Op-Ed

When loyalty shifts from the Constitution to politics, our democracy trembles. The military oath must remain fiercely apolitical.

After 32 years serving Canada and the RCMP—training countless officers and advocating for ethical policing—I’ve seen firsthand that lawful, licensed firearms owners are not the threat, yet we are continually punished by misguided political agendas while real criminals walk free and violent crime rises.

The service academies weren’t built to accommodate dishonesty—they were built to reject it, and their growing tolerance for ethical failure reveals a leadership more committed to protecting reputation than enforcing principle.

America’s military might is stretched thin—money alone won’t fix it. Strategic reform is now a national security imperative.

The problem with the military isn’t the number of push-ups someone can do — it’s the lack of real leadership at the top.

When cruelty is cloaked in patriotism and indifference parades as strength, we are no longer led—we are ruled by those for whom empathy is an inconvenience.

The Trump administration’s reckless disregard for democratic norms and its emboldening of authoritarian regimes abroad have dangerously eroded both America’s credibility and the foundational principles it claims to uphold.

When a political firebrand can walk into the Oval Office and walk out with a win, it says a lot about how loyalty is driving the engine in Trump’s second-term White House.

What if top US officials leaked secrets—and got away with it? “Signal gate” questions power, ethics, and accountability at the highest level.

Is America too soft on crime? As public fear rises, the debate heats up—punishment or reform, where should justice truly land?

Are elected officials shaping justice—or serving special interests? The fight over crime policy reveals deep flaws in America’s legal system.

A crime in Pueblo sparks new concern: Are soft-on-crime policies failing us by letting repeat offenders slip through the cracks?