“When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.”
― Thomas Sowell

“I have never understood why it is “greed” to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.”
― Thomas Sowell, Barbarians Inside the Gates and Other Controversial Essays

“It’s amazing how much panic one honest man can spread among a multitude of hypocrites. ”
― Thomas Sowell

“People who pride themselves on their “complexity” and deride others for being “simplistic” should realize that the truth is often not very complicated. What gets complex is evading the truth.”
― Thomas Sowell, Barbarians Inside the Gates and Other Controversial Essays

“The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.”
― Thomas Sowell, Is Reality Optional? And Other Essays

“Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good.”
― Thomas Sowell

No Great Nation Has Ever Abandoned Gold and Remained Great.—Ronald Reagan

Democratic proposals to repair America’s broken healthcare system have reliably shown a slide towards healthcare-for-all. But for the first time since the modern healthcare system began, Republicans have what they say is an answer.

“Democrats made health insurance illegal in the United States. You can’t buy health insurance. All you can buy is a health care plan. We need to allow people who just want ‘I got hit by a bus, or I got cancer’ insurance to buy that, and they can say, ‘I can take care of everything by myself.’ We need to solve that health insurance problem. Democrats have caused all of these problems, but it is now our job to fix them all, and we’re laser focused on doing it well,” Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., told Just The News exclusively.

Republicans lay out their plans: direct deposits One recent proposal from Senate Republicans Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Mike Crapo of Idaho involves a plan to redirect expiring enhanced Affordable Care Act (ACA) credits into direct HSA deposits ($1,000 for ages 18-49, $1,500 for 50-64) for low- to middle-income individuals buying bronze or catastrophic plans. Their proposal would require Medicaid citizenship verification and bar funds for abortions or gender-affirming care. This aims to shift aid from insurers to individuals, potentially reducing premiums by promoting cheaper high-deductible plans.

The Republican brainstorming to patch ACA has been all-hands-on-deck. Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga., spoke to Just The News and brought his own ideas to the table including the crucial competition factor: “The way to fix this is to put competition back into the system. And get rid of the pharmacy benefit rent managers, get rid of all of these middle people that have driven up the cost of health care.”

“We have so few insurance carriers. We need to make clear is that an individual state has the right to license individual health insurance products to be sold in that individual state. And then, if they want to have some type of joint service agreement between [bordering states] like Alabama, Georgia, Florida, makes plenty of sense to me. But we have to get smaller companies into the business to put pressure on the big companies.”

“We do not need to be doubling down on a broken system”: Onder Rep. Bob Onder, R-Mo., also championed Republican solutions to Obamacare. He recalled many of the early issues of Obamacare and told Just The News, “The very year the Obamacare exchanges were implemented in 2014, insurance prices went up 47% one year, and since then, they’ve gone up 98%, so we do not need to be doubling down on a broken system.”

Emphasizing a free-market approach to healthcare, he added, “We need to be introducing market-oriented, consumer-choice driven reforms…things like expanding health savings accounts, association health plans where groups of employers or other groups can get together and form their own plans, short term health plans where people can buy the insurance that they want and need, not a one-size-fits-all, extremely expensive plan that some bureaucrat wrote for them.”

Another plan via House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., focuses on expanding association health plans for group purchasing of cheaper coverage, restoring cost-sharing reductions to lower out-of-pocket costs, and increasing pharmacy benefit manager transparency to reduce drug prices. It codifies HSA rules and bundles prior bipartisan measures but avoids extending enhanced subsidies to curb spending.

Fine also spoke about issues surrounding transparency in healthcare. He noted, “When you divorce people from the cost of things they buy, they don’t pay attention. Life insurance has gone way down in price over time because you buy it yourself. Health insurance has gone way up over time because you have no idea.”

Fine highlighted his solution to this, which is: “Most people get their insurance through their employers. When they find out what their employers are paying for their insurance, they go crazy. The reason you get your insurance through your employer is its tax advantage. If we let people buying their own insurance get the same tax advantage, we can then tell employers don’t do it anymore. Just pay people more and let them buy it themselves, and then people will start to shop around. When you take that incentive away from people, costs go out of control. And that is what has happened here.”

Yet another fix emphasizes funneling federal health funds directly to individuals via expanded HSAs or similar accounts for catastrophic/high-deductible coverage, criticizing insurer subsidies and aligning with broader patient-directed aid. This plan reflects many of the proposals stated by President Trump and a number of Republicans who have made similar proposals, most similarly by Rep. Eric Burlison, (R-Mo.), who introduced the idea of MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) accounts.

Government shutdown exposes subsidy mess The recent federal government shutdown, which lasted 43 days from October 1 to November 12 and became the longest in history, stemmed primarily from a partisan dispute over extending enhanced Obamacare premium tax credit subsidies set to expire at the end of 2025. Senate Democrats blocked Republican appropriations bills until a separate vote on the subsidies was promised.

The enhanced subsidies, affecting around 24 million enrollees and projected to cost hundreds of billions if extended, were a key Democratic demand to prevent sharp premium increases for low- and moderate-income Americans, though the final continuing resolution funded the government without including the extension.

The White House pointed out that under former President Joe Biden, millions of illegal immigrants were granted entry into the country who benefited from the subsidies, which Republicans vehemently opposed.

Timeline of efforts to bring socialized healthcare to America In 1945, Democratic President Harry Truman proposed a national health insurance plan for all Americans, facing opposition including $1.5 million in lobbying by the American Medical Association in 1948. That’s $27 million in 2025 dollars.

The Democratic-sponsored Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill, introduced in 1943 and reintroduced annually for the next 14 years, sought compulsory national health insurance via payroll taxes but failed amid accusations of socialism.

Then in 1965, Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson enacted Medicare and Medicaid after decades of effort, providing coverage for the elderly and poor that grew to enroll nearly 75 million in Medicaid by the 2010s as partial steps toward universal systems. Those programs were centerpieces of LBJ’s “Great Society” plan.

In 1993, Democratic President Bill Clinton’s Health Security Act aimed for universal coverage through regulated private insurance but collapsed due to industry and partisan opposition. From 2003, Democratic Representative John Conyers introduced Medicare for All bills annually, starting with 38 co-sponsors and reaching 124 in 2017.

By 2025 in the 119th Congress, Representative Pramila Jayapal’s version had 110 co-sponsors, while Senator Bernie Sanders’ had 17, showing sustained Democratic support for a single-payer system.

The biggest advancement toward Democrats’ vision of healthcare came with the Affordable Care Act, enacted in 2010 under President Obama, which expanded coverage to over 20 million Americans through marketplaces and Medicaid expansion, reducing the uninsured rate from around 14% in 2013 to about 8% in recent years.

It turns out that ACA cost Americans more It was described by then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in 2013 as a step toward eventually moving past insurance-based healthcare to a single-payer system.

However, individual market premiums rose sharply, post-implementation, with average increases exceeding 100% in many analyses from 2013 to 2019, far surpassing pre-ACA trends. Many enrollees also encountered reduced scope of coverage, with rising deductibles—averaging over $7,000 on popular bronze plans—and narrower networks limiting provider choices and comprehensive benefits.

---

Amanda Head, Just the News

Ode to Passed FReeper DainBramaged, and the Hunt of a Lifetime He Gave Me!

Six years ago, FReeper “dainbramaged” (a guy I eventually knew In Real Life named “Rich”, last name withheld for his family’s anonymity) and I were FReepmailing about firearms. He mentioned he had a Winchester Model 94 in .30-30 that his Great Grandfather had bought new in 1898, and that he had no heirs who would care to have it, having only had one uninterested daughter in his life. So we kinda agreed that if and when he ever considered disposing of it, that he would call me, as I live just 40 miles away.

Two years passed, and Rich called: “I have four kinds of cancer, and I’ll be out in about 3 months.” Tragic. He had had a fascinating and good life, a loving wife and daughter, a great place in the woods, a 1973 Ford F250 HiBoy in pristine condition … and a gun collection.

“How’d you like to come buy me out?” he said. “What all do you have?” I replied. He listed out about 22 firearms, including the 125-year-old Model 1894. “That’s a few more than I can handle, but can I bring a relative and friend?”

So a few weeks later, my BIL, best friend and I went to Rich’s. He had them all carefully laid out on the dining room table. My retired Lt. Col. (artillery) brother-in-law saw the Springfield 1911, sat down in front of it and put his arms around it. That was going to be his, a 1942 WWII US Army model. I had dibs on the Model 94 and a Ruger Blackhawk flattop in .357.

We had a nice lunch with Rich and his wife, and got down to business. We divvied up the guns among us three depending on our interest, taking 20 out of 22 guns. I ended up with several nice pieces.

We had a gentlemanly negotiation in which Rich offered them to us for too little money, we upped our offers, and settled on prices about 1/3rd of market. With several thousand dollars in a nice tall stack, Rich tapped them into place and said, “When we’re all done here, I’m taking this down to the Senior Center and donating it.”

And so, we have in our friend circle a drinking toast:

“Be Rich!”

Which means exactly: “Be generous beyond any reasonable expectation.”

We went back to visit Rich two more times before he passed, and played poker and drank whiskey with an even larger group of guys who had heard the story. I was out of country for the funeral, but my best friend went.

So, as noted above, the .357 is my anti-Griz gun.

The Model 94 was a bit tricky. It had a headspace problem, and I tried for a couple of years to get that fixed, but nobody with skills and parts could get it done. Eventually, I tried different ammo which largely eliminated the problem, and worked closely with an Oklahoman gunsmith I encountered in Tel Aviv to understand that the problem was never going to be dangerous.

So this fall, I hunted Mule Deer in SE Washington State with Rich’s Great Grandfather’s 125 year old Model 94 with open sights. That territory is wide open, with long shots being the norm. This fall, about 12 bucks were taken (3 points on one side minimum), and the shortest shot was 300 yards, longest was 600 yards.

700 yards up on that rugged mountain several years ago, I encountered a guy named “Frank” who was 97 at the time. He had shot a nice buck the year before at age 96 at 413 yards, verified by rangefinder. His family had helped him out with the meat.

Frank is a WWII Navy Submariner. He’s tough as nails. I’ve seen him every year until this year up at the same place, 700 yards up a steep hill, posted up for Mule Deer.

I asked him how he stays in such good shape: “Before I get up out of bed each morning, I stretch and flex all my muscles, move all my joints as far as they can go, then I get up and use my 5 pound weights. I had to back off of the 10 pounders last year. Then I go for a walk.”

On the eighth day of hunting season this year, Frank hurt his hip 700 yards up there. “Yeah, I had to crawl out with my rifle and pack back to the Jeep and waited a few hours for the family to come back down and take me back to camp.”

Frank turned 101 years old this past November.

So, we have a toast in my friend group: “Be Frank!” Which is to prepare to live to a ripe old age while staying in excellent physical shape.

So on to my hunting story. I had had 7 days of poor luck, with dozens of does, several legitimate shots on 2×2 bucks that didn’t meet the 3 point criteria. But I’m regularly stalking big groups of deer as close as 25 yards, so I’m feeling pretty good about the possibility of getting a short shot with open sights.

On Day 7, I ran into a young guy who spent more money on his spotting scope than I had in my rifle, scope, and everything else I had on me. The dude was totally kitted out. I have no idea how many thousands of dollars his scope cost. His rifle was a wonder of modern technology, with silencer (?) / muzzle break, a spectacular carbon fiber tripod brace for his scope and rifle, etc.

He and I discussed the herds we had seen, and following each other’s footprints around the area a couple of miles out past the last road. We got friendly fast, and he told me of a couple of bucks out in a certain cliff area that was way too hard for me to hike at age 63. But we agreed that he’d go hike the cliffs, and if he knocked a buck down to where I was, he’d be happy if I shot it.

So for the next couple of days, I set up to intercept any buck he moved my way. Day 1, lots and lots of does, and 2 different 2x2s at 50 yards. No shot.

Day 2, I’m up in this crenelated basalt wall perch with grass sticking out the top, a perfect hide. There are about 20 does and fawns splayed out below me. No bucks … until one rounds the corner about 350 yards out, way too long a shot for open sights. So I track him in with the binoculars until he’s at about 200 yards, and I can’t count how many points, but it’s a forest of tines up there, so I’m sure he’s legal.

Then he wanders left into some thick undergrowth, and I lose him. I keep looking out further to the left to see if he’s after the does on the far side of the thicket. Nothing. Dang. Lost him.

So I go back and scan the right side of the thicket, and he’s come back out, is at 100 yards, and heading towards me! I set Rich’s Great Grandfather’s 125 year old Winchester Model 1894 in a slot of the basalt while the buck comes straight at me. No shot.

He stops at 75 yards, turns left 90 degrees and gives me the perfect side to side shot. Drilled him through both lungs.

I’m so freaking excited! But he’s kinda loping around the field like he might make a run for it. I’d hate to lose him in the thicket, the wide open country, or have him suffer any. So as he’s lurching away at 80 yards, I take a head shot. Miss. At 100 yards, head shot, miss. At 125 yards and lurching about, head shot, connected through the brain and out the right eye socket. He drops in place.

That’s a dead deer, so I’m comfortable walking right up. Yup. He’s a goner. 7:15 a.m. Rack is huge on a medium sized animal, 4 points x 5 points. Well over 200 pounds.

Luckily, I’m hard up against a mountain to the South, and I know I have lots of time before the sun hits the carcass. I don’t have my butchering gear and bags with me, and I could use some help. So I hike out 2 miles, go to Frank’s camp for assistance, and nobody but the lady of the camp is there. So I head back in with my meat pack and knives, and get busy butchering.

As I’m going through the motions, I notice the small entry wound, and no exit wound. Weird. So I’m skinning my way down the far side, and my knife hits the mushroomed .30-30 bullet just under the skin. So I’ve got in hand the bullet that took the deer!

When I’m almost done at 11 a.m., two guys from Frank’s camp show up to help. One carries out the head, the other carries out one hind quarter, and I carried out 65 pounds of meat in my pack, all of us in one trip!

Back at Frank’s camp, I have a great picture of me, Frank, the head of the buck, and the rifle in its rack.

Got the meat down on salted ice water immediately. Gave away all my excess food and beer to Frank’s camp mates. Beat feet back to civilization with a whole lot of excellent venison for the year.

All of which is to say,

********

THANK YOU MY DEARLY DEPARTED FRIEND DAINBRAMAGED, RICH.

********

I will never have a more meaningful hunt.

And to all my fellow FReepers:

BE RICH!

BE FRANK!

Uncle Miltie

This Marxist-born racial attack bears no relationship to how American whites have fought for centuries to overcome racism and achieve equality.

Steve McCann | December 30, 2025, AMERICAN THINKER

In a speech at the December 2025 Turning Point USA summit in Phoenix, Arizona, Vice President J.D. Vance declared, “In the United States, you don’t have to apologize for being white anymore.”

There was an overwhelming and immediate meltdown on the left, replete with the usual vile epithets and accusations of “white supremacy,” as headlines on the internet blared, “JD Vance Goes Full White Nationalist at TPUSA Event,” and NPR declared, “Vance Refuses to Set Red Line Over Bigotry at Turning Point USA’s Convention.”

Further, I am proud to be a member of the race that created Western Civilization. A civilization that ended 12,000 years of global slavery, initiated and promoted universal human rights, originated women’s equality, created parliamentary democracy, dramatically raised the standard of living for all races around the globe, and recognized that as certain rights came from God and not man, they cannot be abrogated.

After having attended the March on Washington on August 28, 1963, and listened to the immortal words of Martin Luther King, I have judged others not “…by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Thus, I am not about to roll over and allow autocratic demagogues and their dimwitted acolytes, such as yourself, to use fictitious “systemic racism” and “white nationalism” to denigrate and intimidate the vast bulk of the population in order to achieve the ultimate goal of transforming this magnificent nation into a one-party socialist oligarchy.

It is long past time for America’s white population to stop cowering in the shadows and living in fear of being falsely and absurdly labeled. That begins by understanding the genesis of this anti-white movement and its ultimate objective.

Up until fifty-five years ago, America’s Marxists had been unable to make any serious inroads toward transforming the United States into a one-party “socialist paradise” by using the standard class-warfare tactics that had succeeded in other nations. Those tactics worked in these nations because there was an element of truth to the underlying allegations of rampant inequality stemming from rigid class structures and monolithic governments.

These tactics did not work in America, as this is the first nation in the annals of mankind to eliminate rigid class structure, recognize the rights of the individual, dramatically disperse governmental power, and champion capitalism. Further, it is also the first nation to create a written permanent Constitution with provisions to correct societal inequalities, a document used to establish women’s suffrage in 1920 and eliminate the last vestiges of institutional racism in the 1960s. It is the only nation in history that was willing to suffer the overwhelming death and destruction of a civil war to permanently end slavery. And it is the only country in the annals of mankind created as a multi-ethnic nation.

Thanks to the success of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, America’s Marxists were forced to—and did—change tactics. They began promoting the false premise that the Civil Rights Movement underscored the reality that the United States was and will continue to be a malevolent nation due to “systemic racism” and “white privilege.”

According to their agitprop, the European branch of the Caucasian race (or more contemptuously “whites”) has, since the dawn of recorded history, been the principal promoters and beneficiaries of slavery and repression throughout the world. Thus, the members of this villainous race who settled in this country over the past 400 years are responsible for imposing never-ending racism and inequity on the American continent.

Therefore, the current white American population must openly confess its collective guilt and seek forgiveness. Additionally, and in light of this demonic legacy, every American of any race should be mortified to be a citizen of such a vile and irredeemable country.

Not coincidentally, this same cabal has declared that there is a path toward national redemption and a mechanism to forever erase the stain of “white supremacy” and “systemic racism.” That is for the American Marxists (almost entirely populated by self-aggrandizing members of the white populace) to assume the reins of power in perpetuity and transform the nation into a one-party secular socialist paradise. Their permanent ascendancy to the top of the governing pyramid would be the only means for unenlightened members of the white population who are not part of the ruling left to be granted absolution.

If so-called “white supremacy” has run rampant throughout the nation since its founding, what explains the historical determination of America’s overwhelmingly dominant white Christian population to right wrongs and live by the tenets of the Declaration of Independence with its Judeo-Christian underpinning, a mindset that stretches back to the nation’s founding and the abolition movements of the 19th century?

This determination culminated in a devastating and brutal Civil War. A war in which nearly 400,000 white Union soldiers (the equivalent of over 6 million today) died to end slavery. Further, over the decades, it was the dominant white Christian citizenry that was the catalyst in bringing about change and ensuring the rights of all Americans.

These tactics did not work in America, as this is the first nation in the annals of mankind to eliminate rigid class structure, recognize the rights of the individual, dramatically disperse governmental power, and champion capitalism. Further, it is also the first nation to create a written permanent Constitution with provisions to correct societal inequalities, a document used to establish women’s suffrage in 1920 and eliminate the last vestiges of institutional racism in the 1960s. It is the only nation in history that was willing to suffer the overwhelming death and destruction of a civil war to permanently end slavery. And it is the only country in the annals of mankind created as a multi-ethnic nation.

Thanks to the success of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, America’s Marxists were forced to—and did—change tactics. They began promoting the false premise that the Civil Rights Movement underscored the reality that the United States was and will continue to be a malevolent nation due to “systemic racism” and “white privilege.”

According to their agitprop, the European branch of the Caucasian race (or more contemptuously “whites”) has, since the dawn of recorded history, been the principal promoters and beneficiaries of slavery and repression throughout the world. Thus, the members of this villainous race who settled in this country over the past 400 years are responsible for imposing never-ending racism and inequity on the American continent.

Therefore, the current white American population must openly confess its collective guilt and seek forgiveness. Additionally, and in light of this demonic legacy, every American of any race should be mortified to be a citizen of such a vile and irredeemable country.

Not coincidentally, this same cabal has declared that there is a path toward national redemption and a mechanism to forever erase the stain of “white supremacy” and “systemic racism.” That is for the American Marxists (almost entirely populated by self-aggrandizing members of the white populace) to assume the reins of power in perpetuity and transform the nation into a one-party secular socialist paradise. Their permanent ascendancy to the top of the governing pyramid would be the only means for unenlightened members of the white population who are not part of the ruling left to be granted absolution.

If so-called “white supremacy” has run rampant throughout the nation since its founding, what explains the historical determination of America’s overwhelmingly dominant white Christian population to right wrongs and live by the tenets of the Declaration of Independence with its Judeo-Christian underpinning, a mindset that stretches back to the nation’s founding and the abolition movements of the 19th century?

This determination culminated in a devastating and brutal Civil War. A war in which nearly 400,000 white Union soldiers (the equivalent of over 6 million today) died to end slavery. Further, over the decades, it was the dominant white Christian citizenry that was the catalyst in bringing about change and ensuring the rights of all Americans.

In 1960, nearly 89% of the American population identified as White. Without the involvement of the white citizenry, the Civil Rights Movement would not have been successful. Eliminating all remaining vestiges of institutionalized racism would not have been achieved without the acquiescence of the bulk of the white population.

This is not a racist nation. Despite the American Marxists and their never-ending vitriol and despite their being able to exploit some credulous citizens, the vast majority of Americans instinctively know that.

As recently as 2008, and before the ascension of the race-baiting Barack Obama and his Marxist fellow-travelers, only 18% of Americans were greatly concerned or worried about the state of race relations in the country, as nearly 70% thought that relations between whites and blacks were very or somewhat good.

JD Vance is right: Stop apologizing for being white. All Americans should be proud of being a member of whatever race or ethnic group they may belong to and of being a citizen of the United States. They should not be gulled into feeling guilty about what their ancestors did or didn’t do, especially given that virtually every person on the planet today has ancestors who were slaves and who were also involved in the conquest of other peoples, tribes, or nations.

The time has come for America’s white population to uncompromisingly tell those among their number who are maliciously fomenting guilt and promoting reverse discrimination to shove it.

By Samuel J. Abrams , Jason Jewell
December 29, 2025, Real Clear Politics

Campus free expression is in crisis. According to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), its 2026 College Free Speech Rankings found that student acceptance of disruptive protest tactics has reached record highs. More students than ever believe it is acceptable to shout down a speaker, block entry to campus events, or use violence to silence speech. For the first time, a majority of students oppose allowing any of the six controversial speakers – three liberal, three conservative – that FIRE asked about. The average school earned an F for its speech climate; only 11 of 257 institutions scored a C or higher.

These attitudes have consequences. Turning Point USA events at UC Berkeley have repeatedly descended into chaos. Charlie Kirk faced escalating threats before his murder at Utah Valley University. Public trust in higher education has collapsed alongside these incidents – Gallup and Pew consistently find that only about four in ten Americans express high confidence in colleges and universities.

Against this backdrop, Florida’s public universities offer a revealing counterexample.

FIRE’s annual rankings confirm that Florida’s universities consistently outperform their peers. In the 2025 rankings, Florida State University placed third nationally – earning one of only three “good” ratings in the country. The 2026 rankings, released just before Charlie Kirk’s murder, showed FSU dropping to 17th, with USF at 24^th – still placing both among the handful of schools FIRE identifies as having “consistently outperformed their peers” over six years. These year-to-year swings illustrate a limitation of FIRE’s methodology: with only a few hundred respondents per campus, rankings can shift dramatically from one survey cycle to the next.

The more instructive evidence comes from Florida’s own data. For the past three years, the State University System has administered an annual Intellectual Freedom Survey measuring student attitudes toward free expression, dissent, and disruption. Several of its questions are identical to FIRE’s, allowing for direct comparison. Early iterations struggled with low response rates – just 2.4 percent in 2022, but subsequent rounds introduced incentives and extended completion windows, boosting participation substantially. In 2025, more than 32,000 students responded, over fifteen times the number of Florida students in FIRE’s national sample.

Here is the puzzle: when FIRE surveys a few hundred students at individual Florida campuses, their responses on questions about disrupting speakers track close to national averages. But when Florida asks identical questions to more than 32,000 students, tolerance for coercive tactics drops sharply. The most likely explanation is methodological – larger samples with stronger response incentives capture attitudes that smaller surveys miss. If so, Florida’s data suggest the state’s campus climate may be healthier than even its strong FIRE rankings indicate.

The numbers bear this out. A slim majority of Florida respondents say it is at least “rarely” acceptable to shout down a speaker, but fewer than one-quarter say it is “always” or “sometimes” acceptable. Fewer than one-third believe it is even “rarely” acceptable to block others from attending a campus event, and fewer than one in ten endorse that behavior more strongly. When it comes to violence, just 12.7 percent say it is at least “rarely” acceptable, with fewer than 5 percent expressing anything stronger than minimal tolerance.

Moreover, the trendline in Florida is moving in the right direction: the proportion of its students willing to tolerate violence to prevent campus speech has fallen by about 30% over the past year. Compare this to FIRE’s conclusion that campus toleration of such violence is at record highs nationwide, and Florida’s numbers look even better.

These differences did not emerge by accident. Florida has built a layered policy infrastructure around campus speech.

In 2018, the legislature enacted the Campus Free Expression Act (Section 1004.097, Florida Statutes), which designates outdoor campus areas as traditional public forums, prohibits restrictive “free speech zones,” and authorizes universities to impose only content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions that are “narrowly tailored to a significant institutional interest.” The law also creates a private cause of action for individuals whose expressive rights are violated.

The following year, the Board of Governors adopted a Statement of Free Expression, signed by the chancellor and all twelve university presidents. It declares that “a critical purpose of a higher education institution is to provide a learning environment where divergent ideas, opinions, and philosophies, new and old, can be rigorously debated and critically evaluated.” In 2021, Board Chair Syd Kitson launched a Civil Discourse Initiative, led by Governor Tim Cerio, requiring each university to develop implementation plans that align orientation programs, student codes of conduct, and employee policies with free expression principles.

At the institutional level, Florida State University and the University of Florida have published detailed guidance distinguishing protected expression from disruption. Both emphasize that counter-protesters “may not obstruct, disrupt, or attempt by physical force to cancel or discontinue speech by any speaker.” USF and other institutions have paired policy with repeated messaging that disagreement is central to academic life, but coercion is not.

The spring 2024 protests revealed how much this infrastructure matters. At Columbia, administrators called in the NYPD twice, watched protesters occupy Hamilton Hall, shifted to hybrid learning, and ultimately canceled the main commencement ceremony. At UF, police cleared an encampment within hours, classes continued without interruption, and graduation proceeded on schedule. Florida’s willingness to enforce time, place, and manner rules swiftly, while Columbia negotiated for weeks, produced starkly different outcomes. Applying these rules consistently is never easy, and Florida suspended several students in ways that drew scrutiny. But the broader lesson is clear: institutions that articulate and defend free expression norms fare better than those that respond with paralysis.

The results speak for themselves. U.S. News & World Report has ranked Florida the number one state for higher education for nine consecutive years, citing low tuition, high graduation rates, and minimal student debt. More recently, City Journal’s 2025 College Rankings – praised in a Wall Street Journal editorial – placed the University of Florida first in the nation among 100 leading universities, public or private, with Florida State seventh. The rankings evaluated schools on free speech climate, academic rigor, and civic education.

City Journal specifically praised UF’s Hamilton School for Classical and Civic Education, which has grown into one of the most ambitious experiments in civic renewal at any American university. Now a full-fledged school with 53 faculty members and more than 1,300 enrolled students, Hamilton offers majors in Philosophy, Politics, Economics, and Law and Great Books and Ideas, with more planned. Its faculty includes scholars recruited from Harvard, Oxford, and Cambridge. This year, Hamilton launched the Beren Program on Jewish Classical Education, supported by $15 million in philanthropic funding, to study the intersection of Jewish, Western, and American civilization. The program reflects a broader commitment: building institutional capacity for serious humanistic education, not just defending against disruption.

Florida has also become a destination for students seeking a welcoming campus climate. After the October 7 attacks, Governor DeSantis invited Jewish students facing antisemitism at other institutions to transfer to Florida, waiving certain application requirements and fees. City Journal cited UF’s response to campus disruptions as evidence of a “welcoming and tolerant climate for Jewish students,” and Florida International University earned a top grade from the Anti-Defamation League for its support of Jewish students. Jon Warech, executive director of Hillel at FIU, put it simply: “The administration here at FIU, they were never going to allow any of that, and it makes our students feel good, comfortable.”

Florida is not alone in pursuing this approach. Arizona State University’s School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership, established in 2017, pioneered the model of legislatively-mandated civics education at public universities. According to ASU, seven other states have since copied its approach, creating similar schools and institutes focused on American founding principles, classical texts, and civic leadership. These include the University of Texas at Austin’s School of Civic Leadership, the University of Tennessee’s Institute of American Civics, the University of North Carolina’s School of Civic Life and Leadership, and Ohio State’s Chase Center for Civics, Culture, and Society. What began as an experiment in Arizona and Florida is becoming a national movement.

None of this means Florida has solved every problem. Too many students still view coercive tactics as legitimate, and universities exist precisely to teach why they are not. But Florida’s experience demonstrates something many higher-education leaders have been reluctant to acknowledge: institutional choices still matter.

Campus speech radicalism is often described as an unstoppable cultural force, driven by polarization or generational change. Florida’s data complicate that narrative. They suggest that when universities articulate norms clearly, enforce them consistently, and take responsibility for the climates they cultivate, student attitudes follow – if unevenly, then at least measurably.

At a moment when trust in higher education is fraying and too many administrators respond to disruption with euphemism or paralysis, Florida offers a modest but important reminder. Free speech norms do not sustain themselves. They have to be taught, defended, and measured – or they disappear.

Samuel J. Abrams is a professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and a scholar with the Sutherland Institute.  Jason Jewell is Chief Academic Officer and Vice Chancellor for Strategic Initiatives, State University System of Florida.

I’m seeing it happen in real time.

Douglas Flint | December 29, 2025, American Thinker

In the eighties, I had a friend who worked for me on and off.  He was a competent handyman and could do an oil change without screwing it up, something that was always useful in an auto shop, which I ran.  Eventually, however, he got a better paying job as a drywaller.

Anyone who has ever done a home project with even a small drywall repair knows how difficult it is not to have even a small repair stick out like a sore thumb.  Stevie was good and patient.  He has that ability to measure with his eye.  And so he was a very good drywaller, making a respectable wage with some benefits.

But about a decade later, he came back to my shop, needing work.  He explained that his business had been taken over by mostly Hispanic workers, who worked as sub-contractors and were paid not by the hour, but by the number of sheets of drywall they hung.  No benefits, of course.  Their work may not have been great, but it was acceptable.

In all likelihood, many if not most of these new drywallers were illegal aliens.  And in a one-decade cycle, drywalling became one of those jobs Americans just won’t do.

There is no such thing as a job Americans just won’t do.  There are jobs Americans don’t want to or can’t get hired to do at the prevailing wage.

Some guys have the balance of a cat. They can walk on a 60-degree slope as easily as I walk on a treadmill.  They tend to make good roof, chimney, and gutter masters if these are the fields they choose to enter.  A fair number of guys would do this work when it pays a fair wage with benefits to cover the risk.  I would say that in today’s market, that would start $35 an hour up to $45 and top out at $65 to $75 an hour.  But not too many guys would want to do that kind of work for $15–$20 an hour, paid in cash, to illegal aliens.  And if one of those illegal aliens happens to roll off a roof, he will be dropped off at the emergency room with instructions to “no hablar.”  The taxpayers, not the contractors, will pay the medical bills.

Being a truck driver used to be a respectable “lower middle class” job.  Most respectable truck-driving jobs require a CDL (commercial driver’s license) which once required a certain level of study, integrity, and skill to obtain.  Now we are discovering the wonders of the “non-domiciled” CDL, which seems to have no function other than to act as a pipeline to allow a mass of migrants, many illegal, to poach those good jobs and turn them into “jobs Americans just won’t do” by running the wages down and destroying the fair working conditions that limit driving hours, so that zombified drivers running on caffeine and other unregulated stimulants don’t turn our roads into scenes from The Road Warrior.  According to Victor Davis Hanson, this has already happened in his part of California.  And it’s not just the “open road truckers.”   

I work maintaining a large fleet of cars and trucks, and we regularly “out service” vehicles.  Once they have been stripped of our logos, radios, and specialized equipment, the company we pay to help manage the fleet arranges to pick them up (they must be towed out), and eventually they go to auction.  Vendors call contractors, who call sub-contractors.  And at the bottom of that chain, someone shows up at my lot with a flatbed truck or trailer to haul the vehicles away.

Three years ago, the men at the end of this chain showed up with tow trucks and flatbeds and seemed “American” in their speech and demeaner.  Over the past year and half, this has changed.  Guys wearing shorts and sandals (not a scrap of safety gear, such as boots or steel-toed shoes, or at least long pants) with little to no English started showing up with what looked like converted landscaper’s trailers pulled by pickup trucks.  Often, they could not communicate and spoke into their phones in strange tongues (not Spanish).  Through inquiry, I found that most of these guys came from “the Stans” (Uzbekistan, Tajikistan…also one from the Republic of Georgia).  It was clear from their frequent phone calls that they were directed by personnel located outside the United States.  How did they get here?  Who found this loophole to take over this seemingly insignificant industry?  What lack of laws, regulation, and common sense allows this?

So another set of jobs is suddenly “work Americans won’t do.”

There seems to be no stopping of the flow of immigrants, legal, illegal with green cards, without green cards, with H1-B visas and without.  I truly believe that the president is doing all he can do, but now it is time for Congress to step up to the plate and call a halt to all immigration for 25 years.  If there is a dire refugee crisis somewhere, then refugee camps can be set up outside the United States that can act as true temporary safe havens for genuine refugees.  If there is a group of refugees who seem like a good fit into our culture, Congress can go into session, carve out and exemption, and pass it.

Blue Zone political culture is empty. There’s nothing in it. They don’t make anything, they don’t do anything, they aren’t trying to do anything.

Let’s bracket a great piece of journalism with more details and some context.

By now, I assume most readers here have seen the magnificent work of the independent journalist Nick Shirley in Minnesota, showing widespread Somali fraud in government-funded programs by simply walking up to the front doors of daycare centers and healthcare organizations and inquiring about their services.

Daycare centers with millions of dollars in government funding and no children inside, and neighbors who say they’ve never seen children going in or coming out. This is a slam dunk, and I couldn’t possibly love it any more.

He names the daycare centers he visits, so you can start to find out how much the state of Minnesota knows about the scam without getting off the couch. Daycare centers are licensed and inspected: government inspectors regularly show up with a clipboard and look around. So go look at the record of inspections for Quality Learning Center of Minneapolis, the one in the video with the misspelled sign over the door. The whole thing instantly becomes darkly funny, because there’s no way anyone has ever believed that this is a functioning daycare center running at anything near its declared and funded capacity of 99 children:

I had to shrink the list of violations from the first inspection, in May of 2022, to get a screenshot:

This inspection implies that there have been some children on site at some point, possibly family, but the inspector couldn’t identify anyone in the building: “The program did not have a file for each child,” and, “The program did not have a file for each staff person.” No training, no equipment, no records. This place has never been a functioning daycare center. No one has ever believed that it was. But the government checks kept coming, and government inspectors kept coming around and playing make-believe.

The context for this not-terribly-subtle crony class featherbedding:

As government does more and spends more, government does less. Explosive budget growth leads to declining effectiveness and quality. Low-tax red states pave the roads. High-tax blue states slop cash around to friends. Progressive elected officials view the task of governance as a series of costumed performances.

They’re not trying to run anything. They intend to make faces for the camera and steer money to their friends, the end. Poor infrastructure and “license inspections” that endlessly note “violations” without consequence are — I’m sorry, what was I saying?

I know all of this in my bones, ladies and gentlemen, because I live in California. The California state auditor, screaming in the wilderness, released a long report this month on state programs that have been operated with a high degree of financial risk, without serious efforts to address the risks:

And so this is just normal stuff, California being California:

A story in the New York Times this weekend notes that California has dropped its lawsuit against THAT ORANGE [——-] for withdrawing federal funding to the state’s alleged high-speed rail project. The project was approved in 2008, the Times notes, and has been under active construction for a decade. The plan was to link Los Angeles and San Francisco with bullet trains by 2020. Result: “About 80 miles of guideway have been completed in the Central Valley, according to the authority,” without tracks. I walked around on some of that guideway back in August, if you remember the pictures.

Money is spent. People receive the money. And then … uh … wait, are you saying you actually expected to find childcare at this childcare center? .

Chris Bray, The Federalist

by Jim Hᴏft Dec. 29, 2025 12:00 pm

Independent journalist Nick Shirley released a viral video on December 26, 2025, documenting visits to several state-funded daycare centers in Minneapolis.

These centers, many catering to the Somali immigrant community, were found empty during operational hours, with no children present and signs of disuse, despite receiving substantial public funding through Minnesota’s Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP).

Shirley’s investigation has uncovered over $110 million in suspicious payments in a single day, building on prior scandals like the Feeding Our Future fraud.

The revelations have fueled criticism of Democratic Governor Tim Walz, with Republicans like Rep. Tom Emmer demanding answers and linking the issue to immigration policies. Figures such as Vice President JD Vance, Elon Musk, and President Donald Trump have amplified the story, calling Minnesota a “hub of fraudulent money laundering.”

In response, federal actions include DHS investigations and suspension of certain funds, while Walz’s team defends reforms and labels some reporting as biased.

Shirley’s explosive 42-minute video takes viewers on a tour of deception through South Minneapolis. One glaring example is the Quality Learning Center, licensed to serve up to 99 children but found utterly deserted on a weekday afternoon.

According to state records unearthed by Shirley and his team, this single center pocketed nearly $4 million in taxpayer dollars through Minnesota’s Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) in recent years, with $1.9 million disbursed in 2025 alone.

When Shirley attempted to enroll a fictional child, staff rebuffed him, claiming the center was “full”—a laughable excuse given the vacant premises.

Shirley’s investigation, aided by a local whistleblower named David who had observed these sites for years without seeing a single child, uncovered a web of similar “daycares.

In one day of digging, Shirley claims his team identified over $110 million in suspicious payments across these phantom facilities.

Federal agents are now storming these sites.

On Sunday, FBI Director Kash Patel released a statement:

CASE UPDATE: MINNESOTA FRAUD SCHEME

The FBI is aware of recent social media reports in Minnesota. However, even before the public conversation escalated online, the FBI had surged personnel and investigative resources to Minnesota to dismantle large-scale fraud schemes exploiting federal programs. Fraud that steals from taxpayers and robs vulnerable children will remain a top FBI priority in Minnesota and nationwide.

To date, the FBI dismantled a $250 million fraud scheme that stole federal food aid meant for vulnerable children during COVID. The investigation exposed sham vendors, shell companies, and large-scale money laundering tied to the Feeding Our Future network.

The case led to 78 indictments and 57 convictions. Defendants included Abdiwahab Ahmed Mohamud, Ahmed Ali, Hussein Farah, Abdullahe Nur Jesow, Asha Farhan Hassan, Ousman Camara, and Abdirashid Bixi Dool, each charged for roles ranging from wire fraud to money laundering and conspiracy.

These criminals didn’t just engaged in historic fraud, but tried to subvert justice as well. Abdimajid Mohamed Nur and others were charged for attempting to bribe a juror with $120,000 in cash. Those responsible pleaded guilty and were sentenced, including a 10-year prison term and nearly $48 million in restitution in related cases.

Trending: Primary Sabotage? Niqab-Wearing Muslim Woman Who Has Voted Democrat Since at Least 2008 is the ONLY ‘Republican’ Running for North Carolina Senate

The FBI believes this is just the tip of a very large iceberg. We will continue to follow the money and protect children, and this investigation very much remains ongoing.

Furthermore, many are also being referred to immigrations officials for possible further denaturalization and deportation proceedings where eligible.

When ingredients get expensive, definitions start changing.

If a label needs more words, something real was removed.

Corporations didn’t make chocolate worse by accident.

BRIEFING

Grant here. It really seems like slowly but surely all the foods we buy and consume are being quietly and covertly replaced with imposters. And what’s more, it’s literally happening right under our noses. The latest victim in this secret swap-out is chocolate, the decadent, velvety treat that we all eat by the pound. Basically, what looks like a harmless label change on your favorite chocolate bar is actually a signal of how corporations respond when real ingredients get too expensive to keep using. Let’s break it down.

Over the past few years, cacao prices have exploded, up more than 250 percent. It’s a massive increase, and that kind of spike forces companies to make a big decision. They can either raise prices and risk backlash or quietly change what’s inside the wrapper and hope no one notices. Not too surprisingly, many major brands chose the second option.

Now when you look at a label, more and more products now say “chocolate flavor” or “chocolatey coating” instead of just plain chocolate. In places like the UK, those products no longer meet the legal definition because the cocoa content has dropped too low. In the U.S. however, our looser standards have made the downgrade easier to hide.

SOURCE

Everyone needs to start checking chocolate products before purchasing

“This is the first time in human history corporations are selling you chocolate that can no longer legally be called chocolate.”

“To classify a product as chocolate, the UK requires at least 20-25% cocoa (only 10% in America). So many popular brands, including a slew of Nestle products, have quietly changed their labels to chocolate flavor coating.

Cacao prices have shot up 250% over the past 3 years, so Big Food has reformulated to more vegetable oils, sugars, and other fillers. Major brands like Hershey, Mondelez, and Barry Callebaut are also cutting back for less cocoa usage.

With input prices rising, there seems to be Either corporations continue to swap real ingredients for fillers to keep prices the same or content is kept similar but the price gets pushed to the consumer.

Watch out for this over the holidays and expect to pay a little more for properly sourced and formulated products.”

Everyone needs to start checking chocolate products before purchasing

“This is the first time in human history corporations are selling you chocolate that can no longer legally be called chocolate.”

“To classify a product as chocolate, the UK requires at least 20-25% cocoa… pic.twitter.com/LeE6tmG9QJ— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) December 23, 2025

This entire phenomenon is commonly referred to as “shrinkflation,” and it’s definitely not just limited to chocolate.

As a matter of fact, many snacks found in grocery aisles all across America are quietly reducing container volume big time, while packaging looks virtually identical. And, of course, the prices stay virtually the same.

However, there’s now some silver lining forming in the growing awareness around shrinkflation. Yep, brands know we’re now hip to their game, and they’re reversing course big time, now promising to start putting more chips back in the bag, so to speak.

SOURCE

Up until recently, companies got away with giving angry customers the silent treatment or by putting out some carefully worded statement in an attempt to get back in their good graces. Their statements would often read something like: We hear your frustration but c’mon, have some pity on us too. Oh, and by the way, we didn’t raise our prices as much as everyone is claiming so we’re not the bad guys here.

Then, after companies like McDonald’s, Wendy’s and Burger King started seeing their revenue slide, they unveiled value menus and promos and, in some cases, promised to be more judicious about raising prices.

Still, complaints about shrinkflation and skimpflation seemingly went unaddressed by companies. That’s finally starting to change.

After fans of Whole Foods’ iconic Berry Chantilly Cake took to social media to rant about ingredient changes, the Amazon-owned grocery chain had an usually quick response, informing customers that the cake would soon revert to its original recipe.

But wait — it gets even better!

PepsiCo, the owner of Lay’s, Doritos, Tostitos and Ruffles chips, announced it will put more chips in some bags that had mysteriously gotten lighter. A PepsiCo spokesperson told my colleague Nathaniel Meyersohn that Tostitos and Ruffles “bonus” bags will contain 20% more chips for the same price as standard bags in select locations. The company is also adding two additional small chip bags to its 18-bag variety pack, the spokesperson said.

DEBRIEFING

The big picture here is that what’s happening to chocolate isn’t some quirky food industry footnote. It’s part of a much larger pattern most people now recognize as shrinkflation. When real ingredients get expensive, companies don’t just raise prices. They quietly reduce volume, swap inputs, or redefine the product altogether, all while keeping the packaging familiar enough that most consumers rarely notice.

Chocolate just happens to be one of the latest culprits. Or at least, the latest one we’re all starting to take note of. And that’s the key; we’re all thankfully becoming more aware and calling out these corrupt corporations on their games.

For a long time, companies could get away with it. PR teams were hired, and complaints were often brushed off with carefully worded statements about rising costs and shared sacrifice. Things like “We hear you” or “We’re doing our best.” But those scripts have run thin with the American people who are barely scraping by, living paycheck to paycheck most times.

NOW YOU KNOW

When costs rise, honesty is usually the first casualty.

Grant Mercer, Cypher News