Reason Roundup

University of ICE? Fake College Targeted Immigrants and Encouraged Visa Fraud: Reason Roundup

Plus: No, Virginia isn't making it legal to kill babies during labor, and why Millennials and Gen Z will rule 2020

|

screenshot of Farmington U website

Federal agents are going to dramatic lengths to find immigrants trying to game the student visa system. "For years, the Department of Homeland Security has operated a fake university in the Detroit suburbs as part of an undercover operation that lured undocumented immigrants," The Daily Beast reports.

The Homeland Security-run "University of Farmington"—first revealed by The Detroit News—ran from 2015 until recently and "intensified one month into President Donald Trump's tenure as part of a broader crackdown on illegal immigration," the News says. The school offered immigrants on student visas a way to maintain their student status (and associated work permit) without actually doing any coursework.

As a result, eight people were indicted for "conspiracy to commit visa fraud" and "dozens" of University of Farmington students were arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Most of those arrested are from India and now face deportation.

As with FBI-led terror and drug plots, the scheme raises questions. The fake school gave legal immigrants with expiring student visas a simple way to stay here, by paying tuition at what was listed as an accredited university. It's not at all clear that those scammed knew the school was a total sham, knew that enrolling there wasn't legitimate for visa purposes, or would have engaged in any fraud had the feds not provided the opportunity.

"The university had a professional website, a red-and-blue coat of arms, a Latin slogan meaning 'knowledge and work' and a physical location at a commercial building on Northwestern Highway," The Detroit News reports.

Federal agents deployed several tactics to make the University of Farmington appear to be a legitimate school. The main photo of University of Farmington students on the school's website is nearly identical to a commercially available picture on the stock photograph website Shutterstock.

The University of Farmington has its own Facebook page, too, with a calendar of events, including one scheduled for next week with non-existent university officials.

ICE has also been telling immigrants to show up for court hearings or risk being deported. But the alleged hearings aren't actually scheduled. "Immigrants were instructed to appear on weekends, midnight, and dates that just didn't exist, like Sept. 31," reports CBS News.

QUICK HITS

  • No, Virginia isn't making it legal to kill babies during labor. See more from Reason Managing Editor Stephanie Slade:
  • Millennial and Gen Z voters will make up nearly 40 percent of the electorate in 2020, Pew Research reports.
  • "In less than a decade," writes Daniel Marens at HuffPost, "mainstream Democrats in Congress have gone from entertaining Social Security cuts to almost universally endorsing the program's expansion."
  • The House of Representatives is considering legislation that would add "gender identity" to civil rights legislation.
  • "Plastic straw cop" is now a legitimate thing.
  • Psst:

Advertisement

NEXT: Brickbat: That's Cold

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. University of ICE?

    There was a university of it on my windshield this morning.

    1. Hello.

      If you can’t get in University of ICE there’s always University of Polar Vortex.

      It’s the best I’ve got.

      1. The UPV mascot makes Gritty look shitty.

        1. Gritty is the best thing to come out of Crapadelphia since America. And yes, that’s meant as an insult.

  2. For years, the Department of Homeland Security has operated a fake university in the Detroit suburbs as part of an undercover operation that lured undocumented immigrants…

    I thought Trump University was based in NYC.

    1. Impossible or we would have heard about it.

    2. Breaking news from CNN: Trump administration invents time machine.

  3. The University of Farmington has its own Facebook page.

    Any university that has a Facebook page HAS to be on the up and up.

  4. When the governor discusses resuscitating an already delivered baby and then allowing the mother and doctor decide what to do with it, how is that not infanticide?

    Allowing the government to decide when a human is human and therefore when murder is not actually murder you have basically expanded the government far beyond anything since the Enlightenment.

    1. Oh wait, I get it, he was only referring to “deformed babies” (even though he never uses such qualifier) which changes everything because their not human or something. Makes total sense

      1. he was only referring to “deformed babies”

        Sounds kind of eugenic-ish. You know else was really into eugenics?

        1. Early 20th Century progressives?

        2. Hitler.

          1. Yes, Hitler was certainly one of the early 20th century progressives that was pro eugenics

        3. Ruth Ginsburg?

          1. careful with that axe

        4. Me?

        5. Margaret Sanger?

        6. I’m…Ron Burgundy?

      2. Denmark has eliminated Autism from their country with this method, and their proud of it. look the baby’s head is deformed, kill it now before it blinks. Many babys are born with deformed heads from the birthing process, their heads turn normal within a month. My sister wen’t through a nightmare where the “doctor” wanted to do all sorts of surgery to her kid do to this early malformation that he grew out of. The scary part is today the doctor would have called CPS and then performed un needed surgery

        1. Denmark has eliminated Autism from their country with this method, and their proud of it. look the baby’s head is deformed, kill it now before it blinks. Many babys are born with deformed heads from the birthing process, their heads turn normal within a month.

          What the fuck? How does a pediatric doctor in a first world country not know that *every* baby is born with a “deformed” head after birth because the skull’s shape eases the trip through the birth canal?

          1. that was our thought and hence my sister never went to him again

        2. Can you provide a citation? I have been googling for any mention of whatever you are referring to and getting no hits.

            1. Progressives never moved away from eugenics, they just learned to hide their motives a little better.

              1. Eugenics and progressivism cannot be separated. The idea that not all life is of equal value has always been central to progressive politics.

            2. He said Autism though. So I’m wondering if that’s just a confusion of terms or there is something else I haven’t heard of. I don’t believe Autism is identifiable until the kid is a little older.

              1. confusion of terms on my part

              2. Correct. “Autism” is not correct. “Down syndrome” is correct

              3. I think it depends how severe the autism is. Our eight year old daughter was just diagnosed with mild autism; it was hard to tell at earlier ages what was going on with some of her subtle, non-typical behaviors at any age earlier than that. If she was severely autistic it probably would have been very obvious at an earlier age.

            3. No wonder I couldn’t find anything by googling. We just went from Danes killing autistic kids at birth to Icelanders using prenatal screenings for Down’s syndrome to decide to have abortions.

      3. If we’re going to be practicing a Sparta-type culture of determining which babies live or die based on their physical imperfections, the least we can do is adopt a national PT program to get the country’s limp-armed soy vacuums and fat ass beardos into fighting condition.

    2. “expanded the government far beyond anything since the Enlightenment.”

      The prominence of political twitter in defining national debates demonstrates conclusively that the Enlightenment just didn’t take.

      1. No. I read the thread now. It makes sense. It basically boils down to “Kermit Gosnell was just following procedure”.

        1. I was speaking in a broader sense.

      2. When a nation stops teaching enlightenment values, we shouldn’t be surprised when people don’t understand them anymore.

    3. The mask has slipped and Ralph Northam has revealed himself to be not just an asshole, but an evil asshole.

      Virginians (like me) need to reclaim their state from the progs that elected this monster.

      1. Bio-ethicism gone drunk.

      2. Those northern counties adjacent to D.C. are full of some serious takers, so good luck.

    4. I am trying to figure out what there is to discuss at that point that has anything to do with abortion if killing the child is not on the table.

    5. Boy ‘right to choose’ sure has a long leash.

      Like climate change.

      1. This shouldn’t boil down to “pro-choice” v. “pro-life”. This is “pro-murder” v. “anti-murder”. I understand that abortion is like a God to some and any sacrifice for its greater glory is necessary, but when that leads you to support infanticide then maybe you should consider that you are evil and lack a moral compass.

        1. Killing a delivered and full term baby is not “abortion”

          1. note they also didn’t not give a time frame of when after birth the child is killed is it a day, a week, a year?

            1. What difference, at this point, etc etc

        2. I only support infanticide during the periodic rituals of sacrifice needed to appease Gaia’s bloodlust, as climate change is a sure sign of Her wrath

        3. Then I guess I’m evil & lack a moral compass.

          No, it’s just that my morals go deeper than most. I ask “why” for 1 more level, where others have stopped.

          1. Then “why” is it morally acceptable to kill an infant after birth and “how” is that not a slippery slope?

          2. I ask why you dont just fuck off hihn.

    6. Look, Roe v Wade admitted that in the third trimester society has an interest in protecting the life of an unborn-but-viable human life and these expansions of Roe v Wade to cover abortions beyond that have one purpose and one purpose only – so that when the inevitable lawsuits over the issue come up, it will be right smack in the middle of the 2020 election campaign and Democrats can accuse those evil evil Nazi Republicans of trying to over-turn the settled law of Roe v Wade because they want women back in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant and with their mouths shut. It’s the same way the perfectly sensible voter ID laws are slammed as nothing less than those evil evil Nazi Republicans attempting to repeal the 13th Amendment and re-instate slavery.

  5. ICE has also been telling immigrants to show up for court hearings or risk being deported. But the alleged hearings aren’t actually scheduled.

    “Gotcha! *** rubs knuckles on top of immigrant’s head ***”

    1. “We come for not be illegal and food”

      Someone needs a good noogie!

    2. Trump said that they were not sending their brightest.

  6. Millennial and Gen Z voters will make up nearly 40 percent of the electorate in 2020, Pew Research reports.

    Doesn’t mean shit when they don’t vote. But they will make the most noise.

    1. But they will make the most noise.

      Especially if/ when their preferred candidate, who they couldn’t be bothered to actually vote for, loses.

    2. 2024 will be the better election.

      Many Boomers will be stuck in retirement homes and probably wont be to vote and most Greatest Gen will be dead.

      It will be Gen X, Millennials, and new Gen Zers fighting it out.

      1. Imagine Jeb Bush vs. Oprah Winfrey in 2024.

  7. “Plastic straw cop” is now a legitimate thing.

    the logical fallacy committed when Kamala Harris said “Some believe prosecutors should not exist.”

    1. “At Lotus Express, a Chinese food joint, Rybarczyk peeled the wrapper from a red straw and bent the end – the telltale giveaway.”

      Another example of The Man putting his jackboot on the throats of immigrants…?.

      1. This guy works for the D.C. Department of Energy and Environment. This departments budget last year was $122,927,429.00, a 12.9% increase over the previous year budget of $108,912,455.00 which was an increase of 27% of the previous years budget of $85,502,613.00. If half the Congress wasn’t trying so hard to arrest the other half maybe they’d look into this. I’m sure D.C. budget is heavily subsidized by US taxpayers. Can you make a noose out of plastic straws?

    2. The fake environmental crowd complain about straws. The reason I say fake is because that believe banning things up to a point. Convenience still trumps environmental hazards. I don’t hear them complaining about disposable diapers in landfills.

    3. My city just added itself to the lunacy. Making matters worse, the newly elected Mayor is an acquaintance and I helped his campaign a little. I have not seen him since the news about the plastic straw ban came out, but you can bet he’ll get an ear full the first chance I get.

  8. Rachel Maddow delivers a terrifying update on the threat posed by Russian hacking!

    Pipelines, power grid vulnerable to cyber attack by China, Russia

    Did you see the Die Hard movie where the guy from Justified did exactly this? Well it’s not just a movie anymore. This literally could happen any day now. And only one political party is serious about confronting the threat.

    #VoteDemocratToGetToughWithRussia

    1. Ugh. Of course phony “progressive” and full time #TrumpRussia denier Glenn Greenwald thinks this is all a big joke. Fortunately reality-based people in the comments are telling him otherwise. He probably won’t listen though.

      Everybody reading this ? please stay safe as the weather gets cold and Russia prepares to turn off your heat.

      1. You really seem afraid of nearly everything. You probably should cut back on your news consumption.

    2. Iknowiknow, it’s OBL, Maddow, MSNBC, etc. etc. etc.

      However, SCADA systems are vulnerable to attack, and nobody’s come up with a foolproof method to keep them secure. If you’re curious, look into Vitek Boden’s shenanigans in Oz back in 2000, the DOE’s Aurora generator test, or the Stuxnet attack on Iran’s nuke facility.

      1. SCADA systems are vulnerable to attack

        And have been for years, yet now MSNBC/ Madcow get the vapors over it because “TrumpRussia.” So while it’s certainly a legitimate area of concern, it has nothing to do with Trump, but damned if they’re not going to connect dots that aren’t there. Because “orange man bad.”

        1. agreed

    3. Well, the movie was helpful though–everybody knows now that it’s not enough to just kill the skinny ninja chick.

  9. “Plastic straw cop” is now a legitimate thing

    AND a nice band name.

    1. good radiohead b-side

    2. and a new type of logical fallacy to go along with straw man arguments.

  10. “Immigrants were instructed to appear on weekends, midnight, and dates that just didn’t exist, like Sept. 31,”

    lousy sept. 31 weather

    1. Leap leap year?

  11. It’s not at all clear that those scammed knew the school was a total sham, knew that enrolling there wasn’t legitimate for visa purposes, or would have engaged in any fraud had the feds not provided the opportunity.

    If any of the students went for Art History or Women’s Studies majors, then I have no sympathy. The government should prey on them!

  12. Rybarczyk peeled the wrapper from a red straw and bent the end – the telltale giveaway.

    “Wrapper”?! Where TF are the “straw wrapper cops”?!

  13. The main photo of University of Farmington students on the school’s website is nearly identical to a commercially available picture on the stock photograph website Shutterstock.

    They were going to use a picture of the building where the FBI ran their child pornography servers, but agents were still using it.

  14. Millennial and Gen Z voters will make up nearly 40 percent of the electorate in 2020, Pew Research reports.

    wait until they find out 40 percent of the electorate will soon be made up of the generations after them

    1. It’s 40 percent all the way down!

    2. Millennials are pretty stupid, so I bet their math is off.

  15. So, folks might be eating some crow after all.

    Despite spinning what seemed to be a fantastic tale, police have pieced together a timeline that casts doubt upon the doubt.

    They say that Smollett walks down the street and out of frame of one camera, and when he reappears on another camera less than a minute later, he has a rope around his neck “like a necktie”.

    They also identify two people who are walking on the other side of the street as “persons of interest” and have released screenshots of them. (they don’t appear to be wearing red MAGA hats, but it is dark and hard to see)

    So.

    So…..

    Strange.

    Whatever happened, it took less than a minute. And it just so happened to be at a blind spot in video coverage. Which is odd.

    So hoax fans can say he knew where the blind spot was and faked it – which is implausible.

    And racist stalker conspiracy theorists can say the stalkers tracked him to a blind spot and attacked him – also implausible.

    And we are left with two random dudes that happen to have rope and happen to decide to jump some dude in the middle of the night shouting racist stuff? And randomly it happens out of camera range.

    Bizarre.

    1. Oh, also …

      Police say his music manager was on the phone with him at the time. The manager confirms this and says he heard “MAGA Country!” during the attack.

      For conspiracy nuts – they declined to let the police examine their phones, so they were not able to confirm the phone conversation.

      1. It’s a strange story to say the least

        1. It’s a queer story to say the most

      2. Chicago is MAGA country? Maybe the burbs, but downtown?

    2. A dozen detectives are working on the case

      I thought they were taking this seriously.

      1. Amazing what a little press attention can do.

        I’m sure Chicago has several murders per month that don’t get more than a passing glance from the department. According to this article in the Tribune, they solve less than 20% of murder cases.

        Ouch.

        1. I’m sure Chicago has several murders per month that don’t get more than a passing glance from the department.

          Well, maybe those murder should have been famous if they actually wanted justice.

  16. Kentucky governor says Kim Davis should pay legal fees in same-sex marriage case

    Davis even switched parties, registering as a Republican because she said the Democratic Party abandoned her.

    I dont remember the media ever saying this before. Kim Davis was a Democrat and is now a RINO.

    Democrats are against gay marriage!

  17. “Plastic straw cop” is now a legitimate thing.

    Looks like this sucker…

    [dons sunglasses]

    …wrapped his lips around the wrong cylinder.

    1. Excellent use of tired and overused meme. Well played! Would laugh again.

  18. University of ICE?

    check out the books while the bursar resolves it

  19. Italy in recession amid sluggish eurozone

    Growth in the euro area remained at 0.2% in the final quarter of 2018, the same as the previous quarter and in line with analysts’ expectations.

    This is what Socialism gets you. Stagnant economic growth.

    Looks like GDP for the EU went down in 2017. Almost like Trump’s pressure on the EU to love toward more free trade had an impact.

    Maybe Boehm and Veronique will do a propaganda piece on that too?

    1. Italy and the countries in the EU aren’t actually socialist, but you be you……

      1. True. But, they do have a heavily regulated labor market that largely accounts for the sluggish economic growth

        1. “But, they do have a heavily regulated labor market that largely accounts for the sluggish economic growth”

          Yep. And really high taxes, which doesn’t help either. So let’s criticize them for legitimate reasons rather than made up reasons.

          1. Yeah, I agree. “Socialism” is too overused today as a blanket criticism rather than identifying the actual problems

            1. To be fair, “socialism” is also overused to mean “all good things” by its defenders too

              1. Bevis either doesnt’ know what he is talking about or doesn’t know what the definition of Socialism is.

                The Italian Government owns businesses, thereby controlling the means of production.

                1. They’re called Crown Corporations here. Like Via Rail.

        2. That’s the problem. You can’t fire anyone. Businesses can’t do what needs to be done.

          And Europe – Italy in particular – has been struggling with low growth for years.

      2. Government-owned companies of Italy

        Poor Bevis and his denier buddies.

        I can add the definition of Socialism, if you need that too.

        1. Yes but those are off-set by the army of SME’s. It’s a strange dichotomy.

          1. The SME’s might partially offset the impact but Socialism just requires the state to own the means of production . That does not limit it to only 2 state owned businesses or 1000 or all businesses.

            1. “Socialism just requires the state to own the means of production . That does not limit it to only 2 state owned businesses or 1000 or all businesses.”

              Bullshit. Italy has a stock exchange, and literally thousands of privately owned businesses. Socialist countries don’t do that.

              The US has 20 or so government owned businesses as well, and that’s just the Feds. Are we Socialist? You’re telling us you let Socialism take over right under your nose and you didn’t even lift a finger? You didn’t fire a single shot in the name of liberty? Pussy.

              1. I think what you all seem to be deliberately missing is that he’s saying that things can go ‘socialist’ one at a time.

                And socialism ALWAYS fucks you over.

                So saying that socialism has fucked Italy over is true.

              2. You’re so bad at this Bevis.

                Shanghai Stock Exchange
                The Commies in China has a Stock Exchange.

                The also have tens of thousands of “privately owned businesses”.

                The USA does have Socialism going on. We have Medicare, medicaid, Social Security, ObamaCare, Amtrack, etc.

            2. If that’s your definition the US was socialist since before socialism due to the U.S. postal service.

              1. It’s not a particualry descriptive term anymore. It’s like rallying behind “capitalism”, it means a million things to a million people. Some contexts where they are defined explicitly it can be fine, but in both are frequently just used as vague promotions or criticisms.

                1. cap?i?tal?ism
                  /?kap?dl?iz?m/
                  noun: capitalism
                  an economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

                  People like you BUCS try and twist what these words mean. They have very clear definitions.

  20. Millennial and Gen Z voters will make up nearly 40 percent of the electorate in 2020…

    Hindsight will blame their apathy for the next 4 years.

    1. Indeed. What percent of the registered voters will Millennial and Gen Z voters make up in 2020?

      I mean, under the wild presumption that registering is still a thing then.

      1. Didn’t we see an article about young adults complaining how hard it was to register to vote?

  21. Nike Faces Demand to Recall Sneakers as Muslims Object to Design

    Nike really messed up here. Don’t they have some kind of diversity and inclusion department to prevent disasters like this? They carelessly wrote “Air Max” in a way that resembles the Arabic for “Allah.” This is blatant Islamophobia. And I learned in college Islamophobia is a form of racism.

    #LibertariansAgainstIslamophobicFootwear

    1. “Nike respects all religions and we take concerns of this nature seriously.”

      “Therefore our next design will feature a yellow Star of David, to be followed by a model with a toast-like image of Christ on the sole.”

    2. I followed your link to see what they were talking about – it has a handy picture that shows that if you take the middle part of the stylized “air max” logo (not the whole thing) and squint really good it kinda-sorta almost resembles the arabic characters. I mean, it sorta has a couple of swoops in the right order, with a line.

      Hyper-non-issue.

      The idiots at Nike should never issue any apologies for this sort of thing. It is even dumber than the fake Chevy Nova failing in latin america because Nova translates to No Va – No Go – in Spanish. (Nova is a word in spanish, just like English.)

    3. More panicky breaking news from the commentator spiraling downward to a nervous breakdown.

  22. Ok, indulge me a drug war rant for a moment….

    I had to take my son to the ER last night. He injured his elbow about 5 minutes after the orthopedics offices close. So thanks for waiting until it becomes thousands instead of hundreds.

    But I digress. After they diagnosed him with a probable bad bruise to the nerves – but maybe a break, check back in 4 days after the thing has a chance to start healing – we talked about how to manage the pain.

    And here is the intersection of Papa Bear and Anti-Drug Warrior Activist.

    My boy was in a lot of pain. He privately told me there was no way he was going to be able to sleep, it hurt so bad.

    So what did the doctor prescribe? “GIve him some Tylenol or Motrin. ”

    Papa Bear explained that his boy doesn’t get much relief from pain killers, like his dad. And I opined that we are looking at a 12-36 hour window where he’s going to have basically unmanaged pain. They called over the attending and he told me they don’t prescribe anything for this kind of injury. He’s just going to have to deal with being in pain for a few days.

    1. (cont)

      So a couple of years ago they undermedicated me when I had surgery, and the anesthesiologist told me that prior to the Oxy crisis they would have put me on a morphine drip.

      And now they tell my boy “suck it up”, when there are perfectly apt painkillers like hydrocodone that could have done the job. Because they are worried that we are going to sell a couple of pills? Or become addicts?

      Ok, screw every one of you drug warriors in the neck.

      1. I’m with you. My mother suffered greatly in the last few years of her life because of this attitude. The drug warriors can go circumcise themselves with a rusty chainsaw.

      2. Yup. This is the new phase of the flailing War on Drugs- people who rarely need drugs for pain cannot get them because all the drug warriors are trying to make examples of doctors who prescribe.

        Meanwhile, my VA prescription for Tramadol has arrived because the old ones that I had expired. I use a few pills out of the 50 each year if the old military injury acts up.

        TOP MEN assholes.

      3. #metoo. My early 20s daughter has a couple of bad discs in her back. Had a spell a couple of years ago where she was damn near immobilized with pain. We got her to the ER and they treated her with a non-opioid pain medication that didn’t do shit. Wouldn’t go to anything stronger even though it was clear what they tried didn’t work. Eventually they discharged her with no change in her condition. So she came to the ER immobilized with back pain and left the ER immobilized with back pain, several thousand dollars poorer.

        You’d think that recognition that we’ve arrived at a point at which we’re denying effective medical care to actually sick or injured people that we’d rethink something, but nope. Fuck the drug warriors with a rusty softball bat.

      4. Insanity

        Last year I had a simple ten minute outpatient thing.
        Doc gave me hydrocodone that I never even had to use. Barely even needed an NSAID.

      5. And now they tell my boy “suck it up”, when there are perfectly apt painkillers like hydrocodone that could have done the job. Because they are worried that we are going to sell a couple of pills? Or become addicts?

        Actually they’re worried about the DEA investigating them for “over prescribing” opioids so they over compensate the other way. If they were truly worried about your boy becoming an addict then they could at least claim to be caring about his overall well being, but it’s not even that. They’re just looking out for themselves, as always.

        Sorry to hear about your kid’s injury. That really sucks.

        1. Malpractice on one side, government prosecution on the other. It’s a no-win scenario for providers.

    2. I’d try to develop cx to quickly obtain some narcotics illegally.

  23. As a result, eight people were indicted for “conspiracy to commit visa fraud” and “dozens” of University of Farmington students were arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Most of those arrested are from India and now face deportation.

    I wonder how much they spent to get those 8 indictments and handful of deportations. Money well spent I’m sure.

  24. The kerfluffle over Howard Schultz is rather entertaining. It’s especially funny that enraged progs are shouting that they’ll boycott Starbucks if he runs. Apparently they think this will strike fear into the former CEO of Starbucks.

    1. Boycotting Starbucks for progressives is like a fish boycotting water.

      1. How are these Lefties supposed to get out of their parents basements without an $8 caffeine infusion?

      2. Where are they gonna get their hours free Wi-fi (or as my daughter called it when she was a toddle wee-fee) from?

        They’ll be back quicker than you can say ‘a tall ice grande decaf frap with caramel and sprinkles with soy and chia berry crunch and extra whip cream’.

        1. a tall ice grande decaf frap with caramel and sprinkles with soy and chia berry crunch and extra whip cream

          Because God forbid they actually drink coffee flavored coffee.

          1. If you can’t make a basic espresso properly maybe you shouldn’t be in the coffee business is how I see it.

            And none of these chains make a proper espresso despite the machines.

    2. This is what comes of rejecting logic for being a tool of oppression.

      1. The best part is various Progs claiming Schultz isn’t a self made man despite being born in and growing up in housing projects because projects are government funded. Appearently, if you are poor, the government forever owns you no matter what you do.

    3. “”Apparently they think this will strike fear into the former CEO of Starbucks.”‘

      This is what you get when you think morals are more important than facts.

    4. Schultz is still the largest stockholder of Starbucks. (Just sayin’)

      1. I figured he owns stock but don’t see that as any real lever. Worse case he takes a temporary paper loss. The proggies will feel good about themselves but I don’t see that stopping him.

  25. In a committee hearing the delegate who wrote the proposed abortion bill was cornered into admitting it would allow abortion up to the moment of birth. There is audio of what she said about it.

    But don’t believe what the author of bill says her intention is.

  26. ICE force-feeding detainees on hunger strike

    Another four detainees are on hunger strikes in the agency’s Miami, Phoenix, San Diego and San Francisco areas of responsibility, ICE spokeswoman Leticia Zamarripa said Wednesday.
    The men say they stopped eating to protest verbal abuse and threats of deportation from guards. They are also upset about lengthy lock ups while awaiting legal proceedings.
    In mid-January, two weeks after they stopped eating, a federal judge authorized force-feeding of some El Paso detainees, Zamarripa said.

    Poor illegals and Trump having immigration laws enforced.

    1. That’s disgusting. How are you OK with that? Force-feeding prisoners is a sign of barbarism

      1. So you want to let them die? The government gets blamed for that too, as we saw in yesterday’s seizure story.

        We could just deport them without a hearing.

        I never hear any solutions besides- Americans must let non-Americans do whatever they want and Americans must obey.

        1. Maybe consider why they are refusing to eat in the first place. Is it really too much of a concession to tell officers “don’t taunt the people detained”?

          1. Its the ICE agent’s 1st Amendment right to be able to taunt the detainees.

            There is a second reason and that is the illegals dont like that they have to wait for their hearings.

            1. “Its the ICE agent’s 1st Amendment right to be able to taunt the detainees.”

              Get fucked with this argument

              1. Poor little illegals are getting taunted… By words no less…

                “You ain’t gonna be here much longer”
                “The judge is deny your ass”
                “You’re outta here in a day or two beaner”
                “We Americans make the rules around here”

                Just. like. a. gulag.

                1. Are you being ironic? Because gulags are known for vicious conditions and mental and physical anguish.

                  1. I bet Russians wish that they could self-deport out of Russia to get out of the gulag.

                    You people crack me up. Anything to further the agenda. No principles.

          2. You got ENB defending infanticide and then your defending force feeding migrants who are protesting mistreatment by officers. We have built a society of monsters.

            1. They are starving themselves because they dont like immigration rules being enforced.

              You forgot that part.

            2. You got ENB defending infanticide and then you’re defending illegals who are starve protesting Due Process and Rule of Law in America. We have built a society of monsters.

      2. So you are good with letting them starve?

        1. I doubt they will starve. Some might have the will to actually starve themselves to death but not many if any at all.

          1. It takes a special level of douche mentality to say “nah, we aren’t going to direct our employees to treat people with a degree of dignity. We’ll just manhandle them and force a tube down their throat to pump Ensure into their gut.”

            It seems like most of their requests are not just perfectly reasonable, but something that we should already be doing.

            The “Lengthy lockups awaiting legal proceedings” thing is not really ICE’s fault. It isn’t like they can argue that they are not a flight risk. And ICE doesn’t pay for judges and courts. If Team D was serious about helping the people, they’d pony up for more people to handle the processing.

            But they don’t want that… because the strategy is to delay the process until they’ve been here long enough to get in on the next round of amnesty. Amnesty which will be justified based on “They have been here for 15 years!!” So the folks on the pro-illegal immigration side get the blame for that one, not ICE.

            1. It takes a special level of douche mentality to say “nah, we aren’t going to direct our employees to treat people with a degree of dignity. We’ll just manhandle them and force a tube down their throat to pump Ensure into their gut.”

              If the guy won’t eat, what other alternative besides letting them starve is there? I understand ICE’s actions here. If they don’t do this, one of these guys might actually starve to death and the same people who are screaming about this will be screaming louder about how they allowed someone to die. It is a terrible dilema. But creating a no win dilema is the entire point of the hunger strike. I don’t see how you can blame that on ICE.

              1. Or just tell your people to quit being a bunch of douche bags and settle the thing.

                They are not going to get the “just release us” demand. That’s unreasonable. That should be explainable.

                But ICE and the White House could make a stink about how they don’t have enough resources to process (and deport or release) these people in a reasonable amount of time. That would turn the activists on their ear. (and it would be fun to watch them bloviate about how processing people in a timely manner so they don’t languish in jail is racist)

                I don’t know anything about these guys, but I do know that immigration moves at a glacial pace.

                I sponsored a green card for a wonderful employee and it took more than 8 years. 8. Efffing. Years. That’s incompetent.

                We should be able to go “citizen” or “not citizen” pretty quickly, and then go “deport” or “issue visa” pretty quickly. But we don’t. My assumption is a lack of resources, but it could also be that we have crappy processes. Either way, saying “don’t hold me in jail for 2.5 years awaiting a determination of my immigration status” is probably a reasonable request, even if it is one that ICE has no real control over.

                I know if I was working a contract in Argentina and there was some question of my status, I would be pretty pissed if they threw me in jail for a couple of years while they decided what to do.

                1. Every person in ICE detention could leave today if they agreed to self deport. ICE will even given them a plane ticket back home. They are only there because they would rather stay there than go back home. So, it is hard to have any sympathy for their complaints. They choose to be there. This isn’t a case of both sides being equally wrong. This is a case of activists wanting to make it impossible to enforce any immigration controls.

                  1. As you can tell from my comments, we definitely agree on that. The activists don’t want any of the things they claim. They don’t even want more *legal* immigration. They clearly want more illegal immigration to be tolerated. Which is a completely indefensible position, IMHO.

                    Well, unless you own a produce farm or a chicken processing plant. Or maybe a massage parlor / brothel. Then I suppose it is a pretty rational position to take.

                    1. The same people who defend various industries moving overseas as an example of comparitive advantage when talking about trade totally forget that when talking about immigration. If chicken farms need cheap labor and the cheap labor is in Mexico, doesn’t it make more sense to move the chicken farms to the labor rather than the other way around? If I am living in Central America, my first choice would be to get a good job where I am rather than having to leave everything and everyone I know to find one.

                      Those questions never get asked because for the activists it is about importing votes and power. The actual welfare of the immigrants or the economy has nothing to do with it.

        2. So you are good with letting them starve?

          Yes, absolutely.

          You break into my country unwanted–we decide that you are entitled to a hearing anyway, to see if you get to stay, and then you have the audacity to bitch at the people who are forced to deal with your sorry ass?

          All because they’re calling you names?

          Don’t eat if you don’t want. Why the fuck should we care?

  27. Former Trump worker to attend State of the Union speech

    This is going to backfire on Lefties so bad. They are literally going to publicly display an illegal immigrant who committed fraud and/or identity theft to fool the E-Verify system.

    The Trump Organization said Wednesday that it will use the E-Verify electronic system at all its properties to check employees’ documentation.

    1. I have not been able to figure out what the angle on this story is. The left picked it up and ran with it as if they had the smoking gun to crucify Trump.

      But I don’t get it. Is it because he hired illegals? They followed it from the “heartless Trump fires longtime workers” angle, which makes no sense. Plus, several of the good people they trotted out as having been here for decades working as model citizens had what could charitably be called limited English speaking ability. This kinda torpedoes the “only racists think Hispanic immigrants are not assimilating” argument too.

      Pretty much everything about this story augers for the “build a wall” crowd.

      1. Illegals are getting through the border. Check.
      2. Employer verification of right to work is easy to circumvent. Check.
      3. Illegals become a burden – these guys are complaining that they can’t work and have to get charity, so Check.
      4. Illegals don’t assimilate into the culture. Check.

      I’m on the “we need to come up with better (read easier) immigration policies” side of the fence, and even standing there I can see that this is a total loser for Team D.

  28. So people actually fell for that fake university scam? Maybe Trump is right that they’re not sending us their best and brightest…

  29. It’s wonderful to live in a progressive area of the country! So diverse! So tolerant! Yep, those “San Francisco values” really terrific!

    “Bay Area restaurant’s MAGA hat ban not to everyone’s taste”
    […]
    “”It hasn’t happened yet, but if you come to my restaurant wearing a MAGA cap, you aren’t getting served, same as if you come in wearing a swastika, white hood, or any other symbol of intolerance and hate,” tweeted J. Kenji L?pez-Alt, the chef-partner of Wursthall in San Mateo, on Sunday.”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/
    article/Bay-Area-restaurant-s-MAGA
    -hat-ban-not-to-13575411.php

    1. What happens if I show up wearing a MAGA hat on top of my white hood with a swastika on it but identify to my server as a Black Isrealite while dressed in blackface?

    2. “any other symbol of intolerance and hate,”

      “such as our competition’s logo or my nickname from middle school.”

    3. dude’s runnin’ a brat-haus, doesn’t want nazis?

  30. Plastic straw cop, now there is a worse police position than meter maid

    1. Sounds like a secure government job for all of those Victim’s Studies grads.

  31. Start working at home with Google. It’s the most-financially rewarding I’ve ever done. On tuesday I got a gorgeous BMW after having earned $8699 this last month. I actually started five months/ago and practically straight away was bringin in at least $96, per-hour. visit this site right here….. http://www.mesalary.com

  32. One of the interesting things about the abortion debate is the contrast between how concrete the pro life side is to how abstract the pro abortion side is. The pro life side’s arguments whatever you think of them are always very concrete and backed up by examples. If the pro life side says that children survive abortion, they have a dozen kids who did just that lined up to tell you about it. If the pro life side says abortion is gruisome and horrible and not just disposing of cells, they have sonograms and pictures that will make you want to throw up that show exactly what they are talking about. They claim abortions ruin women’s health, they have a dozen women lined up who have had abortions ready to explain just that and exactly

    The pro choice people in contrast are forever about the theoretical. They claim abortions are neccessary to save women’s lives but they never explain under what circumstances that is true. They never seem to have any women there to claim that having an abortion saved their lives and why that was so. They never give any concrete details or have any actual examples. And that is why the VA governor got in so much trouble and said such an idiotic thing. He was asked to explain in concrete terms what the bill meant and like all pro abortionists started rambling on about some hypothetical example and before he knew it he was endorsing infanticide.

    1. Generally, but I recall hearing – years ago – a pro-choice physician explaining how having to carry an incest child (raped by father) drove a woman nuts.

      1. I can see that.

      2. Again, where is the woman? If it is the case that legal abortion is necessary to save the lives of women, then why are there not hundreds if not thousands of women who had abortions that saved their lives marching on the capitol every year? There are millions of abortions every year. If even a small percentage of those really were necessary to save the woman’s life, there should be tens of thousands of women who are alive today because of having an abortion. And yet, I can’t recall ever seeing such a woman in public. I am not saying they don’t exist or that someone can’t come up with an example from somewhere, but they certainly don’t seem to exist in any significant numbers. So, you tell me how you square the scarcity of such women with the claims that abortions are necessary to save the life of the woman in anything but the rarest of cases?

    2. ” and before he knew it he was endorsing infanticide.”

      Man, if I had a nickel for every time that’s happened to me…

      1. Without humble braggin, I will just say I have seen some very disturbing things in my life. But, I am not sure I have ever seen anything that creeped me out and made my hair stand on end more than that video. The guy is talking about the decision to murder a live child. Slade keeps claiming he was talking about a child who was doomed to die but that makes no sense. If the child is going to die anyway, then there isn’t a decision needed to be made. And even if there was, that is euthanasia not abortion anyway. More importantly, he doesn’t say say “not going to make it” he says “not going to make it OR is deformed”. He is talking about murdering a child who is born deformed and the partents just don’t want. And he is talking about it in the most discustingly sterile and theraputic terms. “Certainly we can make the child comfortable…” was the line that really got me. If the child is doomed and already dead, then why is there a need to make it comfortable.

        I know Slade has to come out and defend this or face losing her job and likely all of her friends but anyone who can watch that video and not be sickened by it much less try and defend it has something very wrong with them.

    3. Add that the pro-life side can also provide examples and cases of women who psychologically struggle after an abortion which rarely gets attention it seems.

    4. because he endorses infanticide.

      1. He absolutely does. And the people like Slade claiming he doesn’t are just lying and telling us not to believe our lying eyes. I don’t really know who Slade lives with herself and how whatever reason is paying her could possibly worth walking away from her integrity like that.

        1. This discussion wasn’t the money quote on that topic. The money quote was the debate over exactly when you *can’t* do an abortion.

          And the answer to “even when delivery is started and the baby’s head is crowning?” was “there’s nothing in the law that would prevent that.”

          There’s nuanced arguments and painful edge cases with grotesque birth defects that are discovered late and people who are stuck in tragic situations.

          But then there’s “you can abort the perfectly healthy baby as it is on its way out of the birth canal” argument. I’mma go ahead and call that one a 100% loser of an argument. If you can’t get to a firm “no” on that one, you’ve got serious issues. Like serial killer sociopath type issues. I can’t see any sane human lining up behind that argument.

          1. Even rejecting that begs the question about how is that something can be a lump of cells lible to be destroyed at any time one moment and a full human being the next simply because it leaves the mother’s womb. There is no physical or mental change that occurs during the process of birth that I can see that could possibly justify such a distinction.

            I think you can have a reasonable discussion about when life begins inside the womb, is it brain waves, a beating heart, limbs, or whatever. Even if I don’t agree with a particular claim of when life begins, I don’t think you can claim such distinctions are unreasonable or arbitrary. But knowing what we know about fetal development I can see no rational case for claiming that the moment of birth is when life begins.

            1. Yeah, that’s why I think this line of reasoning is a complete loser. I don’t think you could get 0.5% of the people to agree with that one. And probably 30% think aliens routinely visit us.

              1. What they don’t? The aliens.

                1. Rufus, the first rule of the alien club is we don’t talk about the aliens.

                  1. had it up to here with the rules about the aliens I will not be restrained.

                    >>>I can’t see any sane human lining up behind that argument.

                    question whether the people are insane, but their arguments willfully defy logic

            2. Like drone strikes, it’s not murder if you can’t see the victim.

          2. There’s nuanced arguments and painful edge cases with grotesque birth defects that are discovered late and people who are stuck in tragic situations.

            And even then, those arguments stretch credulity. There’s tests that can detect Down’s and other birth defects months in advance of delivery. 3-D ultrasounds can find the same thing.

            If a mother is carrying a baby to term, and it turns out to have physical defects, the odds are on the extreme high side that she’s known about it long before the Magic Birth Canal trip. And now pro-abortionists are arguing that this doesn’t even matter, and that babies are still fetuses for some indeterminate amount of time after they take their first breaths.

            It’s fucking ghoulish, and a great example of why leftism is a social cancer. Like I said above, at least the Spartans were honest about why they practiced infanticide. The left can’t even do that, because they lie with every breath they can muster, and then “Catholic libertarians” like Slade end up acting as apologists for these people, because they refuse to see how Northam is clumsily running cover for the fact that Tran basically admitted she considers abortion on a baby who’s crowning during delivery to still be perfectly fine.

    5. They never give any concrete details or have any actual examples.

      Hell, even if they did it wouldn’t address the core of their argument: that if a woman gets pregnant and wants to get rid of the baby simply because she just wants to enjoy fucking without dealing with any consequences, that’s a sacred right that somebody else should foot the bill for.

      1. That’s the part that clinches it for me why tax dollars shouldn’t go into abortion. It enables poor choices and risky behaviour. You want to fuck your brains out? Take the precaution if it not or in the event it fails you, well, this is what it means to be human and to have agency. Account for it. Don’t ask me to pay for it.

    6. Yes but.

      The reality is that >95% of abortions are in the first 20 weeks where the vast majority at least agree it should be legal.

      The political fights are at the margins using rare examples.

      One side says “this is rarely justified and barbaric and it should be illegal” the other says “this is a rare circumstance and we need compassion for the mother”.

      Tactically it eliminates any risk of restrictions on the more common scenarios.

      1. threat of restrictions much more lucrative

      2. Really? Just how many abortions are after the first 20 weeks? Even if there is only one, why is the pro life side being extreme trying to ban them? You can’t claim that abortions after 20 weeks are bad things and then call the pro life side extremists because they fight efforts to legalize such things.

    7. He was also talking out of his ass describing things in his hypothetical about the effects of the proposed law that are applicable under current law that the proposed law eliminates.

      Again the delegate who wrote the law was quite clear, even it had to be dragged out of her, what she wants to be legal. Spade providing cover for what the governor without referring to what the author of the bill said which he was commenting on is weird.

      1. It is not wierd at all. Slade is providing cover for infanticide while claiming to be pro life. She doesn’t mention the author of the bill, who might be the most terrifying women I have ever seen in public life, because she wants to leave the impression that the bill doesn’t endorse infanticide by just talking about the governor.

        1. It is weird for someone who is giving assurances she is pro-life, and remarkably incurious for someone who makes their living as a reporter to not look into the bill’s author’s own comments which were the subject of what the governor was saying.

          You may be right about Slade’s motivations.

          1. Slade is not stupid. She knows what that bill does and she certainly saw the video of it’s author. She just has a job to do which is be the designated pro life concern troll sent out by reason to explain that as a reasonable pro life person the governor is being treated unfairly and by implication this bill is okay.

            1. Actually, Slade has tweeted repeatedly that the bill is horrific.

    8. The pro choice people in contrast are forever about the theoretical.

      One of mankind’s advantages over other animals, maybe the greatest advantage, is the ability to think in hypothetical and theoretical terms. Being stuck in the concrete world is not something that should be praised.

      The argument being made is one of morality and concrete examples should be irrelevant. People are capable of making moral choices without needing explicit examples of those choices.

      1. A hypothetical is only as persuasive as its connection to reality. If the hypothetical doesn’t actually exist or express some factual truth it is worthless. It is not an argument, it is a fantasy.

        If I am no longer required to show any connection to facts, I can think up a hypothetical argument against anything.

      2. Yes. This is a moral question, so we should be honest about what is being discussed here: is it morally acceptable to kill an infant after birth?

        1. I don’t disagree. Based on some other things I saw I don’t think you’re catching the actual thrust of the law, but whatevs.

          1. That sounds like a defense that is typically used by Trump supporters when he says something vile. “We should disregard what the governor and the bill’s sponsor said because I like this policy” sounds a lot like “We should disregard what candidate Trump said about a Muslim ban, because I like this policy”.

            1. I don’t know what you’re saying here. I’m not defending anything.

              1. What you said is that I’m not catching the “thrust of the law”, which has been used by defenders of the bill in order to ignore the statements made by the governor and the bill’s sponsor. All I’m saying is that that’s a tactic that Trump supporters used for the “refugee ban”. That we should not consider the president’s statement in support of a “Muslim ban”, because that wasn’t the “thrust” of the ban.

                I don’t buy that. But, I appreciate your response. I’m honestly trying to understand the basis for justifying this legislation.

                1. Did you read the actual wording of the law or are you going by what someone posted on Twitter? I haven’t read the law but I read some refutations with citations from the law against the people shouting infanticide. You could be right, I could be wrong. In the long run I don’t really care about the law, but I wouldn’t say anything against you caring about it.

                  1. I have read the law. Like I said, I’m honestly trying to understand the basis for justifying the legislation. I read Twitter pontifications in defense of the law, but they like to add caveats that don’t exist and add in qualifications that don’t appear in the law. I saw that one of the previous co-sponsors has backed away from her support of the law which indicates to me that either people have politicized the law to the point that it’s “toxic” or the exposure that the law has received has exposed its “toxic” elements.

                    To be honest, I stopped giving the pro-choice side the benefit of the doubt after the Kermit Gosnell incident. I’ve always been skeptical about the pro-life side’s arguments.

        2. The 12 Tables of Roman Law dictated that kids with obvious defects be killed. Never mind that infanticide was a barbaric act to sacrifice kids to the gods. Maybe that’s what they’re doing here except it’s to the state?

          The practice was outlawed in the 4th century I think. I don’t know how prevalent it was by then or if people were even put in jail for it.

          1. I do think killing someone for a defect is horrific.

            I have a kid in my daycare who has a condition that left his left side of his face paralyzed and is missing an ear. But everyone loves him to death. He always makes sure to come in my office to say good bye.

            Ask me what I think of that Virginia bill on strict human terms.

            1. I have a kid in my daycare who has a condition that left his left side of his face paralyzed and is missing an ear

              If you were the doctor that delivered that child and made the determination that it would take an extraordinary amount of work simply to keep him alive as well as require lifelong care, would you do that extra work regardless of the wish of the mother?

              1. Is this a serious question?

                I can tell you one thing his parents don’t regret anything. I admire them.

                1. I can tell you one thing his parents don’t regret anything. I admire them.

                  And there’s nothing wrong with that. But what do you do about the cases where the family will be completely incapable of caring for the child?

                  1. What happens if the parents still want to keep the child regardless but the state says they can’t afford it?

                    1. What happens if the parents still want to keep the child regardless but the state says they can’t afford it?

                      The state shouldn’t have a say other than to leave the decision to the doctor and the mother. I could be wrong, but I saw that this was a point of this law.

                    2. What happens if the parents still want to keep the child regardless but the state says they can’t afford it?

                      And why dodge the question I asked you?

              2. If you were the doctor that delivered that child and made the determination that it would take an extraordinary amount of work simply to keep him alive as well as require lifelong care, would you do that extra work regardless of the wish of the mother?

                What kind of question is this?

                You don’t get to kill people because their existence might inconvenience someone.

                The doctor doesn’t get a say. The mother doesn’t get a say. A person who is alive is alive. The doctor’s ONLY job is to keep them that way.

                1. The doctor doesn’t get a say. The mother doesn’t get a say. A person who is alive is alive. The doctor’s ONLY job is to keep them that way.

                  Please send your home address to every hospital in VA. They’re going to need to know where to send the babies that can’t be taken care of by the birth parents.

                  1. Do you not get that the option to say “it would take an extraordinary amount of work simply to keep him alive as well as require lifelong care, let’s just kill him” closes forever after birth?

                    And it should close after about 20 weeks of pregnancy.

                    Once you’ve passed that threshold you don’t get to say no. You step up.

                    1. Once you’ve passed that threshold you don’t get to say no. You step up.

                      So step up and send your home address to every hospital in VA. Otherwise, fuck off.

                    2. Sparky, I already have.

                      I’m a foster and adoptive parent.

                      So take a flying fuck you pretentious douche.

                      I’ll reiterate–

                      Once you’re past viability, your options close. You either step up and take care of your kid, or you sign off so someone who can step up can do something.

                      KILLING, which is what I’m talking about, is off the table.

                      To me.

                      To you, based on what you’re saying here, killing babies, live breathing babies, is just fine if the parents don’t want to care for it.

                      You’ve really sunk low.

      3. The argument being made is one of morality and concrete examples should be irrelevant.

        That is just complete nonsense. Morality and ethics are by their very nature practical questions. If the real world effects of a particular moral postulate don’t matter, then morality just becomes an exercise in rationalization of whatever the speaker prefers. And now that I put it that way, that is a perfect description of the arguments made for abortion; exercises in rationalization of murder in the name of convience.

        1. If the real world effects of a particular moral postulate don’t matter

          Show me where I said that.

          then morality just becomes an exercise in rationalization of whatever the speaker prefers

          Which is exactly what morality is.

          I don’t have to kill someone to believe that killing is wrong. You don’t have to have an abortion to think that abortion is wrong. Both of those decisions come from our ability to think hypothetically.

          1. Show me where I said that.

            If hypothetical arguments carry the same weight regardless of their connection to reality, the necessary implication is that the effects of a proposition on the real world don’t matter. If the effects mattered, hypothetical arguments made in support of them would have to bear some connection to reality to be persuasive.

            1. If hypothetical arguments carry the same weight regardless of their connection to reality, the necessary implication is that the effects of a proposition on the real world don’t matter.

              Not quite. Being able to make hypothetical arguments means we can argue one side or another without having direct experience of either. It lets us think beyond our personal experience.

              1. Sure. But not every hypothetical is persuasive. How persuasive it is depends on how well it reflects reality.

                1. I don’t disagree.

    9. its not just this governor but academics also suggesting infantcide
      https://slate.com/technology /2012/03/after-birth-abortion- the-pro-choice-case-for-infanticide.html

      I know just google it

  33. It’s nice to see Heaton back in the mix, even if they did make him use the servant’s entrance.

  34. If you add gender identity to civil rights, how do you determine their gender identity? Everything instantly becomes a hate crime if someone wants it to be so, one might think.

  35. Millennial and Gen Z voters will make up nearly 40 percent of the electorate in 2020, Pew Research reports.

    That might not pan out like you think.

    1. Of course we want the next generation to be better than us. Like older siblings, we care for them and certainly appreciate that they have learned from some of our mistakes, especially in the financial realm. But it is important to pay close attention to Gen Z’s more radical political outlooks. The Republican party usually engages people as they get older, but with Gen Z’s conservative leanings the Republicans have great hope of capturing yet another election. If we don’t want a major upset in 2020 we have to find ways to reach out to the next generation and work together.

      “radical political outlooks”? Haha. Socialists like the author pride themselves on being radical.

      The proper term would be more like traditional political outlooks

  36. I’m pro-choice and what the governor said makes me very uncomfortable.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.