A bombshell report released Tuesday by the House Select Weaponization Subcommittee is the gift that keeps on giving‚ further exposing yet another President Joe Biden-led censorship plan against Americans. The report‚ previously covered by MRC Free Speech America‚ unveiled how the Biden-led National Science Foundation is using taxpayer-funded grants to use artificial intelligence to censor free speech online. One of the grantees‚ tech non-profit Meedan‚ received $5.75 million for a program that would “work with social media apps to “identify and limit susceptibility to misinformation” and “pseudoscientific information online.” The taxpayer-funded program‚ dubbed Co-Insights‚ worked with social media and messaging companies like WhatsApp‚ Telegram and Signal to develop tools to locate violating content to censor more effectively. According to documents released by the House Weaponization Subcommittee‚ Meedan Director of Research Scott Hale highlighted that the company’s ultimate goal was to allow social media platforms to “put all the content they take down into a data enclave” and use code to “benchmark differentiated automated detection approaches without having direct access to the data.” In other words‚ the manual review of content moderation was too inefficient‚ so the team at Meedan wanted to do the heavy lifting and let social media companies detect blacklisted content in bulk.  Specifically‚ the team listed several examples of what kind of information it wanted to censor. According to the report‚ the list included “fear mongering and anti-Black narratives‚” “undermining trust in mainstream media‚” “glorifying vigilantism” and “weakening political participation.” An example of an “anti-Black” narrative would be criticizing The New York Times for “ignoring Black-on-Asian hate crimes.” This statement is not even a statement of fact‚ but simply a political opinion on the coverage of The Times‚ but that doesn’t stop the team at Meedan from wanting to get rid of it.     One fact in particular stuck out in the grant proposal and even prompted a reaction from Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-WY) in a Tuesday hearing overseeing the content unveiled in the report. Meedan bragged in its grant proposal about having the ability to monitor 750‚000 blog posts and news articles “daily” using its AI tools. Hageman cited this slide as evidence of “the absolute scope of what AI can do for violating people’s First Amendment rights.” .@RepHageman exposes the scope of #CensorshipIndustrialComplex‚ revealed industry partner‚ @meedan ‚ told the National Science Foundation it was monitoring 750k blog posts "daily" using AI pic.twitter.com/LvfBhbThr4 — Count of Monte Cristo (@MonteCristo1837) February 6‚ 2024 This NSF scheme is sadly not a fluke‚ but rather part of a larger complex of grants and government-sponsored programs designed to either censor content or perhaps worse‚ use propaganda to manipulate people’s views of the information they consume‚ particularly children.  MRC Free Speech America released a report last month exposing an initiative by the U.S. Embassy in Germany to host a series of seminars that imported German censorship methods into American classrooms. The grant’s fiscal agent was Media Literacy Now‚ a nonprofit that advocates for “media literacy” programs to be mandated in K-12 schools in all 50 states. MLN has pitched the need for these programs as a means to fight “misinformation” and “online radicalization.”  Notably‚ one of the seminars‚ MEET Tolerance‚ featured curricula from German socialist Konstantin Von Notz. The German politician helped lead the “No Hate Speech Movement‚” a youth organization set up by the European Union to “combat hate speech and promote human rights online.” The movement mobilized kids to be activists by posting pre-approved messages and hashtags to create public pressure on politicians to enact new censorship laws. Von Notz has argued that freedom of speech does not protect “‘haters’ motivated by ‘right wing extremism.’” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand government agencies and Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.  

Why are we constantly forced to prove we're human? A team of researchers at Carnegie Mellon University developed CAPTCHA‚ a contrived acronym for "Completely Automated Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart‚" in the early 2000s. CAPTCHAs meaningfully distinguished human and bot activity online for the first time. This advance curbed automated scourges of the internet‚ such as the mass creation of spam email accounts and illegitimate answers in online polls‚ and they remain an essential tool that makes the modern internet usable today. So I decided to introduce a challenge for myself: Refuse to complete CAPTCHAs‚ in a refusal to prove my humanity to a computer. But the computer scientist John Langford‚ who helped create CAPTCHA twenty years ago as a graduate student‚ is surprised they have lasted as long as they have. "I kind of expected machine learning to eventually succeed in making CAPTCHAs not a thing‚" he told me in an interview. "But that hasn't fully happened yet." Instead of disappearing‚ CAPTCHAs have become more complex and more prevalent. It seems one can't go a day on the internet without needing to solve one. So I decided to introduce a challenge for myself: Refuse to complete CAPTCHAs‚ in a refusal to prove my humanity to a computer. I understood the purpose of CAPTCHAs was noble and made the internet a better experience by reducing spam and preventing bots from buying up all the concert tickets‚ for instance. But still‚ I wanted to try. In the meantime‚ I would try to figure out why CAPTCHAs were still around and what their evolution may suggest about the future of the internet. As I dove into the story‚ I saw another wrinkle: how labor and AI may interact. The history of CAPTCHA Andrii Shelenkov/Getty In the early 2000s‚ the internet had a problem: As spammers got better‚ they were able to write programs that could create countless free email accounts on services like Yahoo! Mail in seconds. This led to an explosion of spam. A team of graduate students at Carnegie Mellon – Luis von Ahn‚ John Langford‚ Nicholas Hopper‚ and their adviser‚ Manuel Blum – tried to come up with a solution. The group knew they needed some way to differentiate humans from computers online. However‚ the test needed to be solvable by every human and have a low success rate by computers. Eventually‚ the team settled on text recognition. They would distort an image of a word and ask the user to identify it. This worked much better than previous experiments: Computers were terrible at reading distorted text. Meanwhile‚ even if they didn't know what a specific word meant‚ humans were much better at identifying what letters were present. One didn't even need to be literate to solve a CAPTCHA‚ because it just required a person to match the letters on the screen to the letters on a keyboard. The test went into effect at Yahoo! Mail and was quickly used millions of times daily. Over the next decade‚ however‚ a few things happened. First‚ Google bought an updated version of the technology called reCAPTCHA to digitize vast amounts of old text. By serving each user two words – one artificially distorted and one from an old New York Times article – the computer could transcribe those articles using unwitting human participants. Second‚ though‚ computers got better at identifying distorted text – to such an extent that‚ according to a 2014 internal Google study‚ AI could read the most distorted CAPTCHAs at a rate of 99.8% accuracy. Humans‚ meanwhile? Only 33%. This‚ according to John Langford‚ was always part of the plan. CAPTCHAs were designed as a win-win situation: Either they kept computers out‚ or they helped computers break some heretofore unbreakable problem. Thanks to CAPTCHAs‚ computers could now read distorted text. The next development‚ then‚ was to trade text for images. A Google reCAPTCHA may ask you to identify the boundaries of a motorcycle by clicking on the squares where that motorcycle exists. It seems that these new CAPTCHAs are both more complex and less accurate. I've run across tests that ask me to identify buses or cars in an image that has neither‚ and‚ of course‚ I've puzzled over whether I should click squares that have only small slices of the edge of a traffic light. I'm not alone in this feeling. Twitter is replete with internet users complaining about CAPTCHAs that are confusing or just plain wrong. Working a third-world job Artem Stepanov/getty My self-imposed CAPTCHA ban stopped me from applying for a job – if they can't even trust I'm an actual human‚ that doesn't sound like the kind of company I'd want to work for‚ I told myself. It also prevented me from checking my full astrological report‚ which was also probably for the best. Is stubbornness rooted in my rising sign? I'll never know. I decided I didn't need to log in to my Airbnb account after all. I dropped my desire to prepay for movie tickets. When watching a soccer game using my VPN‚ I was prevented from using Google search‚ which told me that it had "detected unusual traffic" from my IP address. But I gave up on my self-imposed ban when I decided it was time to dig into the cheap labor that keeps spammers operating. Despite the "low value" of email addresses and other internet functions protected by CAPTCHAs‚ there remains a CAPTCHA-cracking industry of unclear size. A quick Google search turns up several websites that promise cheap and quick CAPTCHA solving for meager rates. These websites – "CAPTCHA farms" – offer to solve 1‚000 reCAPTCHAs for about three dollars. One thousand text CAPTCHAs‚ meanwhile‚ will cost you only one dollar. So after weeks of refusing to do CAPTCHAs‚ I figured I'd break my ban and try out this "guaranteed way to have additional income in Internet [sic]‚" according to the company 2Captcha. Plus‚ if this writing stuff didn't work out‚ it might be nice to have a backup. I signed up for an account on Kolotibablo‚ and within minutes I solved basic text-recognition CAPTCHAs. (Solving reCAPTCHAs required downloading some root-access software to my computer‚ the idea of which didn't thrill me.) In total‚ I solved only those five CAPTCHAs in around ten minutes because of low demand for the basic CAPTCHAs I was authorized for before typing an extra "2" and getting banned. At least someone paid me a little bit to prove my humanity‚ I thought – even if I didn't prove it consistently or for very long. I blamed my failure on being out of practice. But who is solving thousands of CAPTCHAs‚ spending hours typing numbers and identifying traffic lights for pennies? It turns out that‚ perhaps unsurprisingly‚ these companies rely on labor from some of the most economically depressed regions of the world. About a quarter of workers on the site Anti-Captcha are from Venezuela‚ according to data from the site itself; Indonesia‚ Vietnam‚ India‚ Pakistan‚ the Philippines‚ and Ukraine round out the top of the list. These companies say that workers make between 25 and 80 cents per hour. These jobs allow people to work from anywhere with an internet connection‚ with only their smartphone or computer. And to be sure‚ $2 to $4 a day can stretch farther in many regions of the world than in the United States. But it is also clear that these companies care little for the workers' well-being‚ despite their claims that they provide easy employment for virtually anyone. I joined three Facebook groups for CAPTCHA solvers worldwide‚ each with thousands of members. These posts are riddled with complaints by workers that they have been banned from their platform for unclear reasons. Most of the CAPTCHA-solving companies did not reply to my request for comment‚ except for Death by Captcha. The company touted its ability to solve many popular types of CAPTCHAs and the ability of people from all around the world to solve CAPTCHAs for them – "whoever wants to work can solve captchas for us" – before refusing further questions about the locations and earnings of its workers. The highest earner in the world on Kolotibablo over the past seven days‚ a user from Poland‚ had solved over 106‚000 reCAPTCHAs in that time. The user earned a grand total of $110.45. CAPTCHA capture The future of CAPTCHAs may not look like the image or text questions to which we have grown so accustomed. John Langford told me that he thinks the result of a manual CAPTCHA test is probably only one of several signals that providers use to determine humanity – and maybe not a very important one. Langford‚ for one‚ believes that the trade-off for CAPTCHAs is worth it. They're annoying‚ yes. And he says that he has failed a CAPTCHA‚ just like the rest of us. However‚ "To me‚ a CAPTCHA seems like a necessary evil‚" he says. "You can either pay for your accounts‚ or you can have some sort of barrier to complete automation. … I think it's desirable to be able to provide things to people [for free] to help them go about their day." But with the prevalence of CAPTCHA farms‚ and the likelihood of machine learning's continued advancement‚ it is unclear how effective they remain. Maybe their primary value now is the ability to get millions of answers to questions of a company's choosing (Where is the traffic light? What does a spoon look like?) that will influence the makeup of some future AI product. CAPTCHA farms have been around for at least a decade. But they are part of a broader trend to use poorly paid labor to solve tech problems. As we venture into a brave new world of prevalent AI‚ I wonder if there will be a point where technology will facilitate finding cheap labor – instead of promoting a fully autonomous future. Until then‚ I'll go back to doing CAPTCHAs – but just to prove my humanity.

A black municipal leader in Illinois had a meltdown at a recent public meeting‚ demanding racial solidarity after black trustees dared to question her lavish spending habits with the village reportedly millions of dollars in debt.On Monday‚ Democrat Mayor Tiffany Henyard excoriated a group of trustees for the village of Dolton‚ just south of Chicago‚ suggesting they were racial turncoats who were "sitting up here beating and attacking a black woman that’s in power.""Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves because y'all are black‚" she shouted. "Y'all are black."With hair neatly coiffed and earrings twinkling‚ Henyard also insinuated that she was the only area leader of any importance and that the trustees were lazy. "You all don’t do no work‚ no work‚" she insisted to the trustees dutifully attending the meeting."Y'all forget I’m the leader‚" her rant continued. "They want to hear from the mayor. You ain’t learned that yet."The mayor — not the trustees that don’t do nothing. They only run their mouth." — (@) Some of the trustees have been running their mouths‚ but perhaps with good reason. Credit card receipts for nearby Thornton Township‚ another municipality headed by Henyard‚ show that Henyard and other officials took trips to Portland‚ Atlanta‚ and New York City‚ flying first class and racking up tens of thousands of dollars in accommodation costs.WGN reported that taxpayers shelled out more than $67‚000 for these trips and an additional $23‚000 for Henyard to reportedly treat staff members and supporters to a fine-dining experience back in Illinois‚ even as Henyard has never fully explained the public purpose of these expenses and Dolton cannot afford to pay its bills."At the end of the day‚ vendors are not being paid‚" trustee Jason House said at the public meeting‚ lamenting the village's enormous $5 million debt. "The board approved it‚ but vendors are not being paid."A public relations firm for Dolton and Thornton Township claimed that the travel expenses "play a crucial role in building relationships‚ attracting investment and securing valuable resources for our township’s development." Public safety also remains an issue for the Chicago-area village. Earlier this month‚ four people were shot and wounded in Dolton‚ but Henyard may not have noticed since she enjoys the protection of a sizeable security retinue. The New York Post reported that six village officers have been assigned to keep her safe‚ sometimes working more than 100 hours a week and collecting considerable overtime pay."We’re not saying police aren’t doing a good job‚" trustee Brittney Norwood quipped at the meeting. "We’re saying you’re assigning all of them to be with you when they should be out here protecting the residents so we can all feel safe."Dolton Police Chief Lewis Lacey expressed his frustration as well. "It’s unfortunate that politics are being played‚" he said. "What’s happened is a million dollars out of my budget have been cut because of politics."Though the median income in Dolton is just $24‚000‚ Henyard‚ first elected in 2021‚ earns $285‚000 between her two municipal roles. Henyard also has a hair and makeup stylist to help her look her best before every public appearance‚ though whether she pays for these assistants out of pocket is unclear.The office of Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul is even looking into a cancer charity bearing Henyard's name because the charity has not filed the financial reports required by state law regarding charities and nonprofits. Last month‚ the AG’s charitable trusts bureau sent a letter to the Tiffany Henyard Cares Foundation‚ demanding its leadership submit the necessary reports or face further investigation."Failure to comply [by February 16] will leave us no alternative but to pursue all available legal remedies in obtaining compliance with the Illinois charitable organization laws‚" the letter said.The state AG's office‚ the Dolton police chief‚ and several trustees have all voiced concerns about Henyard and her work in the public and nonprofit sector. But at the meeting earlier this week‚ Henyard still positioned herself as the victim of "grandstanders" and a champion of "the people.""Everything we do is for the people ... but we’re under attack‚" she claimed‚ ostensibly addressing her constituents. "We get scrutinized by the media. For what? Loving on the people? Showing that they matter to us?"We go through the fires for y'all."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

There is an effort under way across Canada to replicate American red states' success in bolstering parental rights. The province of Saskatchewan ratified a parental bill of rights in October. New Brunswick now requires teachers to obtain parental consent before humoring students' cross-sex delusions. Alberta is poised to pass wide-sweeping policies and legislation that would not only prohibit children from undergoing sex-change mutilations and taking puberty blockers but would also keep parents abreast of their kids' efforts to transition at school and bar men from women's sports. Radical LGBT activists‚ teachers' unions‚ and other champions of putting greater distance between parents and children are desperately fighting this campaign to strengthen parental rights. A socialist lawmaker in Ottawa recently gave away the thinking at the heart of their efforts: There were never any parental rights to begin with. Randall Garrison‚ an NDP member of Parliament and an Israel-Hamas ceasefire advocate‚ is a non-straight LGBT activist who has condemned provincial efforts to strengthen parental rights and protect children from unnecessary‚ irreversible‚ and disfiguring medical interventions. When asked about Alberta's planned legislation‚ Garrison‚ who apparently supports so-called "gender-affirming care" at any age but not "cosmetic surgeries on intersex children‚" said the quiet part out loud. "I like to say‚ first of all‚ that there's no such thing as parental rights in Canada‚" said Garrison. "There are parental responsibilities. And in Canadian family law‚ the primary responsibility of parents is to support and affirm their kids." "Children have rights in Canada‚" continued the LGBT activist‚ "and these kind of policies restrict the rights that children have in Canada." — (@) Alberta is planning to ban the removal of genitals and healthy breasts on minors under the age of 17 as well as the provision of irreversible puberty blockers and hormone therapies to children 15 and younger — transmogrifying procedures Garrison apparently figures that children‚ alternatively unable to legally drink‚ get tattoos‚ or drive‚ should have a right to. The province would further require parental notification and consent for a school to alter the name or pronouns of a child under the age of 15. For kids 16 and 17‚ the schools won't need permission but will nevertheless be required to notify the parents. Additionally‚ parents would have the opportunity to opt their children out whenever a teacher plans to reach about so-called gender identity‚ sexual orientation‚ or sexuality‚ according to state media. Finally‚ Alberta would bar male transvestites from participating in women's sports leagues. Garrison's dismissal of parental rights echoes similar claims made in the U.S.‚ not all of which have to do with the LGBT agenda. In 2021‚ Kyle B. Brother‚ a professor of pediatrics at the University of Louisville School of Medicine and the chief scientific officer at the Norton Children's Research Institute‚ and Ellen Wright Clayton‚ a health policy professor at Vanderbilt University Medical Center‚ penned an article for Politico entitled‚ "The Dangerous Legal Illusion of 'Parental Rights.'" "When it comes to society's interest in protecting children‚ the legal precedent is unambiguous: The rights of their parents come second‚" wrote the professors. "Parents do have the freedom to direct the health care and education of their children‚ but these rights are not unlimited." Brother and Clayton argued that children can‚ for example‚ be required to wear masks and undergo vaccinations even if parents are not on board. The academics nearly offered Garrison's assessment word for word‚ writing‚ "We should spend less time thinking about the rights we claim for ourselves and more time thinking about our responsibilities to protect our children." Other leftists have sought to undermine the concept of parental rights by claiming collective responsibility and state ownership over children. In an April speech‚ President Joe Biden quoted a teacher as saying‚ "'There's no such thing as someone else's child.'" The geriatric Democrat proceeded to say‚ "No such thing as someone else's child. Our nation's children are all our children." The notion that children are effectively wards of the state has been codified in California and other Democratic states where authorities are legally required to refuse to reunite runaway children with their parents if the kids are looking to undergo sex-change mutilations. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CNN legal expert Elie Honig fact-checked President Joe Biden for denying key facts established in special counsel Robert Hur's investigation.At a press conference held late Thursday‚ Biden denied that he shared classified information with his ghostwriter‚ Mark Zwonitzer — screaming at NBC News correspondent Gabe Gutierrez for daring to ask him Hur's about allegations — and claimed that Hur concluded that he did not break the law. The claims left Honig astonished because they're not true."Here are the facts‚" Honig said afterward on CNN. "Joe Biden retained sensitive‚ classified documents after he left the vice presidency ... marked classified — highest level‚ top secret SCI. They related to our international affairs‚ to war plans‚ to foreign relations. He knew it. He knew it. He's on tape‚ after he's out of the vice presidency‚ saying to his autobiographer‚ 'The classified documents are in the basement.' He knew it.""That is what blew my mind about Joe Biden's statement‚" Honig exclaimed.Honig‚ a former federal prosecutor‚ explained:There are two things he said that are completely the opposite of what Robert Hur found. First‚ Joe Biden says‚ "I did not act willfully." Willfully just means voluntarily‚ intentionally. Well‚ the second sentence of this whole summary says‚ "President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials." The facts in here show it was willful. He knew. He talked about it. And the second thing he says is‚ "I did not disclose classified documents to my ghostwriter." Page three says that he did that. It says‚ "Mr. Biden shared information‚ including some classified information from those notebooks with his ghostwriter." — (@) Later in the broadcast‚ Honig explained why Biden's case helps Trump‚ both politically and legally."Let me tell you two ways it's helpful. One is just atmospherically‚ right? We've all seen a thousand times the photos of documents strewn around the bathroom in the stage of Mar-a-Lago. Now there's similar-looking photos in this report‚" he began."But here's the technical way that Donald Trump's team is going to use this. Mark my words‚" Honig promised.According to Honig‚ Trump "has a basis" to bring a motion for selective prosecution in his own classified documents case because Biden "did essentially the same thing" that Trump is accused of doing. Such motions‚ however‚ are difficult to win‚ Honig noted.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Police said a St. Louis-area Wendy's employee physically attacked a drive-thru customer after an argument earlier this week‚ KPLR-TV reported — but that ain't the half of what the suspect is accused of.In short‚ the worker allegedly punched the customer through his driver-side window‚ stole the victim's car‚ returned to the scene and hit the victim with the car‚ and bit two cops.Then there was the whole hammer thing.What are the details?Police in Overland — which is about 20 minutes northwest of St. Louis — headed to the restaurant in the 8900 block of Page Avenue after a report of a fight in progress Monday‚ KPLR-TV reported.The victim told officers that he got into an argument with the employee while in the drive-thru lane‚ the station said.The victim said the employee — later identified as 27-year-old Leon S. Johnson — exited the restaurant and began punching him through his open car window‚ KMOV-TV reported.The victim told police he grabbed a hammer from his car and began swinging it at Johnson to get him to back off‚ KPLR said‚ adding that the victim soon exited his car with the hammer — but then Johnson got in the victim’s car and drove off.KSDK-TV reported‚ citing court documents‚ that Johnson soon returned to the restaurant and hit the customer with the car‚ knocking the hammer out of the customer's hand. Johnson then got out of the car‚ picked up the hammer‚ and began to hit the car's front windshield‚ KSDK added. The KPLR report indicates Johnson hit the victim with the hammer.The customer suffered a "laceration on his lip and multiple contusions to his face‚" police told KSDK‚ which added that officers said Johnson admitted to taking the victim’s car and hitting him with it. Police also said Johnson bit two officers who tried to arrest him‚ KSDK added. Jail records indicate the arrest took place just after 9 p.m.It's unclear what the victim and Johnson were arguing about‚ KSDK added.The St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office charged Johnson with first-degree assault‚ first-degree tampering with a motor vehicle‚ third-degree assault‚ second-degree property damage‚ resisting arrest for a felony‚ and two counts of fourth-degree assault‚ KSDK said‚ adding that all the charges are felonies.Johnson was jailed on a $500‚000 cash-only bond‚ KSDK noted. He remained in jail as of Friday morning. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Federal Trade Commission in 2017 challenged a proposed merger between DraftKings and FanDuel‚ the two largest providers of fantasy sports contests. Regulators argued that the merger would reduce consumer competition‚ limit choices‚ and violate antitrust laws by granting a near-monopoly to one corporate behemoth. Although that merger never moved forward‚ those same two companies now appear to be behaving as an anti-competitive duopoly — and their coordinated efforts could jeopardize the integrity of the fantasy sports industry that the American people have come to know and love. Limiting competition and choice in such a popular industry would be a major fumble — one that 50 million Americans who play fantasy sports games will not soon forget. Fantasy sports have grown by leaps and bounds over the last decade. Over 50 million Americans now enjoy playing fantasy games‚ and the increase in players has allowed other companies to enter the market with their own versions of fantasy games. However‚ in a story as old as time‚ the two largest companies in the market‚ DraftKings and FanDuel‚ are now using their market power to stifle their upstart competitors. The Sports Betting Alliance‚ which represents DraftKings and FanDuel‚ is lobbying state officials to categorize their new competitors’ games as forms of unlicensed (and thus illegal) online gambling. They argue that their rivals’ games represent luck-driven gambling‚ not games of the fantasy variety — skill-based contests won through knowledge of sports history and statistics. These arguments are simply not true. Not much separates DraftKings’ and FanDuel’s fantasy games from those of their rivals. DraftKings and FanDuel allow consumers to build a team based on the expected performances of the players in real-life games. Their marketplace competitors’ games are more focused on the individual performances of the players participants select. It’s a distinction without a difference. Nevertheless‚ some states have still responded to the lobbying solicitations they have received from the Sports Betting Alliance by sending cease-and-desist letters or otherwise heavily scrutinizing these new‚ popular fantasy sports companies. Market economies are most successful when competition can flourish. It keeps prices down and improves the quality and selection of goods and services available to consumers. It also fosters innovation and efficiency‚ leading to better choices and enhanced customer experiences. Muscling highly popular upstart fantasy sports companies out of the marketplace would do the opposite. That is in no one’s interest but their competitors. In the movie “Tucker: The Man and His Dream‚” innovator Preston Tucker attempted to market an innovative new car for Americans‚ but the three largest automakers successfully used their lobbying power to destroy his operations. In doing so‚ not only did they put Tucker out of business‚ but they also stifled adoption of many of his ideas‚ from seatbelts and fuel injection to disc brakes‚ for many years to come. A similar scenario will inevitably play out in the fantasy sports industry if regulators continue moving forward with DraftKings and FanDuel’s regulatory agendas. February should represent Super Bowl season‚ not corporate welfare season. Regulators and those in charge of protecting marketplace competition should not allow a couple of established fantasy sports corporations to twist interpretations of the law to their benefit. Limiting competition and consumer choice in such a popular industry would be a major fumble — one that the 50 million Americans who play fantasy sports games will not soon forget. Here’s hoping federal and state decision-makers are listening.

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach is turning up the heat on "troublesome districts" that have doubled-down on policies allegedly allowing schools to "socially transition" students without parental consent. The Republican AG has narrowed the remaining offenders down to a handful of districts‚ which he appears keen to rein in. "A child changing his or her gender identity has major long-term medical and psychological ramifications‚" Kobach said in a statement Thursday. "Parents should know‚ and have an opportunity to be involved in such an important aspect of their well-being." According to the Washington Examiner‚ Kobach used Parents Defending Education's list of parental exclusion policies to pinpoint offending districts in Kansas. After drilling down on each district's policies and weighing their constitutionality‚ Kobach identified six school districts that were allegedly undermining parental rights. The Republican AG penned letters to the districts in December‚ specifically challenging policies that require school staff to hide a student's transvestism or "gender non-conforming" status from their parents‚ reported the Associated Press. The letters accused the districts of surrendering "to woke gender ideology" and stressed it "would be arrogant beyond believe to hide something with such weighty consequences from the very people (parents) that both law and nature vest with providing for a child's long-term well-being." Kobach indicated Thursday that upon notifying the districts and asking whether they had collected parental input prior to adopting the radical policies‚ two districts — Belle Plaine and Maize — "responded that they had no intention of cutting parents out of the process and immediately rescinded or amended their polices." "A lot of times these policies are pushed by outside activist organizations and adopted by school boards without being fully informed about what the policy would actually do‚" said Kansas Deputy Attorney General Abhishek Kambli. "Belle Plaine and Maize should be praised for responding swiftly when they saw what was going on." Three of the four other districts — Kansas City‚ Shawnee Mission‚ and Topeka — refused to back down on keeping parents in the dark‚ according to Kobach. The Olathe School District alternatively appears to have had a change of heart this week. The attorney general noted on X that the OSD has scheduled a meeting to discuss its policy. OSD said in a statement obtained by KSHB-TV that they had developed "internal administrative guidelines" for staff‚ but that no formal policy has ever existed. The OSD's "Guidance Related to Gender Identity‚" obtained by Parents Defending Education via a public records request‚ states the "best practice is for staff to obtain parental consent before addressing the student publicly by their preferred name and/or pronoun." However‚ it goes on qualify such disclosures‚ noting instances where parents could be left in the dark. "Staff must be carefully to refrain from incautious disclosure of a student's gender status and/or sexual orientation. Informing the decision to disclose to a parent/guardian are considerations related to the age of the student; whether the student has developmental disabilities; protecting the privacy interests of the student; whether the communications with the parent would cause trauma to the student‚ and a fear for the child's health as a result of the communication‚" says the guidance. If a child expressed delusions about their sex‚ teachers in the Shawnee Mission School District are apparently required to notify the principal‚ who in turn "meets with the student to share support and gauge the level of family involvement." The Kansas City Kansas Public Schools' guidance that the PDE has on file states‚ "School personnel should not disclose information that may reveal a student's transgender status or gender or gender nonconforming presentation to others‚ including parents and other school personnel‚ unless legally required to do so or unless the student has authorized such disclosure." Topeka Public Schools' revised 2018 guidance echoes the KCKPS recommendations. Topeka told the AP that its practices are legal. Shawnee Mission superintendent Michelle Hubbard claimed Kobach was relying on "misinformation" from "partisan sources" and indicated she took offense to his use of woke "as an insult." KCKPS declined the AP's request for comment. The other outliers claimed they handled gender dysphoric students on a case by case basis and seek to work with parents. "Parental exclusion policies purposely tarnish relationships between parents and children‚" Caroline Moore‚ vice president of Parents Defending Education‚ said in a statement. "Kansas is a great example of recognizing an issue that impacts all and correcting course‚ so these policies don't plague another generation of students and their families." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A California elementary school principal was recently placed on leave over allegations she “pretended to shoot” her students during an unauthorized and disturbing active shooter drill on Wednesday‚ KTLA reported.Nina Denson‚ the principal of Washington Elementary School in San Gabriel‚ was reportedly forced to take administrative leave after witnesses claimed she staged a mock drill where she pretended to shoot children by making finger-gun gestures.According to one parent‚ Jennifer Chavez‚ “[Denson] proceeded to walk around campus and pretended to shoot people she saw using finger movements and banging on windows.”“From what I heard‚ she said to one of the students‚ ‘Boom. You’re dead‚’” Chavez added.Denson joined the school staff as principal in Fall 2023‚ but now‚ parents are calling for her to be permanently removed from her position‚ claiming her alleged actions during the recent incident were inappropriate and even traumatizing for young children. Students as young as 4 reportedly witnessed the drill.Chavez stated that her son‚ who is in the first grade‚ “was really upset.”“The one shocking‚ surprising thing he said as a 6-year-old was‚ ‘I’m just really glad none of my friends died‚’” Chavez told KTLA.“I don’t want her back here at all‚” Chavez continued. “She does not have the trust of the community.”According to other school employees‚ after the drill concluded‚ Denson made an announcement declaring that seven children were dead.Another parent‚ Anna Bustamante‚ told the news outlet‚ “Can you imagine the trauma these children potentially could go through just thinking‚ ‘Oh my God‚ my friend was killed’ or ‘I was shot and told I died.’”“At the young age that these children are‚ it was very upsetting‚” she noted.The San Gabriel Unified School District’s superintendent‚ Jim Symonds‚ stated that the district did not authorize the mock drill.“This type of drill where a scenario was run is not approved by the district nor part of our district protocol‚” he said.Parents received a letter from district officials that claimed‚ “The conduct of the drill does not appear to have been in line with District protocols or best practices.” The district also announced that a veteran teacher at the school will serve as interim principal while an investigation into the incident is underway. Counselors were on the school campus to provide their services to students and staff‚ officials told KTLA.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Democrats are panicking about the political fallout from special counsel Robert Hur's report detailing his investigation into Biden's classified documents scandal.The report explains that Hur ultimately chose not to prosecute Biden — despite the technical elements of criminality being met — because he did not think prosecutors could win the case. The chief reason for his doubt‚ Hur explained‚ is because he believes that "Biden would likely present himself to a jury‚ as he did during our interview of him‚ as a sympathetic‚ well-meaning‚ elderly man with a poor memory."That line is proving to be devastating to an 81-year-old commander in chief whose No. 1 political liability is his age.Behind closed doors‚ Democrats are not ignorant to the political ramifications of Hur's report and its shocking revelations about Biden's memory‚ especially in a week where Biden claimed multiple times that he spoke with dead world leaders."This is beyond devastating‚" one Democratic operative told NBC News. "It confirms every doubt and concern that voters have. If the only reason they didn't charge him is because he’s too old to be charged‚ then how can he be president of the United States?" that strategist added.Another Democratic strategist told NBC News that Thursday was "the worst day of his presidency."A House Democrat‚ who spoke anonymously‚ told NBC that "it's a nightmare" because Hur's report "weakens President Biden electorally.""For Democrats‚ we're in a grim situation‚" that House Democrat admitted.Democratic strategist Paul Begala‚ meanwhile‚ said publicly what other Democrats are saying behind closed doors."Look‚ I'm a Biden supporter‚ and I slept like a baby last night: I woke up every two hours crying and wet the bed‚" Begala said on CNN. "This is terrible for Democrats‚ and anybody with a functioning brain knows that."Finally‚ Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) rebuked Biden for how he conducted himself during Thursday's chaotic late-night press conference."I'm a senior Democratic politician. I've been doing this for a long time. That's not the way you want to do it. OK? I think we can all agree on that‚" Smith said. "He was angry. He was frustrated by what came out. There was not a prepared‚ clear agenda."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!