Home Blog

22 Measles cases now confirmed in Gallatin County

22 Measles cases now confirmed in Gallatin County

Two new measles cases have been discovered in Gallatin County thus bringing the County’s total up to 22 confirmed measles infections since the start of the outbreak earlier in the year, with 13 among children (ages 17 and under) and 9 among adults.

The infected individuals may have exposed others at over 20 public locations across Gallatin County (including Bozeman and Belgrade) and three sites in Missoula County during November 2025, such as stores, restaurants, airports, medical facilities, and churches.

No confirmed cases have been reported in Missoula County as of the latest updates, though health officials there issued exposure warnings for an infected visitor on November 22, 2025.

There hasn’t been any additional confirmed measles cases reported statewide since December 1st, based on available health department and news sources.

Health authorities across the state are recommending checking your MMR vaccination status, as two doses provide 97% protection.

If you’re not immune and have been exposed, you should contact your local health department; symptoms like fever, cough, runny nose, red eyes, and rash typically appear within 7-14 days after exposure.

For the full list of exposure sites and times, you can visit the Gallatin City-County Health Department website (or your local City-County Health Department).

sourced — dphhs.mt.gov




College Campus Bias: Tips for Surviving University Life

Tips for Surviving University Life

You just graduated High School and now you’re headed for University — congratulations — you made it. Sure, you’ve looked at the news, and what with all that’s supposedly going on in the academic world these days, you might be wondering about just how you might be able cope with all of the distraction, noise and nonsense.

If you’re a conservative kid, hitting our modern left-leaning Universities can appear to be somewhat of a daunting task. Not to worry though because nothing is as it seems. Education isn’t as static as most might have you believe. You might be surprised to learn that campus life can be a total delight even in spite of what the nightly news tells you.

Here’s bit of advice for kids that are trying to navigate the busy world of University life.

If you’re a student with differing views (e.g., conservative) facing ideologically left-leaning instructors (or vice versa), you would do well to focus on academic excellence and strategic engagement rather than confrontation.

Tips for Surviving University Life

Prioritize strong academic performance:

Deliver high-quality work on time to demonstrate respect and capability, making it harder for bias to affect grades. This builds credibility and can even win over your instructors.

Engage respectfully and use evidence:

In discussions, present your views with solid facts, logic, and a positive attitude. Incorporate humor to diffuse tension, and frame arguments as truth-seeking rather than combative. Avoid emotional outbursts — aim to persuade through debate.

Choose courses and majors strategically:

If possible, avoid classes with known radical biases by researching instructors (e.g., via RateMyProfessors or syllabi). Opt for fields like economics, business, or STEM where conservative perspectives are more tolerated or ideas are evaluated objectively.

Don’t isolate yourself:

Interact with diverse peers and faculty to broaden your understanding — exposure to opposing views can strengthen your own. Join conservative student groups for support, but avoid echo chambers.

Document potential bias and know your rights:

If you suspect unfair grading or hostility, keep records of assignments and feedback. Use university policies on free speech or appeal processes if needed, but only as a last resort — most issues resolve through dialogue.

Stay open to learning:

Some instructors note that “liberal” exposure comes more from peers than faculty. Use the experience to refine your beliefs without compromising them.

Overall, campuses lean left, with surveys showing faculty Democrats outnumbering Republicans significantly, but survival comes from skill, not ideology clashes.

Many of us already know that even a thin pancake has two sides. It’s a fact of life that there are always going to be two sides to any story and whether you like it or not, you’re very likely on one side or the other.

In my own experience (1979), college was somewhat quirky but manageable. I’ve often found myself saying that things have changed over the years — things were different back in the day — but were they? Really?

People haven’t really changed that much at all:

If I looked back hard enough, I could probably see various forms of bias — even clear back when.

The biases of today aren’t really that different from the biases of yesteryear except that today, these biases are broadcast every night on the national news whereas biases from the 70’s weren’t. Though they be the same, biases weren’t the thing then like they are now.

These days, and in light of just how far off the rails we’ve gone, academic bias often manifests itself in political contexts, particularly in higher education where surveys show faculty lean left, with liberals outnumbering conservatives significantly (e.g., 72% of faculty identifying as liberal). It might be important to note that you’re going to school to become an engineer, not a politician, so all of the ideological B.S. on campus doesn’t really concern you.

Here are some specific examples (of bias) drawn from studies, surveys, and anecdotes, that focus on mostly the political biases we find today in our institutions of higher learning.
(Note: While liberal bias against conservatives is more commonly reported in research, there are counter-examples of discrimination against left-leaning views as well.)

Bias Against Conservatives

Hiring and Promotion Discrimination:

In social sciences and humanities, 15% of political scientists and 24% of philosophy instructors admitted they would discriminate against Republican job applicants. Additionally, 4 in 10 American academics would not hire a known Trump supporter, and 1 in 3 British academics would discriminate against a Brexit supporter.

Self-Censorship and Hostile Environment:

70% of conservative academics in U.S. social sciences/humanities self-censor, with 75% reporting a hostile departmental environment for their beliefs. Over 90% of Trump-supporting academics wouldn’t share views with colleagues, and 85% of Democratic colleagues agree they should stay silent. Only 20% of faculty believe a conservative would fit well in their department.

Discipline and Threats:

1 in 3 conservative graduate students or academics in the U.S. has been disciplined or threatened for their views.

Grant and Research Evaluation:

Between 20% and 50% of academics would mark a right-leaning grant application lower.

Anecdotal Hostility:

At one university, faculty assumed anyone voting for George W. Bush was “evil or stupid.” During a talk by conservative speaker Dinesh D’Souza, he faced belligerent questions and hostility, akin to an evolutionary biologist at a religious college. In another case, a faculty meeting voice vote on an anti-Iraq war resolution passed overwhelmingly, pressuring dissenters.

Bias Against Liberals

In current research the examples below are less prevalent, as academia skews liberal overall, but some studies highlight reverse discrimination.

Discrimination by Conservative Faculty:

Conservative and centrist faculty discriminate against leftists more than liberals do against conservatives, per a study on ideological bias.

Political Litmus Tests:

74% of liberal faculty support mandatory diversity statements in hiring, which 90% of conservative faculty view as political tests that could disadvantage liberals in conservative-leaning departments or institutions.

Historical and Isolated Cases:

During the McCarthy era (1950s), liberal professors were targeted for suspected communist sympathies, leading to firings and blacklisting. More recently, in conservative-dominated fields like business or at religious universities, liberal views on issues like LGBTQ+ rights have led to tenure denials or backlash, though specific modern cases are anecdotal and less documented in broad surveys.

Other Forms of Political Bias

Peer Review and Publishing:

Liberal academics admit to discriminating against conservatives in peer review processes.

Classroom Indoctrination Perceptions:

Conservative students report biased grading or discussions, but research shows ideology has minimal impact on grades. Conversely, accusations of “social justice indoctrination” target liberal professors.

Some of these examples stem from surveys and studies, with bias often self-reported or perceptual. While liberal dominance is well-documented (e.g., Democrats outnumber Republicans 7:1 in social sciences), actual discrimination varies widely by institution and field.

Anecdotal

One day we were in Missoula during Homecoming and we had to wait for the same light to change 3 times on Higgins for all of the kids in the street. I told my son that the kids in college that party all the time are the same kids that will either drop out or will graduate at the bottom of their class. The kids you don’t see out partying every Friday night are the kids that will graduate higher in their class and have a better chance of making a difference because they’re in studying.

I also told my son to stay the course and not to worry about what everybody else is doing — stay focused and be deliberate in the pursuit of your chosen field of study. College by itself is a pretty big deal for most kids so don’t blow it by getting sidetracked by personal opinions and various other failed ideologies.

There are those in this world that seem to think you might be ruined by University, but don’t worry, kids come out of it every day and are none-the-worse for the wear — with degree in hand they know what they can do and who they are — they’re ready to face the world head on.

Our son’s in college now and based on how he’s getting on, I’m sure he’ll be just fine.

sourced — manhattan.instituteaei.orghechingerreport.org




Department of the Interior: National Parks non-resident price hikes

Department of the Interior

The US Department of the Interior recently announced fee increases for non-US residents (including foreign tourists) at 11 popular national parks, effective January 1, 2026. This policy, described as America-first pricing, aims to prioritize affordability for American families while requiring international visitors to contribute more toward park maintenance and improvements. US citizens and permanent residents are unaffected and will continue paying standard fees, such as $80 for an annual America the Beautiful pass.

New Fees Schedule

Per-Person Fee for Non-Residents

International visitors without an annual pass will pay an additional $100 per person (on top of the standard vehicle or individual entrance fee) to enter the affected parks. This applies per entry and is in addition to existing fees (e.g., a typical $35 per vehicle entrance fee at many parks).

Annual Pass for Non-Residents

The price for a non-resident annual pass will rise to $250 per vehicle (up from $80), granting access to all national parks for a year. US residents remain eligible for the $80 pass.

Fee-Free Days

Eight fee-free days in 2026 (e.g., Memorial Day, Independence Day, Veterans Day) will be exclusive to US residents; non-residents will still pay full fees on those days.

Other Updates

The changes coincide with a modernized online reservation system and improved access for motorcyclists.

Affected National Parks

The fee hikes apply to the following 11 highly visited parks:

    • Acadia National Park — Maine
    • Bryce Canyon National Park — Utah
    • Everglades National Park — Florida
    • Glacier National Park — Montana
    • Grand Canyon National Park — Arizona
    • Grand Teton National Park — Wyoming
    • Rocky Mountain National Park — Colorado
    • Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks — California
    • Yellowstone National Park — Wyoming/Montana/Idaho
    • Yosemite National Park — California
    • Zion National Park — Utah

Reasons and Context

The new pricing policy stems from an executive order signed by President Trump in July 2025, directing the Interior Department to increase fees for overseas visitors. Secretary Doug Burgum stated that since US taxpayers fund the national park system, international visitors should pay a fairer share for upkeep, especially amid planned budget reductions for the National Park Service. Revenue from the hikes will support conservation efforts.

Reactions and Concerns

The announcement about the National Parks admissions price hike with regard to non-residents has sparked mixed responses. Tourism industry groups and some experts express apprehension that the steep increases could deter international visitors, who make up a significant portion of park attendance (e.g., about 20% at Rocky Mountain National Park). This might harm local economies reliant on tourism, such as gateway communities near parks like Yellowstone and the Grand Canyon. Environmental organizations like the Sierra Club have criticized the move as part of broader fee hikes that could limit access to public lands. However, supporters argue it ensures fairness and sustainability for the parks. So far, no widespread boycotts or legal challenges have been reported.




The Jetsons: Video calls were everyday life

The Jetsons

In The Jetsons, video calls were treated as an ordinary, ubiquitous part of daily life long before that was true in the real world, and this has become one of the show’s most famous future predictions.

Characters in the show constantly use wall-mounted or desk videophones at home and at work, especially George Jetson’s calls with his boss, Mr. Spacely, which are shown as routine business communication rather than special events.

Family and friends also drop in via video at all hours, which creates comic situations such as Jane Jetson throwing on a morning mask to look presentable for an unexpected early call from her friend.

When The Jetsons premiered in 1962, real videophones like AT&T’s experimental Picturephone existed only as expensive demos or limited trials, not as common household devices.

The series assumed that technical hurdles and cost would be solved, presenting videophones as simple appliances as familiar as TVs or radios, reflecting mid‑century optimism about technology reshaping everyday domestic life.

Today we’ve gone from Sci‑Fi gag to everyday reality — with mainstream tools such as Skype, Zoom, and FaceTime making real‑time video communication on phones, tablets, and computers a normal part of work, school, and social life, closely mirroring the casual, frequent calling seen in the cartoon.

Wrist‑mounted video devices like George Jetson’s video watch now resemble modern smartwatches, which can place video calls or integrate with phones, further reinforcing how closely contemporary habits track the show’s imagined future.




 

U.S. Housing: Is the market is going to face a sharp correction?

U.S. Housing

The U.S. housing market is clearly cooling, and a modest, drawn‑out price correction is increasingly likely in many areas, but a 2008‑style crash is not what most mainstream forecasts are calling for right now. Outcomes will also vary a lot by city and neighborhood, with some markets seeing flat or slightly rising prices while others may experience multi‑year declines.

What The Current Data Shows

National price gauges are starting to show small month‑to‑month declines, which analysts see as an early sign that prices may be entering a sustained but gradual downturn rather than a sudden collapse. One major forecast now projects U.S. home values to fall around 1–2% from spring 2025 to spring 2026 after previously expecting gains, signaling a turn toward a mildly “bearish” view on prices.

At the same time, some forecasts for the next several years still expect overall national prices to be roughly flat to slightly higher, implying that any correction is more about taking the froth off recent rapid gains than fully reversing them.

Even with recent softening, median sale prices remain dramatically higher than five years ago, so current declines are coming off an elevated base.

Drivers Of A Potential Correction

High mortgage rates relative to the pandemic era have sharply reduced affordability, which is pressuring both demand and prices as more buyers are priced out. Economists point to elevated borrowing costs, economic uncertainty, and signs of a softening labor market as key headwinds that increase the risk of a deeper and more prolonged period of price declines.

On the supply side, inventory has risen compared with a year earlier, and a growing share of homes sit on the market for 60+ days, leading many sellers to cut listing prices or pull homes altogether rather than accept lower offers. This mix of weak demand and cautious sellers is creating a slow‑moving adjustment instead of a sudden flood of distressed sales.

Regional Variation

National averages mask big local differences: some metro areas that became significantly overvalued in recent years are flagged by analysts as more vulnerable to multi‑year price drops. Other regions with strong job markets, structural housing shortages, or continued in‑migration are expected to see prices roughly flat or still eking out small gains despite higher rates.

Because of this, whether “a price correction” shows up where you live will depend heavily on local supply, incomes, and how stretched prices became during the boom. For any personal decision—buying, selling, or investing—focusing on your specific metro’s price trends, inventory, and rent vs. buy math will matter more than the national headline.

On The Local Level

Great Falls has seen modest year-over-year price increases but remains below Montana’s statewide medians.

    • The median sale price for homes in Great Falls was $319,000 in October 2025, reflecting a 1.8% decrease from the previous year.
    • In Cascade County overall, the August 2025 median sale price was $322,304, up 9% year-over-year, with single-family homes at $333,993 (up 11.5%) and condos/townhomes at $245,265 (up 42.4%).
    • The average home value in Great Falls stands at $327,711, up 6.2% over the past year, indicating resilience in property valuations despite sales price dips.
    • Median list price is $429,500, with a price per square foot of $193.80—both below national ($432,980 and $212.30) and Montana statewide ($650,000 and $306.40) figures.
Note

Some sources, like Movoto, report a higher median sale price of $413,750 for October 2025, but this appears inconsistent with other data and may reflect a broader area or different methodology.

Current Local Market Conditions

    • Days on Market: Median DOM in Great Falls is 51 days (up 3 days YoY) per Redfin, or 56 days per other estimates, with a higher 84 days reported recently—exceeding the national 77 days.
    • Price Reductions: Nearly half (45.7%) of sellers cut prices in the week ending November 7, 2025, while only 0.4% raised them, signaling properties are lingering and buyers have more leverage.
    • Underlying factors include slow sales absorption, rising inventory, and economic uncertainty, contrasting with Montana’s overall fluctuating market.

Housing Forecasts and Outlook

Earlier 2025 predictions suggested a 5-8% price increase in Great Falls due to low inventory, but recent trends point to cooling, with statewide uncertainty from shifting interest rates.

A moderately competitive market is anticipated, though the high rate of price cuts suggests potential for further buyer advantages if inventory continues to build.

For the broader market with regard to U.S. housing, existing-home sales dipped slightly in May 2025, which may influence local dynamics.