I agree, and that is enough to resolve this case. I conclude, as the en banc Fifth Circuit recently did, that a public library’s removal of books does not implicate the First Amendment right to receive information. Little v. Llano County, 138 F.4th 834, 850 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. pending, No. 25-284 (2025). Nor does it implicate any author’s First Amendment rights."

Note how the Florida Court refers to Little v. Llano County, which has a cert pending to the Supreme Court. The Court said in part, "In that case, a plurality held “that a public library’s collection decisions are government speech.” Id. at 865 (plurality). It did so after examining numerous precedents..." 

Further, it stated, "In the end, the Little plurality concluded 'a public library’s collection decisions are government speech.' Id. at 865. It did so based on 'precedents teaching that a speaker, including a government speaker, engages in expressive activity by selecting and presenting a curated collection of third-party speech,' its conclusion (quoted above) that a library collection does not constitute a public forum, and its consideration of the Shurtleff factors, 'which show that libraries’ collection decisions have traditionally expressed libraries’ own views about what constitutes worthwhile literature.'” Id.6

In its 18-page decision, the Court referenced the case of United States v. American Library Association, Inc., which "examined" the role of libraries in our nation. "It recognized that public libraries 'pursue the worthy missions of facilitating learning and cultural enrichment,' that they 'must have broad discretion to decide what material to provide to their patrons,' and that they 'collect only those materials deemed to have "requisite and appropriate quality." Id. at 203-04 (cleaned up). In other words, curating a library inherently requires an 'exercise of judgment in selecting the material' in the library, so 'forum analysis and heightened judicial scrutiny are incompatible' with the role of a public library. Id. at 205. Libraries do not exist primarily to encourage diverse views of private speakers or to 'provide a public forum for the authors of books.' Id. at 206. Instead, libraries collect books that the government deems to be of 'requisite and appropriate quality.'” Id.

The Left is going bonkers and screeching about "free speech" and "First Amendment Rights" and so on. I know that "And Tango Makes Three" was a particular favorite of MSU Professor Elizabeth Dudash-Buskirk. I can't access her Facebook page to see how she is reacting, however, because I was censored off Facebook. But I imagine she is quite upset that her book is not enjoying required accessibility in Escambia County, FL schools.

Let me tell you, though, the defendants in these cases go through hell because of these lawsuits. I want to thank one in particular--Vicki Baggett. A longtime teacher in Escambia County, Vicki has withstood the kind of lawfare and defamation that makes most people shrink from taking a stand. I applaud her. Bravo, Vicki and may God richly bless you. Here she is in a recent interview:

Judgment below:
Final Order
Court Judgment

CENSORED...again: UPDATE

By Gretchen Garrity

I was suspended from Facebook this morning:

 Why? "Your account, or activity on it, doesn't follow our Community Standards on cybersecurity." 

I must be a Russian bot.

"Our technology." Uh huh. And Christians are the ones called Nazi fascists.

In order to appeal the "technology" decision, I have to provide email, phone, selfie (and whatever info I need to provide after that). I decline. I did nothing wrong.

But, it is satisfying to know that whichever minions complained, whoever made the decision and presented the reason given, all recognize they LOST the narrative. They had to stop me from commenting on a Springfield Daily Citizen FB post about the Library Board of Trustees because I wouldn't give up arguing for the protection of children and parental rights.

They want you to give up. 

Never give up.

They had to resort to that of which they accuse conservatives. Not one book has been censored or banned from the Christian County Library. They don't even have the satisfaction of pointing to that in order to justify censoring the free speech of others.

In fact, communications professor Elizabeth Dudash-Buskirk (who I was engaging when I was so rudely interrupted by the suspension) should complain that a fellow citizen was censored! Indeed, she should be my biggest supporter since she has argued so vociferously that censorship is evil. And all the others on the FB thread who argued so eloquently for smut in the children's section of the library, they should rush to my defense too, right? 

And this just came to me in an email. It's laughable. I had no idea there was any advertising on my account. 

"Inauthentic behavior." LOL. "Or violations of our Advertising policies affecting business assets." That sound like the SDC was not happy with the way the thread was going. LOL.

UPDATE: BTW, as far as I can tell, ALL of my comments have been filtered out. Now that is some Grade A censorship.

Where's George Orwell when you need him?