School bureaucrats who have mismanaged their finances are hoping that voters will blame a convenient scapegoat: families using Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESAs) to educate their children. As usual, their allies in the legacy media are trying hard to help them shift the blame—but the numbers don’t lie.
Channel 12 recently ran a story titled “Deer Valley teachers self-fund or rely on classroom wish lists for basics, while ESA parents buy luxury items with state tax dollars.” Most of the article reads like a press release from Deer Valley Unified School District Superintendent Curtis Finch, who claims that the ESA program has “zero accountability,” “no oversight,” and is “out of control.” Meanwhile, the article quotes teachers in Deer Valley who are spending hundreds of dollars from their own pockets to cover school supplies for their students.
The implication is clear: district schools are financially starved while ESA families waste money on frivolous luxuries. But the reality is exactly the opposite.
Misuse of the ESA program is vanishingly small. The Arizona Department of Education’s internal audit had turned up $622,000 in ESA funds that are “possible fraud or misuse.” That’s approximately 0.05% of total ESA spending over the past two years.
Misuse of funds in the ESA or any other public program must be detected, deterred, and punished. This is in fact happening in the ESA program, as the Arizona Department of Education had already found the misuse, suspended accounts of those responsible, and reports that it is “in the process of collecting more than $600,000” in improper spending. All of this makes the ESA program far more transparent and accountable than Arizona school districts, which do not post their purchases.
And while Deer Valley teachers may indeed purchase their own school supplies, it has nothing to do with the ESA program and everything to do with misplaced district priorities.
One of the oldest tricks in the school district advocate playbook involves pretending that teachers must buy their own classroom supplies because of a lack of funding. The Channel 12 story cites a Deer Valley biology teacher who said she “spends at least $500 of her own money every summer for her classroom.”
Days after the report aired, former Deer Valley school board candidate Tiffany Hawkins revealed that Deer Valley Unified had spent $560,407 to send students and staff on trips to Disneyland, Knott’s Berry Farm, Sea World, Universal Studios, and other destinations in Arizona, California, Hawaii, Indiana, and Texas. Apparently, the district leadership decided that these trips took precedence over classroom supplies for Deer Valley teachers.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for Channel 12 to cover that. Deer Valley Superintendent Finch—who recently faced charges of stonewalling public records requests and illegal electioneering on school grounds—attacked the ESA program for “out of control” spending with “zero accountability.” But his critiques of the ESA program much more accurately describe spending in his own district.
The Arizona Auditor General reports that Deer Valley spends $13,717 per pupil, meaning that a classroom of 25 students thus generates over $340,000 in total revenue. Where did this money go? Mainly not to teachers.
The Auditor General reports that Deer Valley average teacher pay is $2,163 below the state average. If Deer Valley is not prioritizing teachers, what is it prioritizing instead? The Auditor General report helpfully provides an answer: “high” and “very high” spending on administration and transportation, respectively, compared to a group of peer school districts.
The Goldwater Institute recently published a study of Arizona school superintendent compensation. Goldwater needed to use the open-records law to obtain this information, as districts compensate their superintendents in a variety of creative ways outside of their base salary, including providing either vehicles or “car allowances,” extra retirement benefits, and other perks.
The Goldwater Institute found that Deer Valley provides a total compensation package for their Superintendent of $290,505, including a car allowance of $10,000. This car allowance alone could have provided 20 teachers with $500 each for classroom supplies.
Even if one were to take the highly perverse view that students were the indentured servants of the school districts in which they reside, it would still be absurd for Deer Valley Unified officials to blame their problems on the ESA program. Arizona Department of Education reports show that 10,966 students lived within the boundaries of Deer Valley Unified but attended other public schools in 2024.
Deer Valley Unified meanwhile “drained” almost 3,000 students and their funding from other public schools. At the end of 2024, only 709 students had left a Deer Valley school to participate in the ESA program. Four different public schools outside Deer Valley Unified each have enrolled more students who reside in the district than the ESA program. Moreover 217 total public schools outside the district enroll Deer Valley Unified resident students.
Luckily, Arizona policymakers have decided that Arizona children are not merely funding units for their local school districts. Arizona families can use ESAs to choose the schools that are the best fit for the interests and aspirations of their children.
Arizona school districts have never had as much money as they have now, enough apparently to prioritize trips to California and perks for superintendents. If Deer Valley Unified officials hope to gain the enrollment of the thousands of resident students who have chosen to pursue their education elsewhere, a clear path forward would be to prioritize their funding.
Purchasing classroom supplies for teachers would be a great first step.
Matthew Ladner is a Senior Advisor for education policy implementation and Jason Bedrick is a Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy.
There is a heavy sadness that has swept the nation. Society is grieving to a level not seen since the 1960s. Earlier this month, America suffered an unspeakable loss. Charlie Kirk was in the middle of doing what he loved, talking to college students about the traditional American values that have made this nation a beacon of hope for millions of people the past 250 years: God, family, and country. And then he was abruptly taken from us. Kirk was singular, indispensable, and irreplaceable. America will not be the same without him. It will take multitudes of people to fill the void.
Wednesday, September 10, 2025, will forever be noted in history as a dark day where evil in its truest form was on full display. Charlie Kirk was assassinated in cold blood by a cowardly terrorist who sought to permanently silence someone he vehemently disagreed with. Americans across all political persuasions will always remember the moment in time they heard about the shooting on the campus of Utah Valley University and the flurry of information leading up to and past the time of Kirk’s passing.
I, for one, will never forget where I was or what I was doing when I heard the horrible news. I was filled with shock, disbelief, and heartbreak. The feeling was amplified by the like-minded voices of millions of individuals across the country who had in some way been influenced by him and felt a personal relationship.
It is no wonder so many people feel a heavy weight for the abrupt loss. His talent and intelligence were not easily parallelled. It is mind boggling what he accomplished in his short lifetime. As a teenager, he followed his dream to start a grassroots organization from his parents’ garage. He defied the odds and naysayers to grow Turning Point into a renowned international organization that would influence the course of American history across several elections.
Throughout his mission, Charlie Kirk became a trusted and influential confidant and advisor to several of our country’s leaders—most notably President Donald J. Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance. Despite his quick rise to fame and influence, however, Kirk never forgot his humble roots. He always had time for the young people who flocked to his organization, seeking to raise up an army of thoughtful, inspired men and women who would win back the values that made America into the greatest nation on our planet. They followed him, in part because he offered hope for a happy way to live.
Thanks to Kirk’s tireless and determined efforts, a marked change started happening with the youth. The current generation of Americans was bucking the trend of the woke indoctrination so prevalent in society. The left’s stranglehold on the youth across the nation was fading. For the first time in years the younger generation was trending more conservative. His efforts affected not only culture but politics, most notably the most recent presidential campaign, where Trump made a historic comeback. He was truly a public servant.
Charlie put others—and his nation—above himself. He loved the country that had given him the limitless opportunity to pursue his dreams, and he sought to make her a better place for his children and all those who would follow in his footsteps.
We know that full justice for Charlie will not happen in this lifetime. But we must seek as much justice as possible. That includes full prosecution of the assassin. But that is not enough. Kirk was targeted because he was influencing and changing the hearts and minds of millions of people, especially the youth. We must now take on the mantle and teach the traditional values of America to the youth. It will take thousands of people to compensate for Charlie’s immense talent. But justice demands it.
The pain in our hearts over this great loss reminds us to press forward and build our resolve to finish what Charlie has started. It is up to us to make sure his legacy continues. I think President Abraham Lincoln put it best when he said, “It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is … for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain.”
Warren Petersen is the President of the Arizona State Senate and represents Legislative District 14.
I had the privilege of attending Charlie Kirk’s memorial service, seated not far from the stage. To say that it was “moving”, would be an enormous understatement. Nearly 100,000 gathered in Arizona to grieve the loss of a husband, friend, and Christian leader who was gunned down in cold blood. The speeches were heartfelt. The tributes were moving. But the moment that shook the arena came when Erika Kirk, through tears, stood and forgave her husband’s killer.
The cameras captured her words — “I forgive him” — and then panned to the crowd. In that instant, as Erika spoke the hardest words a widow could speak and the audience along with millions of people watching online, witnessed a miracle of grace. (watch: Erika forgives Charlie’s murderer)
She went on to say: “Because that is what Christ did and what Charlie would do. The answer to hate is not hate. The answer we know from the gospel is love and always love”.
Forgiveness in the Heart, Justice in the Courts
This is where many stumble and could fall into a ditch on either side of the road. Forgiveness, especially in the wake of horrendous crime, is often misunderstood. People confuse forgiveness in the heart with the duties of the civil magistrate. Some imagine that forgiveness means the courts should show leniency, or that the murderer should go free. Others, on the opposite extreme, think forgiveness is weak and that personal vengeance would be a fitting response to such evil.
The truth of Scripture is a narrow road between them.
In the heart, the Christian lays down vengeance, refuses to be mastered by bitterness, and prays for the offender to repent and be reconciled to God.
In the state, the magistrate must still do its God-given duty (Romans 13:4, 1 Peter 2:14) to punish evil proportionately and protect the innocent.
To collapse these callings into one is to miss God’s design. Magistrates are not commanded to forgive instead of punishing. And individuals are forbidden from taking vengeance into their own hands. Erika’s testimony showed the balance: forgiveness from the heart, while leaving justice to God and His appointed servants.
A Public Witness
When Erika forgave, she was not excusing the crime, nor was she calling for the courts to drop their duty. She was releasing vengeance into God’s hands while pointing to the cross of Christ, where all true forgiveness begins. It was not weakness. It was strength clothed in tears.
Fernando Rangel, a friend and member of our organization, was in the audience. The cameras caught him rising to his feet, emotion in his eyes as he applauded Erika’s words. As we rode home together that evening, he said, “That moment was the highlight of the entire memorial service.”
And it wasn’t only Erika. One after another, speakers pointed to Christ and the Bible that day — including members of the President’s cabinet. Fernando summed it up well: “I think we just witnessed something historical.”
As we reflected on that moment, we agreed that Erika’s forgiveness embodied the two greatest commandments — loving God by obeying His Word, and loving neighbor by pointing to the gospel. Her words reminded us why our organization has partnered with TPUSA Faith and TP Action: to impact the culture by pointing to Christ, while also urging lawmakers to uphold justice and protect the innocent. On that day, both truths stood side by side.
Erika’s act matters not just personally, but nationally. At a time when even Congress could not unite even to honor a slain American — Republicans voting unanimously YES, while 58 Democrats voted NO, and dozens more avoided making a choice — Erika’s testimony lifted the conversation above partisanship and into eternal truth.
The Hardest Thing
Ultimately, forgiveness requires a miracle. By nature, we want revenge. By instinct, we want the offender to hurt as much as we hurt. Erika’s words were not natural; they were supernatural. It is highly likely that the hardest thing she’s ever had to do was trust God in this tragic situation. But she knows that God will work all things together for good to those who love Him and are called according to His purpose (Romans 8:28).
Forgiveness does not mean justice will not be done. Forgiveness means Erika refuses to let hatred master her heart. It means she entrusts vengeance to God, justice to the courts, and her husband’s legacy to Christ.
The Way Forward
America must learn again the difference between vengeance and justice, between forgiveness and excusing evil. If magistrates “forgive” by refusing to punish, they become unjust. If individuals take vengeance into their own hands, they usurp God’s role. But when a Christian forgives from the heart while still affirming the need for justice, the world sees something entirely different: God’s law and gospel on display.
Charlie Kirk spent his life calling people to truth and liberty. At his memorial, Erika Kirk showed the world the deepest truth and the highest liberty: the freedom of a heart released from vengeance because Christ has forgiven her.
In that moment, America witnessed something greater than politics — the power of the gospel to free sinners, heal wounds, and keep a soul anchored even in unspeakable loss.
Taxpayer-funded resources should not be used to tilt the scales of any election. This isn’t a difficult concept to understand. So, when Arizona State University (ASU) and PBS were exposed for colluding to help Katie Hobbs in the 2022 governor’s race against Kari Lake, we demanded accountability. We called on Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes and Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell to launch a full investigation. After all, Arizona law is clear that universities must remain impartial and neutral in election-related activities.
In a ridiculous decision, both Mayes and Mitchell refused to take action on our complaint. But this battle is far from over.
The Illegal Use of Public Funds
This all began back in 2022 when Katie Hobbs was ducking just about everyone during her campaign for governor, most especially Kari Lake. It culminated in Hobbs’ refusal to debate Lake on Arizona PBS. From there, the process should’ve been simple. According to long-standing Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission (AZCCEC) rules, Kari Lake should have been provided with airtime, and the AZCCEC planned to do just that. But hours before Lake’s interview was scheduled to take place, the AZCCEC learned that Arizona PBS went behind their back to schedule an exclusive interview with Katie Hobbs—moving them to postpone Lake’s interview.
Then, last month, a series of emails came to light revealing that ASU leaders including President Michael Crow, former Arizona Republic publisher Mi-Ai Parrish, and Arizona PBS leaders allegedly colluded to jettison the debate rules to help Hobbs. This was a blatant and illegal use of taxpayer funds, and that’s why we filed a Hatch Act complaint with Mayes and Mitchell against ASU. But in a shocking and shameful decision, both decided against taking action…
A young Christian man named Charlie Kirk was shot—simply for speaking his mind. A husband, a father, a voice for the next generation. Lord, why did it happen this way? How dare they steal the breath from a faithful man?
Charlie was not a violent agitator, not a man bent on tearing down, but one who stirred the hearts of the young. He spoke boldly where others remained silent, reminding his peers that they were created for more. He gave them courage. And for that, he was silenced.
“How dare they?” we ask. Indeed. Yet the truth is more sobering: they dare because of the cultural environment we now live in—an environment shaped, in part, by radical ideologies that have seeped into our schools, our politics, and even our everyday conversations. And right here in Scottsdale, that environment has been nurtured by leaders like Superintendent Menzel, current and former board members, and others who have steered the Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) away from academic excellence and into ideological experiments.
The Shift Away from Education
SUSD leaders claim to promote critical thinking, yet what they push is a one-sided agenda built on misinformation and half-truths. Instead of focusing on the basics—reading, writing, mathematics, science—SUSD has embraced policies that undermine families and confuse students. Here are a few examples:
Telling children they can change their gender without parental involvement.
Promoting Social Emotional Learning (SEL) in place of foundational academics.
Teaching that America is a fundamentally racist nation.
Undermining parental rights while telling families to “trust the experts.”
Blocking parents from curriculum discussions while approving controversial materials, sometimes in violation of state law.
Replacing qualified teachers with social workers and counselors.
Conducting constant student surveys on mental health, sowing confusion rather than providing clarity.
This is not the recipe for a high-achieving school district. It is the foundation of a crisis.
The Failed Promise of Social Emotional Learning
Superintendent Menzel and his allies argue that focusing on student “emotional well-being” will, in turn, unlock academic achievement. This theory, rooted in social-emotional learning, posits that removing a child’s psychological “barriers” will allow them to thrive in the classroom.
But does it work? The evidence suggests otherwise. Independent researchers, particularly outside the U.S. educational establishment, have found little to no link between widespread, non-targeted mental health interventions and improved academic outcomes. In fact, research shows these programs may worsen student mental health.
In medicine, the term for this is iatrogenic harm: unintended damage caused by treatments meant to heal. In mental health, it refers to harm that arises from interventions that destabilize rather than stabilize. The endless surveys, the focus on fragility rather than resilience, and the substitution of therapy for instruction can actually make students more anxious, less confident, and less academically capable.
If SUSD’s policies worked, our students would be excelling. Instead, they are struggling.
The Numbers Don’t Lie
Let’s look at the hard data under Menzel’s leadership.
Instructional spending: Down to 54.4% in 2024, compared to 54.6% in 2023, and trending toward a historic low. Over the past five years, instructional spending has dropped 1.7%.
Student support spending: Up 2.6% over the past 5-year period.
Administrative spending: 15% higher per student than peer districts.
Enrollment: Down 8.4% over the past 5-year period.
Staffing: In FY24, the district cut 59 instructional positions but added 71 student support staff and 44 administrative positions.
Test scores: Math proficiency fell from 57% in 2019 to 55% in 2024. Science dropped from 64% to 41%. English Language Arts rose slightly, from 56% to 61%, but overall performance represents a 12% decline since 2019.
So: fewer teachers, lower academic spending, higher administrative costs, declining enrollment, and worse performance.
SUSD recently held its second mental health fair and sponsored a suicide prevention event. After 125 years of SUSD history, why is it only now that we need districtwide events to address student mental health and suicide? Could it be that the very programs meant to fix mental health are feeding the crisis?
The Culture War in the Classroom
The failures of SUSD are not isolated. They are part of a broader cultural radicalization. Across the nation, schools are less focused on knowledge and more focused on ideology. Students are taught to distrust their parents, question their identity, and view their country as irredeemably broken.
We see the results not only in academic decline but also in growing instability—emotional, social, and even violent.
This instability was on display here in Scottsdale when conservative board member Carine Werner was allegedly overheard making a disparaging comment, and leftist groups who celebrated Charlie Kirk’s death, seemingly collaborated to paint her in a bad light. Protesters immediately called for her resignation, parading signs that read “Protect Children: Werner Must Resign,” and “Ban Bigots, Not Books.”
But labeling Werner “ignorant” or “bigoted” ignores her record. As a state senator, she championed laws to make schools safer from predators and supported pay raises for law enforcement. As a board member, she pushed to remove sexually explicit material from schools, opposed social studies curricula that included anti-police rhetoric and glorified activism over academics, fought for stronger school security, introduced a common-sense policy that kept boys out of the girls’ bathroom, and even stood up to a transportation contractor after one of its employees sexually assaulted a student.
That’s not bigotry. That’s leadership.
The Consequences of Demonization
So how did we get here, where speaking truth—or even raising common-sense concerns—can cost you your reputation, your job, or even your life?
We’ve been told the problem is “radicalization on the dark web.” But you don’t need the dark web. Just watch mainstream media or scroll social media. From the highest levels of government on down, leaders tell us anyone who disagrees is a racist, a fascist, or a threat to democracy. Politicians openly encourage people to “get in their faces” and drive dissenters out of public life.
For someone already struggling with confusion, addiction, or emotional instability, this narrative can justify hostility—even violence—against those who dare to think differently.
That’s what happened to Charlie. He stood for free dialogue, for open exchange of ideas—values once core to American identity. For that, he was killed.
Diversity of Thought—or the Illusion of It
SUSD claims to celebrate diversity. But it is not diversity of thought. Instead, there is one sanctioned narrative: accept it, or be labeled hateful. We are told tolerance is a virtue, yet intolerance is practiced against anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy.
We cannot allow this inversion of truth. Lies are not compassion. Half-truths are not education. And intolerance cannot be the foundation of a healthy community.
A Call to Parents
Superintendent Menzel and the SUSD Governing Board may not be directly responsible for Charlie’s death in Utah, but their policies contribute to the kind of environment where such tragedies become possible.
Parents, it is time to wake up. Our children are not experiments. Our schools are not laboratories for ideological reprogramming. The mission of education must return to the basics: truth, knowledge, critical thinking, and resilience.
We must demand accountability from school leaders. We must replace ideologically driven programs with proven academic strategies. We must protect our children—not only from physical threats but also from the corrosive cultural forces undermining their mental, emotional, and intellectual well-being.
Charlie’s voice has been silenced. But ours has not. If we remain quiet, more voices will be lost. If we speak boldly—as he did—we can reclaim truth, restore education, and protect the next generation.
The question is: will we dare?
Mike Bengert is a husband, father, grandfather, and Scottsdale resident advocating for quality education in SUSD for over 30 years.
I believe we’re entering a new era in America—one rooted in faith, honest communication, and a reckoning with the cultural shifts of the last decade. When Obama promised “change,” a lot did change. The culture wars were beginning. Under Trump, I saw clearly how far things had shifted.
Growing up during the Clinton and Bush years, I never experienced anything like what I felt today at Charlie Kirk’s memorial. The closest I can compare it to is the unity after 9/11, when President Bush rose to the occasion and brought the country together. That moment felt patriotic and spiritual, but it quickly turned into years of war, driven more by geopolitical motives than true healing.
I’ve always viewed the 1980s/90s revival era as a defining chapter in American politics. My generation saw how politicians—especially Republicans—learned to use evangelical faith as a tool. Democrats, or “the Left,” recognized their power and worked to undermine it. I believe there was a deliberate effort to expose evangelical leaders’ weaknesses—whether through moral failings, wealth, or ego. Social media amplified their downfall, turning disappointment into widespread cynicism.
As social media grew, so did the divide. When Obama ran for president, tech and media backed him heavily. California became the epicenter of progress, and Republicans fell behind. That’s when the term “RINO” started to mean something to me—they represented the failure to adapt. In a world driven by innovation, being labeled “traditional” felt like being left out.
I lived in Palo Alto during the tech boom and witnessed global change firsthand. Managing operations at the Four Seasons Silicon Valley, I served world leaders, tech giants, and political insiders. I personally took care of Hillary Clinton and her team during private meetings with Apple, Google, and Facebook—meetings the public never saw. I met John Kerry, Saudi royalty, and liberal power brokers. But I rarely saw conservative or Christian-backed leaders in those rooms. They weren’t part of the conversation.
I made friends with many of these influential people. They weren’t biased; they were simply engaged by one side. That absence made me question the relevance of the faith and political institutions I grew up with. The party I was raised in, and the church I trusted, felt ideologically broken and behind the times.
In short, I watched the leaders of my youth fall, the institutions I believed in lose influence, and the movement I once trusted become disconnected from the future. Today, I’m hopeful—but only if we’re willing to confront the past honestly and move forward with clarity, unity, and purpose.
I saw early on how tech’s influence would spread across the country. As social media began highlighting the failures of evangelical leaders, I felt increasingly isolated. The revival era of the ’80s and ’90s had let us down—our leaders fell morally, and their failures were broadcast everywhere. Those who remained, like Franklin Graham, were respected but felt distant and out of touch.
The Obama years deepened that divide. Tech firms pushed for global diversity, and their founders sparked a capitalist renaissance not seen since the days of Carnegie. The Left’s platform aligned perfectly with what tech needed: inclusion, global talent, and unchecked influence. Social media reshaped the narrative and slowly eroded the moral and spiritual foundation I grew up with.
After Trump’s first term, the attacks intensified. He was up against tech giants, RINOs who didn’t understand the fight, and Democrats who piled on. Despite his wealth and boldness, he couldn’t win. Watching him get crushed daily felt like déjà vu—we won, but somehow still lost. It was disheartening. If Trump couldn’t break through, maybe no one could. My friends and I went quiet. We didn’t abandon our values—we just felt like America had moved on without us.
The Biden years were another blow. Faith leaders were either gone or silenced. The Left dominated social media, and figures like “The Squad” rose to power. Pelosi held the reins, and the Right couldn’t keep up online. That weakness, I believe, opened the door to absurdities like social gender ideologies. Donors like Soros understood the power of revival and worked to widen the cultural divide. The trans movement, while ideologically complex, became financially lucrative for the right people. The Left controlled through chaos—Antifa, BLM riots—while tech platforms promoted the disruption.
I internalized all of it. The noise, the division, the silence from our side—they wore me down. But today changed everything.
In the midst of all this chaos, Charlie Kirk stood alone. He was the only warrior left who truly represented us—those of us who had stayed silent. Charlie was the leader Boomers had hoped for. He did everything right. He gave them hope that their revival wasn’t in vain. He visited college campuses, places often considered lost causes, and transformed Gen Z through logic, love, and courage. He faced threats and hostility, but he reignited the heart of a movement that had gone quiet.
Charlie gave Gen Z belief, gave Millennials hope, and reassured Boomers that their fight for freedom wasn’t wasted. Today, I saw thousands worship, leaders speak about faith and purpose, and an arena filled with people who were genuinely moved. I’ve been to many political events—most felt staged. This one didn’t. Everyone believed Charlie was there for them personally. And he was.
I never felt called to politics or Turning Point. My path has been business, and I believe that’s where I’m meant to be in this moment. My father has balanced both worlds with grace, and I hope to learn from him. My sister has played a key role in supporting Turning Point’s most influential figures. While I wasn’t involved, I’m grateful to them for giving me a seat at today’s event—an event that I believe will shape generations.
What I witnessed today is what my parents, aunts, and uncles described from their youth. Boomers might call it a revival. My generation and Gen X might call it a turning point. We have high hopes that this time, it’s real.
We heard the most powerful voices in America say they won’t let Charlie’s legacy die. If they mean it, and if Gen Z keeps the momentum, Boomers support it, and Millennials finally engage, we could see a transformation unlike anything this country has ever known.
Charlie was our champion. If his message multiplies, America will change. Based on what I saw today, I believe it can happen—and I truly hope it does.
David Farah, a Pepperdine grad, has a partial ownership stake in a growing business in the Phoenix Valley. His father, Barry Farah, is an early donor to Turning Point USA and had an eleven-year friendship with Charlie Kirk. David grew up in a Christian conservative home.
