Emojis under attack because … codes!

/

gee, i hope they don’t misinterpret my own text signature as code for “I don’t give a fuck”

EU to Begin Censoring Emojis on Social Media — For ‘Safety’

Via European Commission (emphasis added):

European regulators, the European Commission and the Board of the Digital Services Coordinators, enforcing the Digital Service Act published a world-wide first report on the landscape of prominent and recurrent risks on very large online platforms and search engines in the European Union.

The report (pdf) identifies systemic risks such as, among others, the spread of illegal content or threats to fundamental rights, occurring on very large online platforms. It also gives a first overview of the mitigation measures taken by platforms, based on the transparency requirements under the DSA.

Key findings cover risks to mental health and to the protection of minors online*; the impact of emerging technologies, such as generative AI, on online platforms; and challenges to intellectual property protection on online marketplaces. Among the notable mitigation measures highlighted are, for example, the use of automated systems to detect emojis used as code for illegal activities online, such as the sale of illegal drugs.

Benjamin Bartee:

Was any of this what the European states signed up for with the 1950 establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the promise being a limited economic cooperative agreement between a handful of Western European states that has now somehow ballooned into a sprawling bureaucracy dictating what emojis some Pole is permitted to use on Facebook?

Medicaid for the Fewer, or the “Affordable for Taxpayers Care Act” (Skip the main article, if you wish, but don’t miss the video)

/

Media All Take Turns Sobbing Over Nebraska Turning Off Corroded Taxpayer Money Spigot

CNN’s headline: “Tens of thousands could lose Medicaid coverage as Nebraska becomes first state to implement GOP work requirement”

NBC’s headline: “Nebraska rolls out Medicaid work requirements, putting thousands at risk of losing coverage”

NPR’s: “It’s Day 1 of Medicaid work requirements in Nebraska. People are worried”

Nebraska Examiner: “Critics decry Nebraska’s ‘rush’ to be first enforcer of new federal Medicaid rules”

Nebraska became the first state in the nation Friday to enforce a new federal policy that state officials described as a targeted step to protect taxpayer resources.

The media sang their songs of disappointment in unison as they realized that Nebraska would apply provisions from President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (signed in July 2025) that force Medicaid work requirements for eligible adults enrolled in the program.

>>>>

Sky-is-falling headlines lose their effect when you look closely at the actual numbers. Nebraska’s unemployment rate hovers near 3 percent, making it one of the lowest in the country. Many enrollees already work. A spokesperson for Nebraska’s health department projected that 60 to 72 percent of those seeking Medicaid will qualify automatically through data matches with employment records or school enrollment, NBC reported.

The requirements apply to roughly 70,000 to 72,000 adults ages 19 to 64 covered under Nebraska’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion. That group represents about one-fifth of the state’s total Medicaid enrollment, which is roughly 336,000 people, according to the Nebraska Examiner. Under the rules, affected enrollees must complete at least 80 hours per month of qualifying activities. This could include paid work, volunteering, community service, job training, education, or apprenticeships. They could also qualify by showing the state a monthly earnings of just $580, CNN reported.

The policy does not apply to traditional Medicaid groups such as parents or guardians who have children up to age 13, seniors, pregnant women, or people with disabilities covered under pre-expansion categories, according to a December press release. It targets only the expansion population approved by Nebraska voters in 2018, a group that added tens of thousands of able-bodied adults to the rolls at high cost.

Nebraska’s Medicaid program spends billions annually to provide medical coverage to those who don’t have it. Recent data show average benefit spending for those using Medicaid was about $9,500 per person per year. State spending on the 2018 Medicaid expansion alone exceeded $100 million by year three of the program.

Of the roughly 336,000 adults using Medicaid, an estimated 28,000 to 41,000 will potentially transition out of the program due to the new work requirements in 2034. This will save Nebraskan taxpayers millions a year. Still, beyond the cost-benefit of these individuals transitioning off Medicaid, the social boom this will create is immeasurable.

>>>>

For those with long attention spans, here’s Grok’s summary of the original Obama-Kare expansion of benefits and what’s been changed:

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded Medicaid by creating a new eligibility category focused on low-income adults, primarily those without young children. Prior to the ACA (enacted in 2010 and implemented starting in 2014), Medicaid eligibility was largely "categorical." It covered specific groups like low-income children, pregnant women, parents of dependent children (with state income limits often around 64% of the federal poverty level or lower), and people who were aged, blind, or disabled. Many low-income childless adults (and even some parents) fell into a coverage gap in most states, especially if they didn't fit those categories or had incomes too high for traditional limits.

The ACA added a new pathway (Section 2001 of the law): States could (and still can) opt to cover nearly all adults ages 19–64 with household incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level (FPL)—about $21,600 for an individual or $37,000 for a family of three in recent guidelines—based primarily on income alone, without needing to meet the old categorical rules. This is often called the "ACA Medicaid expansion" or "expansion population." It covers both parents (whose prior limits were raised) and especially childless adults who previously had almost no access in most states.

Nothing has been "subtracted" from the core expansion in the sense of repealing it or removing the income-based eligibility. The expansion remains fully in place in adopting states. However, the current debate (as of May 2026) centers on new federal work/community engagement requirements that apply specifically to adults in this ACA expansion group (and similar adults in a couple of partial-expansion states like Georgia and Wisconsin). These requirements were enacted as part of the 2025 federal budget reconciliation law (often called the "One Big Beautiful Bill" or H.R. 1), signed by President Trump on July 4, 2025.

Key Details of the New Requirements

  • Who it affects: Adults ages 19–64 enrolled through the ACA expansion (or equivalent waiver programs). Traditional Medicaid groups (e.g., children, pregnant women, disabled individuals, elderly) are generally exempt or not targeted.

  • What’s required: At least 80 hours per month (averaged) of work, job training, education, or community service/volunteering. Some states can require proof of recent compliance (e.g., 1–3 months of qualifying activity) when applying or renewing.

  • Exemptions: Available for pregnancy, caregiving for young children or incapacitated family members, students, disability/medical frailty, certain hardships (e.g., natural disasters, high unemployment areas), and others.

  • Timeline: Mandatory nationwide start date is January 1, 2027, with states required to check compliance at application and at least every 6 months at renewal. Some states are starting earlier via state plan amendments or waivers (e.g., Nebraska in May 2026, Montana in July 2026, others planning soft launches).

  • Enforcement: Failure to meet the requirement (or qualify for an exemption) can result in loss of coverage. States must update systems, notices, and portals to track this.

The DebateSupporters (mostly Republicans) argue this promotes self-sufficiency, aligns Medicaid more with programs like TANF or SNAP that have work rules, encourages healthier behaviors through employment, and reduces federal spending (Congressional Budget Office estimates ~$326 billion in Medicaid savings over 10 years, largely from coverage losses). They note that many expansion enrollees already work, but the policy targets "able-bodied" adults.

In short: The ACA added broad income-based coverage for low-income working-age adults (the expansion group). The 2025 law is now conditioning ongoing eligibility for many in that group on meeting work/community engagement rules—effectively "subtracting" coverage from those who don’t comply or navigate the new bureaucracy, without changing the underlying income eligibility rules or repealing the expansion itself.

Related, but more fun to watch, enjoy this video — the look of disgust on her face when she’s forced to buy asparagus and orange juice instead of Little Debbies is priceless.

Guess Who’s Big Mad They Can’t Buy Junk Food With Your Tax Money Anymore

Food stamp users in Florida are waking up to some big changes that took place in their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits that took effect April 20. The entitlement program’s beneficiaries can no longer use their EBT cards to purchase soda, energy drinks, candy, and “ultra-processed prepared desserts” such as Twinkies, cookies, cupcakes, and other packaged sweets.

They can continue to use their taxpayer-funded, free-food cards for fruit, vegetables, grains, meat, dairy and other staples. They can also use their EBT cards for coffee, tea, bottled water, and sport drinks. On the snack side, they can use their EBT cards for granola bars, freshly prepared baked goods, and packaged “breakfast” foods such as toaster strudels and breakfast biscuits.

The federal government did not implement the restrictions, even though the state of Florida’s SNAP program receives subsidies from the government. Rather, this a state policy which is being implemented under a waiver program from the Trump administration.

Guess who’s not happy about the change?

We've already posted on Spirit Airways' crash, but when Chris Murphy's idiocy is exposed, again, it's always worth a special mention

/

Liberals Showed Their Spirit When They Killed an Airline

David Strom:

Spirit Airlines has ceased operations. 

Now you may not care because you didn't fly Spirit, and have heard a lot of bad things about the airline, or more specifically, the behavior of its customers, but you should. Thousands of people are going to lose their jobs, and ticket prices on all airlines are going to skyrocket. 

My wife and I were regular flyers on Spirit, and we actually found that it was not only much cheaper than the alternatives, but a better flying experience as well. We didn't mind the "pick what services you want" model of pricing, which so many complained about, because the pricing was upfront (no, the fees weren't hidden), and we could purchase a "Big Front Seat" that was basically First Class for only about $80 more than economy. 

When Spirit quit serving the route we needed, we had to switch to the primary airline servicing Minneapolis, and the price per ticket almost doubled, and the seats were worse. It made us miserable. By every single measure, things got worse. 

Spirit didn't die because it could not have survived. It died because the Biden administration and Elizabeth Warren [And the bearded philanderer from CT] killed it. 

Spirit and JetBlue, both low-cost airlines, were set to merge in 2024, strengthening their finances and giving each access to a larger market. Neither was doing great, but it would take two low-cost airlines to make them a more viable competitor in the marketplace. 

Did I say that the cost to fly to Detroit jumped almost a 100% when Spirit quit serving our route? 

40,000 people out of work.

Yuppie Relief Act behind Maine's Tofu Line

/

Effective May 1st, Maine has a new family leave law, paid for by adding another 1% tax to payroll and income taxes. The law claims to be for the benefit of new parents and caregivers of sick family members, but the definitions are so broad that, essentially, anyone who wants 12 weeks paid leave can take it.

Who will benefit from this new program? The Bangor Daily News asks that question in this morning’s paper: Maine paid family leave has started. Who needs it most?, and then inadvertently answers it by profiling just one couple. I say “inadvertently”, because the BDN is a liberal rag that would never intentionally undercut a welfare program they’ve previously advocated so strongly for.

Here’s that couple’s profile, distilled from the article:

  • Portland residents

  • Already work remotely from home, so they have no need

  • Combined income of $200,000

  • Both will claim benefits

  • Both have already-accrued personal leave benefits they could draw on, But “don’t want to have to use their hard-earned PTO”

Maine paid family leave has started. Who needs it most?

Paid leave was not part of Tom Warner and Kathleen Kelley’s calculations when they found out in January they were having a baby.

The married couple was sure that at least one of them would have to take unpaid time off after her September due date.

They worried it would be harder to cover regular expenses like food, mortgage payments for their Portland home and car insurance.

They did the math believing they would have to take unpaid leave and hoped “to get through this without taking any kind of substantial financial hit,” said Warner, 36. “But obviously, there’s always the possibility that there could be some kind of unanticipated medical expense. There are just so many unexpected things that can happen.”

Then they heard about Maine’s new paid family leave program that not only anticipates interruptions to work, but pays for them.

Starting May 1, the Maine Paid Family and Medical Leave program will allow any employee in Maine to take up to 12 weeks off work for family or medical events such as childbirth, infant care, injury, illness or family caregiving duties — all while receiving partial wage replacement. Employers and employees each split 0.5% of a 1% payroll tax on employees’ wages to finance the fund.

For the first time, thousands of Mainers can take time off from work during life events and return to their jobs, while still getting paid a part of their wages. Over 2,000 Maine residents have already pre-applied for benefits, according to the Maine Department of Labor.

“It makes us worry a little bit less about: How are we going to make ends meet?” said Kelley, 34.

Warner and Kelley both work remotely. But with paid time off, they can be fully present with their baby at home. They look forward to figuring out his first weeks together.

Warner: “It’s going to be really nice for both of us to be there,” Warner said.

Kelley: “And I don’t want to have to use my hard-earned PTO”

So, a Maine laborer trying to support a family on $45,000 a year, a person who can’t afford to take time off at reduced pay, is being taxed to pay for the summer vacations of Portlanders earning twice as much. Does he share the enthusiasm of the program’s beneficiaries? Apparently so, because, according to the polls, he’ll be voting for still more of this, gooder and harder, this November.

Chump.

Child's Crusade. If Seattle voters wake up to who they voted for, will they cheer, or cringe? I’m going with “cheer” because after all, she’s one of their own

/

Socialist Seattle Mayor Gets Aggressively Saved By Handlers When a Reporter Politely Asks Basic Questions

Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson's staff abruptly ended an interview with a local news reporter this week after he pressed her on rising gun violence and surveillance cameras in the city after a recent shooting. 

Chris Daniels of KOMO News asked Wilson about community concerns over increasing gun violence and whether additional surveillance measures might be reconsidered. 

The mayor was quickly cut off mid-response by a member of her staff.

The mayor was being asked polite and frankly fairly basic questions and staffers felt the need to do a quick "clean up on aisle socialist" at that moment. Watch: 

If you missed it, here’s another of her performances, also from this week:

“That’s not the subject”

Also this week, the Mayor’s frequent target Starbucks — her very first statement upon taking office was to call for a boycott of the company’s stores – announced that its pulling hundreds of employees out of its Seattle headquarters and expanding to Nashville. Her comment? No comment”.

We have a feeling there's going to be a lot more the mayor (and her staff) doesn't want to talk about in the coming days and weeks:

Mission accomplished — depending on what the mission was

/

i told you i was sick

SPIRIT SET TO CEASE FLIGHTS AT 3AM TOMORROW, SPARKING FEARS OF BRAWLS AT AIRPORTS — ALTHOUGH DOOMED AIRLINE’S WEBSITE IS STILL LETTING PASSENGERS BOOK FLIGHTS:

Spirit Airlines is reportedly set to cease operations at 3am on Saturday after a bailout from President Trump has failed to materialize.

The airline, which began air operations in 1990, had been hoping for a $500 million lifeline from the federal government, but the deal has not been finalized in time due to financial complications, reports the Wall Street Journal.

Sources told the outlet that the budget airline has failed to get sufficient support from bondholders and the government to secure the funding before running out of cash.

The collapse of the airline could leave passengers stranded across the nation, and places over 14,000 jobs at risk.

The carrier previously filed for bankruptcy twice between November 2024 and August 2025, and it currently remains under Chapter 11 protection.

March 4, 2024:

JetBlue and Spirit are ending their $3.8 billion merger plan after a federal judge blocked the deal

JetBlue Airways and Spirit Airlines are ending their proposed $3.8 billion merger weeks after a federal judge blocked the deal, saying it would hurt consumers who depend on Spirit’s lower fares.

The Justice Department sued to block the merger last year, saying it would reduce competition and drive up fares, especially for travelers who depend on low-fare Spirit.

In January, a federal district judge in Boston sided with the government and blocked the deal, saying it violated antitrust law.

“On Monday, the Justice Department took a victory lap.”

“Today’s decision by JetBlue is yet another victory for the Justice Department’s work on behalf of American consumers,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. “The Justice Department proved in court that a merger between JetBlue and Spirit would have caused tens of millions of travelers to face higher fares and fewer choices. We will continue to vigorously enforce the nation’s antitrust laws.”

A JPMorgan Chase analyst said in January that he couldn’t see a viable path for Spirit on its own to return to profitability any time soon.

The collapse of the sale to JetBlue could leave Spirit in a precarious position, facing looming debt payments while a portion of its planes are grounded by engine problems.

Unlike bigger airlines that attract more upscale passengers — and now offer their own bare-bones fares to compete with budget carriers — Spirit has not recovered from the pandemic. It lost $447 million last year and $1.9 billion since the start of 2020.

A JPMorgan Chase analyst said in January that he couldn’t see a viable path for Spirit on its own to return to profitability any time soon.

Shares of Spirit Airlines Inc. closed down 11% and have fallen more than 60% since U.S. District Judge William Young’s ruling against the merger on Jan. 16. Shares of JetBlue Airways Corp. rose 4%.

So much for lower fares and increased competition.

UPDATE: Chief Buttincheeks also celebrated the great victory:

Where perpetrators are the victims, and the "complaining parties" are ignored

/

David Strom has posted an article on the tolerance, even support for criminals in our Blue States:

Peak Blue Governance?

He includes this incident where, over the objection of the girls’ parents, a rapist was essential let off scot-free:

I don’t automatically accept anything posted on social media true, so I asked Grok about this; admittedly, AI answers aren’t infallible, but I believe this one.

Q:

I’ve a report that a man from Rochester MI, one Mohamed Bakari Shei, was sentenced to just 180 days in jail for raoing two girls under the age of 9. Is this true? If so, what reason did the sentencing judge give for handing down such a lenient sentence?

A:

Yes, the report is true (with one small correction: it was Rochester, Minnesota, not Michigan).

Mohamed Bakari Shei (then 20) was sentenced on January 30, 2023, in Olmsted County District Court for sexually assaulting two girls (one approximately 9 years old and the other 4–5 years old) multiple times between 2017 and 2019, when he himself was 15–16. The victims were friends of his sister who had come over to play at the family home in Rochester.

postbulletin.com

He faced three counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct (felonies involving children under 13). In a plea deal, he entered an Alford plea (acknowledging that the evidence was strong enough for conviction while not formally admitting guilt) to one count. The other two charges were dismissed, and the court imposed a stay of adjudication. This meant that if he successfully completed probation, the charges could ultimately be dismissed and erased from his record. He was not required to register as a sex offender.

The sentence handed down by District Judge Jacob Allen was exactly as reported: 180 days in the Olmsted County Adult Detention Center (with credit for time already served, so roughly 176 days total; good behavior could reduce it further to as little as ~116 days) plus up to 30 years of supervised probation, a sex-offender treatment program, and 200 hours of community service. The jail time could be served with work release or a community-service option (Sentence to Serve).

Why such a lenient sentence?The judge approved a negotiated plea agreement between the defense and Olmsted County prosecutors. There was no trial; the deal was struck to resolve the case. Key factors and explanations include:

  • Shei was a juvenile at the time of the offenses (15–16 years old). The case was originally filed in juvenile court in 2019 but was dismissed due to delays (including COVID-related backlogs) and then refiled in adult court. Prosecutors offered the lenient terms (no prison, stay of adjudication) in exchange for Shei not challenging his certification to adult court, which allowed the prosecution to continue.

    postbulletin.com

  • Olmsted County Attorney’s Office policy on sex crimes (explained after the case drew public criticism): For many first-time/non-violent sex offenses, the office prioritizes long-term local probation and treatment over prison. The goal is rehabilitation and community safety—keeping the offender under supervision for decades (here, up to 30 years) while ensuring access to treatment programs that are harder to get in prison. Senior Attorney Thomas Gort told the court that the plea was specifically to secure continued prosecution after the juvenile-court issues. County Attorney Mark Ostrem later said: “Rehabilitation for most first-time offenders is preferable to a lengthy prison sentence” and that local supervision gives “better assurance that our communities are safer than if we send them to prison.” He noted that a stay of adjudication is common in juvenile cases and was used sparingly here.

    postbulletin.com

  • At sentencing, Judge Allen directly addressed Shei after hearing emotional victim-impact statements (one survivor said there is “no moving on or getting over it”; a family member described lasting trauma). The judge rejected a defense argument that even the 180-day jail term violated the plea’s “spirit,” noting that courts routinely impose short jail terms alongside stays of adjudication (e.g., in drug cases). He told Shei: “I hope you heard what was said in this court today. The conduct they described and the way it affected them should be something that haunts you.”

    postbulletin.com

In short, the light sentence was the result of a prosecutor-negotiated plea that prioritized long-term treatment and supervision over prison time, rooted in Shei’s juvenile status at the time of the crimes and the office’s view that extended probation better protects the community. The judge accepted the deal and imposed the agreed-upon terms. This case has been widely criticized online for the outcome, which is why the county attorney’s office publicly defended the approach.