Mr. Webb: 0:00

What is the 1619 Project? How does it reinterpret American history in a racist light, and how can we tell if we're teaching and learning factual information or merely a biased interpretation? Welcome to The Conservative Classroom, where we're teaching the truth and preserving our values. I'm your host, Mr. Webb, and I'm glad you're here. This podcast is a haven for conservative educators, parents and patriots like you, who believe in the importance of free speech, traditional values and education without indoctrination. Each week, we dive into issues that are plaguing our education system and keeping you up at night. In each episode, we offer common sense ideas to improve education in our classrooms and communities. You may feel like you're the last conservative educator or parent, but I want you to know that you are not alone. By the way, if you like what you hear today, please share this podcast with a like-minded educator, parent or patriot. Together, we can teach the truth and preserve our values.

Mr. Webb: 1:17

In today's episode, I'm joined by a couple of teachers who have been on the podcast before. They're experts in teaching the truth using primary source documents, and together we'll discuss the 1619 Project, an American history curriculum that teaches that America was built on racism. Now let's get started. Today, I'm excited to welcome two special guests to the conservative classroom, mr Ted Lamb and Mr Patrick Garrison. They have both been on the podcast before separately, but we get the pleasure of having them both on today to talk about the 1619 Project. And I didn't tell you guys this, but this is a special episode for me. And I didn't tell you guys this, but this is a special episode for me this marks the 52nd straight weekly podcast episode. So this is. The Conservative Classroom was born 52 weeks ago, so we're a year old.

Mr. Webb: 2:22

I specifically wanted you guys on here because you were both on separately early and those episodes were great and I thought, man, if I can have these guys we talked about doing an episode together but the timing of it I thought, okay, I've got to get this together and get this out. So it's actually going to be the 52nd episode.

Patrick Garrison: 2:44

That's awesome.

Mr. Webb: 2:45

Cool. So for folks maybe that didn't hear the episode that you guys were on separately, just give us a quick 30-second elevator speech about who you are, what you're doing and why we should listen to you about US history. Ted, you want to go first?

Ted Lamb: 3:09

Sure, my name is Ted Lamb. I'm a formal two-term school board member. I am currently a public school teacher, nearing almost 30 years. I teach American history and I teach using primary sources, and the reason why I think it would be good to hear not that I'm a self-proclaimed expert or anything like that. I hear and I know that everything that is being talked about in this episode and other episodes on this podcast is absolutely correct.

Mr. Webb: 3:54

Thank you. Patrick?

Patrick Garrison: 3:56

All right. So I teach history in a high school in New York. I am also the founder and president of the True Corrective and I'm sure we'll have other opportunities to talk about what that is. But on the subject of why you should listen to anything I say, I'm going to say that you should not listen to what I say, and here's what I mean by that.

Patrick Garrison: 4:22

The whole point of what we do with the true corrective is to inform you and your children parents and their children so you can arrive at certain, at conclusions, so you can learn how to, to develop that skill of independently discovering truth, of independently discovering truth. And so we don't even tell you what to think or believe, or even give too many of our interpretations of history. What we want to do is we focus on what Ted mentioned primary sources so you have the opportunity to see the truth on your own. So we often say at the True Corrective don't just listen to what we say, because then that makes us no better than all the other sources out there that are telling you what to think. Just take the material that we have and discover the truth on your own.

Mr. Webb: 5:21

And that's one thing I love about you guys is your use of primary source documents. It's kind of hard to dispute when you're going back to the original source, which brings us to the 1619 Project, and I'll let you guys explain to our listeners what the 1619 Project is. For the folks that maybe haven't heard of it or don't know what it is. I know there's a lot of teachers and parents out there who have heard of it and some of them are dealing with it being taught right now. But, in overview, the 1619 Project was launched by New York Times Magazine in 2019, and it aims to reframe American history. Would you guys say that's an accurate explanation of it? That's word for word from what they wrote, right? One of the biggest things that jumps out at me is that America started in 1619 on the backs of slaves, or basically when the first slaves came over to Jamestown.

Patrick Garrison: 6:41

Is that correct? Yeah, do either of you guys mind if I read a couple quotes from the 1619 Project magazine? No, that sounds good. So here's just a couple. Some of them are out of context, but you'll get the point very quickly. What if we were to tell you that this fact that the United States was founded in 1776, which is taught in all our schools and unanimously celebrated every 4th of July, what if we told you that this fact is wrong and that the country's true birth date, the moment that it's defining contradictions came into the world, was in late August of 1619. Was in late August of 1619. Another quote out of slavery, out of slavery grew nearly everything that has truly made America exceptional. And like you said, here's another quote. Like you had said, joey, the goal of the 1619 Project is to reframe American history. And then one more the United States are. Oh, here it is. Our founding ideals of liberty and equality were false when they were written.

Ted Lamb: 7:53

So, if you don't mind, I'd love to respond to what Patrick just said. No, that'd be great. Oh, first off, let's just be honest, and we don't even have to be very hard to be objective here. The founding of this nation would have been on, I mean, if we wanted to be technical and an obsessive, compulsive history teachers which I'm not but close you could say July 2nd, 1776, when you had the official vote on the Declaration of Independence. But I'll stay with July 4th. Not a big deal with that, but that is when the founding of this nation was.

Ted Lamb: 8:37

As far as colonization of the English, that would be 1607, founding of Jamestown of the English, that would be 1607, founding of Jamestown.

Ted Lamb: 8:52

When you start, it's interesting they say 1619, the first beginning parts of the first slaves, when actually those individuals that came over at that time, the colonies themselves that were setting up and taking more of the Massachusetts lead, they did not want slavery here, more of the Massachusetts lead, they did not want slavery here. And so those individuals that came over, they were actually viewed as indentured servants, just like everyone else that came over Then here. Eventually in time then that changed over. But then to say that everything from this time period of 1619 was all rooted in slavery and oppression and so forth. I could point out hundreds of examples of primary sources and of individuals, and we do it on History Moments with Ted every February. Instead of it being African American History Month, we do Black Patriot Month, Individual after individual after individual that clearly says and shows in the primary source record their own words. That goes completely against what is said there by the 1619 Project that came up with the 1619 project.

Mr. Webb: 10:09

How can they, where are they getting their information and how is it that they can conveniently ignore so many primary source documents? And maybe that's a question we can't answer, but what do you guys think?

Ted Lamb: 10:21

well, I, I think you, I think we can answer it. It's just like anything else. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe I'm giving a little more credence than what I should, but you can take a primary source document and you can pick and choose what you want to take out of it and then use that for your own agenda or your political the glasses that you're using. For example, I did this thing with my own kids at school.

Ted Lamb: 10:54

If you look at the Journal of Christopher Columbus, you can pick and choose certain quotes out of there that can make him look like he was evil there. That can make him look like he was evil, but unless you actually read the full context of those very same things, you would not know that he was very different than actually what they want you to say. It is based upon a bias and an agenda of what they are wanting. A lot of this is rooted into things such as the early 1900s when it comes to the Frankfurt School and socialism. It's a divisionary tactic and they've done quite well with it.

Patrick Garrison: 11:36

The other thing I want to add to that is that the 1619 Project is not a work of history. It's not even meant to be a work of history. It's not trying to teach Americans or students anything about history. What it's attempting to do is teach a particular interpretation of history. So I feel, like all of the discussions that were had early on about where it's factually incorrect, I felt like those were not hitting the mark, that they were kind of looking in the wrong direction, because the 1619 Project is not trying to teach history. It's not trying to teach about slavery. What it's trying to teach is a particular narrative and ideology about America.

Mr. Webb: 12:23

That's correct and what is that narrative?

Ted Lamb: 12:30

That narrative, and then, of course, patrick can even add even onto this as well. That narrative is rooted into a concept of division and divisiveness. It wants to paint that the institutions of America, from its founding documents to its well, its institutions, from the government system, the education system, everything about America is rooted in an inherent racism, and so that is the picture and that is what they are completely wanting to paint, because again and we saw this from many founding fathers as well as from the first and second generation early 1800s that always said that america, if it ever was to fall, it would never be able to fall from an eye, but it would only fall from within, that we would be the only ones that be able to ourselves. That is exactly what the 1619 project does with regards to. It's just one tool of many that others have tried to put in place to destroy us, to take down a republic.

Mr. Webb: 13:45

And that's exactly the words you use there inherently racist. That's what I was hoping to bring out, because that's what it seems to me that we're inherently racist. Go ahead, patrick.

Patrick Garrison: 14:01

Well, I was just going to say that I could go on about this forever.

Patrick Garrison: 14:07

I know we don't have forever, but I certainly could.

Patrick Garrison: 14:09

So, like Ted was saying, what they seek to do is place and they use this phrase and this phrasing all the time.

Patrick Garrison: 14:19

They seek to place slavery at the very center of what our country is, at the heart of who we are as a people. So, instead of all those foundational shared values and principles that exist in our founding documents, that are literally part of what we brought into the world, to start moving into societies and civilizations that we, that we began here, instead of those, they want us to see slavery as the foundation, and that ultimately degrades and slanders and maligns our actual foundations. And, honestly, that's what they want. They want us to believe those things about our actual foundations, like Ted was saying, that our actual foundations are racist, white supremacists and evil. They want us to believe those things because that's what they believe about our foundations. It's very normal for someone who has a certain ideology to want to spread that and share it, and so when they, when they spread and share that ideology, it's because they believe it and they want the rest of us to feel the same way.

Mr. Webb: 15:39

Now correct me if I'm wrong here, but England had slaves. So why, if England had slaves, why would we want our independence so that we could have slavery if we already had slavery? That's something that existed before America.

Patrick Garrison: 16:06

Yeah, they were forced to remove that part of the of what they had written because that was one of their key tenets at first was that the American Revolution was fought in order to maintain slavery. They had to change that because they were. Everybody threw the book at them about that and that's completely factually incorrect, so they had to change that.

Ted Lamb: 16:31

And I would go one step further to even show that there were multiple times in the colonies especially even like, even from right here from Virginia, that where we tried to petition the crown that we did not want it, but the crown was heavily indebted to the London Company. Who guess what One of their top franchises or business models were? It was slavery models were. It was slavery.

Ted Lamb: 17:07

Thomas Jefferson was known for actually defending runaway slaves to try to get them their freedom. Also too and I think this is what Patrick was alluding to as well Thomas Jefferson, when he initially wrote the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, he was actually wanting to call for an end of the whole deal, for whatever reason. We had two colonies that didn't go along with that. But if you look at the Articles of Association of 1774, all of the colonies all 13 were in agreement that you know we had to do away with this whole business of it, not only just slavery itself, but it's industry, it's transportation, all of it Interesting. What happened in that two years, but just those couple of things alone clearly shows that there's holes that can be made into the 1619 Project.

Mr. Webb: 17:59

And I suppose that was conveniently left out of the 1619 Project, and I suppose that was conveniently left out of the 1619 Project.

Patrick Garrison: 18:06

Well, again, it's not supposed to teach history. They're not trying to teach anybody history, they're trying to teach a narrative. Can I expand for a little bit on what Ted said? This is something that I think, first of all, 99% of Americans don't know. I'm certain of that, and probably another you know, 50% of teachers don't know it either that, like Ted was saying, the colonies tried desperately to stop the slave trade.

Patrick Garrison: 18:36

Before we became the United States in 1789, when the Constitution became law, they petitioned the king, they passed laws within the colonies to end slavery, but all of them were shot down and vetoed by the royal governors who answered to the king. The royal governors were not elected, they answered directly to the king. So if the king and London said, no, you can't raise this import tax, this duty on slavery, because it would slow it down and we need it to make money and you can't do that, then it would get shot down. And this started very early. As early as 1728, virginia was trying to raise the duty on slaves being imported in order to stop the importation, but the crown just would not allow it.

Mr. Webb: 19:28

Do you guys know how prevalent the 1619 Project is as far as its spread? As it's spread, it's fairly new, obviously, if it just was just written in 2019.

Patrick Garrison: 19:50

Well, I looked it up and there aren't any hard numbers because initially, when they wrote the 1619 Project curriculum, they were posting proudly how many school districts and how many schools had adopted it, but then they stopped. They stopped doing that. I guess there was too much pushback. So I found an article in 2020 that said over four and a half thousand schools had adopted it. That's a ridiculous amount of schools. And we don't have any idea what the number is now.

Mr. Webb: 20:25

And that was in 2020.

Patrick Garrison: 20:27

Yeah.

Ted Lamb: 20:27

Okay, yeah, and I would add to that, even if school divisions has not adopted the full curriculum, you could pick up an actual history textbook for high school in many cases and you see components and elements already written into the textbook on several of these different topics that the 1619 espouses.

Mr. Webb: 21:00

That's a great point, ted. That's something else I was curious about. So it's good to hear, it's good to hear from you on that.

Patrick Garrison: 21:08

Can I? Can I add to that? Sure, well, I just wanted to say I mean Ted's right more than 100 percent. I mean that's actually the entire point, point. And there's a part of me that feels like we're having the wrong discussion when we talk about the 1619 Project, because that is just a vehicle for their ideologies. It could be in any vehicle and it is in any vehicle. It's not just in schools. These ideologies are in our books, in our films, they're in our television cartoons that our kids watch. Many of us saw the excerpts from this Disney show that was promoting all of this stuff, this cartoon, and so it's really everywhere in the society. And when we focus on the 1619 Project, it kind of gives us the feeling that if we were by some chance to be able to get every state in the union to pass a law to ban the teaching of the 1619 Project in schools, we would not solve the problem. The problem is that, like Ted said, these ideologies are everywhere. They're being pushed in in everything.

Mr. Webb: 22:18

Right, and it would be like critical race theory thing. Right, and it would be like critical race theory. It's not called critical race theory in many of the schools that are pushing some of that ideology. So even if you could quote unquote outlaw teaching the 1619 project, it would be easy to slip in some of the ideologies and just not call it that. So you're right, that wouldn't work either.

Patrick Garrison: 22:47

And I think you guys all know, as we're all teachers, you know that it really doesn't matter what it says in the curriculum. When that door closes, that teacher is God and they teach whatever they want.

Ted Lamb: 23:01

And that is so true. I just uh, last week I'm sitting, um, in my in my room and I'm listening and, um, and I could hear some of the stuff uh being put out there, um, in lessons, and I was like man, oh man, it's just crazy, because it's not balanced. You know, there was no. It wasn't being presented in a way that you had a full picture of the topic. You know, do you understand what I'm saying? There was only this kind of sl topic. Do you understand what I'm saying? There was only this kind of slant. America is inherently evil, and here is why and nothing else. And I was like, wow, what are we doing?

Mr. Webb: 23:53

On the teacher side of things. Teachers that want to avoid this, they can use primary source documents, like you guys are doing. What about? And I guess the problem with that is, is that teachers that want to push a narrative they won't use primary source documents. So, yeah, it's great to use primary source documents, but what for a parent or a teacher out there who maybe knows this sort of thing is being taught in their school? What can they do? What can they look for to first recognize that this is being taught, but secondly, what can they do about it?

Patrick Garrison: 24:43

Well, I'm not going to use this opportunity to promote what we do at the True Corrective, but you did really tee me up for that. So that's literally exactly what we do. What we do is provide parents with the information to counter and combat those those kind of ideologies and narratives that are being pushed on their children, because you can't do anything about what the teacher is going to teach. So the best the parents can do is be able to counter it before those kind of things take hold and twist up their kids heads. Things take hold and twist up their kids' heads, so we give them the material that directly combats the kinds of things that are coming out of their child's classroom. And if it's not coming out of your child's classroom, the material then gives them a grounding and an ability not to be fooled and manipulated by someone else later be fooled and manipulated by someone else later.

Ted Lamb: 25:43

And one thing that I do with my classroom and I would encourage this with any teacher. Well, first off, as a teacher, I think we now live in a day and time to where I don't think it would be too unreasonable to question everything that you're reading in a textbook. The problem, of course, teachers has is that they say, well, I have a curriculum to cover because of a state-mandated test. Well, so do I, but that doesn't mean that you cannot go beyond what that curriculum is saying. An example many times a curriculum might say that for the test, the state test you might ask who's the author of the Declaration of Independence? You know A, b, c or D. One of those is Thomas Jefferson, you know. That doesn't mean that you can't go deeper with what that document means. I would highly recommend that you go to the dictionary that was used at that time that the founding fathers would have used. The words and vocabulary that they've used in those founding documents would be tied to the dictionary of that day that had the definitions, and that dictionary is the Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary. That's what the founding fathers, the terms that they used, those would have been the definitions that they would have used for our founding documents itself. You can find primary sources. I don't know the full website, but if you look it up it's avalonedu, I think it's through Yale. You can find a primary source document from ancient history all the way up to currently mostly American history.

Ted Lamb: 27:32

Teachers need to start questioning and researching themselves. Anytime I present a lesson, what I try to do is, first off, I try to put myself out of it, because I don't think a teacher should be in any way, implicitly or explicitly, implying their political views of any such. But I allow for these students to get both sides of what is being said out here, the primary source document, as well as what they may hear from TV, society or just what they read in a textbook. And we go from there and that conversation. It stimulates the mind, where even my kids the highest compliment they give me is. They say oh, you're making my brain hurt. Well, I hope so, because you've probably haven't had to think about these things until you've gotten into my classroom, and so also, too, teachers haven't had to think about these things either. It's high time that we do.

Mr. Webb: 28:40

And you mentioned that Avalon link on the previous episode you were on. You mentioned that and I linked it in the show notes. I'll make sure and link that in the show notes as well as the True Corrective website also. So what is the harm? I mean, we've talked about how the 1619 Project is, I guess, inaccurate and then, like Patrick pointed out, it's really an interpretation of history and we agree it's biased and it's pushing racial division. What is the harm in that?

Patrick Garrison: 29:22

So I would say that the harm is is total, and, and what I mean by that is so societies are bound together by a set of values and principles, a common set of shared values and principles, and that's what binds people together, it's what gives them their, their duties and responsibilities that they have to each other, to their society. It tethers them to their society, and what this whole movement, whether it's 1619 Project or CRT, et cetera, what it's trying to do, is replace our actual foundational values and principles with this new set that is based on grievance, anger and resentment, and those things do not bind people together. Those values and principles are not binding or those are separating. Those are what tear people apart. This teaches us to hate ourselves and to hate each other and to hate our country, and so I think, I think the effect of, of preaching this, of this kind of thing, and teaching this is is, like I said, it's total. It, it, it.

Ted Lamb: 30:36

It leads to the destruction of any society and I would go even and also say too, along with that is I mean, it's it's own premise, as you've pointed out here um, joy is the fact that, um, it's not teaching history, but it's teaching a mindset or a philosophy.

Ted Lamb: 31:00

But that's the problem. Many people will look at it, read it and take it as truthful, as accurate, when it's not at all. So that's the real problem with this. And I mean, goodness sakes, you add in you mentioned critical race theory, which is now called culturally responsive teaching. You add that in, you add in AI, which you can now change things up or write a whole paper. I mean, you know, you have that kid that couldn't he's in 10th grade and he can't write a third grade level somehow turning out Nobel Peace Prize papers, and I mean it all is a conglomeration of actually distorting the ability of people to just be able to think, and unfortunately, that's where we are at, and I think that's the biggest harm right there, the fact that people will take it as truth and leave it at that.

Patrick Garrison: 32:05

Yeah, and you know, I don't know who your primary audience is, Joey, whether it's teachers or parents or you know what percentage, but I think it's important that we drive home, like Ted has been saying, why primary sources are so important, because everything that's not a primary source is someone else's interpretation of a primary source. So everything we've most of us have ever learned in history has been somebody else's interpretation of evidence. That's what textbooks are. It's not evidence, and neither is the slideshows that your teacher scrolls through endlessly to teach you things. That's not evidence, that's somebody's interpretation of the evidence, and those interpretations can be skewed, either ignorantly or maliciously, and so that's why the primary sources are free of that, or at least as free as we can get them to be.

Mr. Webb: 32:57

And I love what you said that everything else is an interpretation. What if someone had the argument I try to approach things from the other side, or at least think about them. And what if someone said well, you say the 1619 Project is an interpretation. What if what you're teaching is an interpretation Primary source documents and that's what hit me? It's like well, here you go, here's the primary source documents. And that's what hit me. It's like well, here you go, here's the primary source documents. I'm not teaching an interpretation, here's the primary sources. So that's why I think that's so important.

Patrick Garrison: 33:30

Yeah, I agree 100%.

Ted Lamb: 33:32

Yeah, I mean, I've had that conversation. People will say, well, you can't trust primary sources. My response is what is there not to trust? Is it that you personally can't trust them or you don't like what they're saying?

Mr. Webb: 33:47

Right, they disagree Exactly.

Ted Lamb: 33:50

Yeah, you can disagree. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it. In fact, I've read a couple of primary sources. That has sent chills down my spine because I found them absolutely disgusting. But it doesn't change anything about the primary source. That's just my response to it. I don't have to like it, but it is what it is. You know, I tell my kids all the time, at the very beginning of the year, I say listen, we're going to read, we're going to discuss some things that you're not going to like. I don't like it either.

Ted Lamb: 34:25

But lesson number one human beings, mankind is flawed. The best of us can do the worst actions and the worst of us can do some of the most amazing things. And if we keep that in mind, the most amazing things, and if we keep that in mind, then primary sources can be used as what they are supposed to be used for. That's not interpretation. What a man wrote 200 years ago on paper and we have it on record. That's not interpretation. That is firsthand account and that is exactly what they said and that is what they meant. They said and that is what they meant.

Mr. Webb: 35:01

There's so much we could get into here. We could go on for hours. In fact, I wouldn't mind having you guys come back on to maybe talk more about this. We could spend an hour just on the greatness of America and how great it has been for the African-American community. I mean we had a black president for two terms. There's so much we could talk about there, but as we wrap things up, I usually end the episode with a key takeaway. So what's the one thing you want the listener to remember, if they don't remember anything else about this episode? Patrick?

Patrick Garrison: 35:48

I would like if what people remember is that our foundations matter. Let me put it that way Foundations matter. Let me put it that way Foundations matter. And how we teach our children and our citizens about our foundations is going to, is going to affect what, what. And if we teach the past as racist, white supremacist, you know bigoted and you know hateful and all of this stuff, if that's how we promote that those are the foundations of our society, then that leads us to a society today that obviously anything built on those foundations is equally as evil and racist and white supremacist and it all has to be torn down. And then what are you left with? So I think we just have to remember that what the foundations are matter. And if you see someone and you hear someone promoting that our foundations are rotten, someone promoting that our foundations are rotten, think about what's the logical conclusion of that. If the foundations are, rotten.

Ted Lamb: 37:07

The whole house has to be turned torn down right, and and I would and I would say, probably if I to uh listeners the 1619 project is not history, but it is just interpretation, philosophy, of what they want us to think. So the biggest takeaway there is that this really is not history at all.

Mr. Webb: 37:46

Patrick. Ted, can you share with our listeners where they can find more information about what you're doing, your projects, how they can connect with you on social media, and I'll make sure and put links in the show notes. Ted, you want to go first on this one.

Ted Lamb: 37:57

Absolutely so. We've got and we're doing some exciting things over at History Moments with Ted on Facebook. We've been going now for about three years. We share and we discuss history. We have a great group that is from all spectrums of politics, so you would think that we'd have drama. We do not. I make that very clear. I don't tolerate drama, especially demeaning, hateful stuff. But we're actually looking at launching and becoming an actual LLC as well. One of the things that's coming up on May 14th is we will be doing the Federal Convention of 1787, which means that from May 14th all the way to September 17th, looking at the notes of James Madison at the Federal Convention and discussing and sharing all of the debates, the characters, the answers. That's there, because we don't know, that's the biggest thing that's going to be coming up here shortly. So check us out.

Patrick Garrison: 39:11

Awesome, that sounds fun actually, Patrick what do you want to plug or promote? Well, the True Corrective is at truecorrective. com and on social media. It's @True Corrective on everything, and we have two curricula that we offer. One is full homeschool courses, full year, full courses for homeschool families, and the other one is what I mentioned earlier is a curriculum that is meant to combat the kinds of things that are being pushed in schools, the kind of false narratives and damaging ideologies that are being pushed not only in schools but across our society, and all of that's on the website.

Mr. Webb: 39:55

Awesome, I appreciate both of you so much. Thank you for coming on today. Awesome, I appreciate both of you so much. Thank you for coming on today, ted Lamb and Patrick Garrison. It's been a pleasure having you guys on The Conservative Classroom and I know our listeners appreciate your insights on US history and bias of the 1619 Project. Thank you so much.

Patrick Garrison: 40:17

Thank you guys. I always enjoy talking to you guys.

Mr. Webb: 40:19

I appreciate it. I feel the same about you guys. That's it for today's episode of The Conservative Classroom. Thank you for tuning in. I hope you enjoyed it and learned something. If you liked what you heard, please don't forget to subscribe and leave us a review on your favorite podcast platform. Most importantly, share this podcast with a like-minded educator, parent or patriot. You can also connect with us on social media and share your thoughts on today's topic. Give feedback on the podcast or suggest a topic by sending me an email at TheConservativeClassroom@ gmail. com. We'd love to hear from you.

Mr. Webb: 41:01

If you feel that education without indoctrination and teaching the truth is important to preserve traditional values, then support my efforts to keep The Conservative Classroom running. I'm a full-time teacher and dad and part-time podcaster. I invest a lot of hours and my own hard-earned money each week to bring you quality content, but I need your help. Check out the links in the show notes and on the website to support the podcast with one-time or recurring monthly donations. Every little bit helps.

Mr. Webb: 41:35

You can also visit our merch store to get your own clothing, coffee mugs, stickers, backpacks, book bags and more with the conservative classroom logo or one of our many other conservative slogans, such as age appropriate does not equal banning books. Defund the teachers unions, keep politics out of the classroom and more. If you want to support common sense in education without pushing your politics, check out our products with the red schoolhouse logo on it. We know it's hard to be openly conservative in some school districts, but your silent show of support may help you find other conservatives in your community and it lets you know that you're doing the right thing. And it lets you know that you're doing the right thing Until next time. This is Mr. Webb, reminding you that you are not alone. See you next time on The Conservative Classroom. Teaching the truth. Preserving our values.