The presumptive Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan is sitting pretty just hours away from the primary.

According to two polls conducted in late July, Republican primary front-runner Mike Rogers has a lead over the two main candidates vying for the Democratic nomination, Haley Stevens and Abdul El-Sayed.

El-Sayed campaigned with US-hating Islamist Hasan Piker, who once said, ‘America deserved 9/11.’

An EPIC-MRA poll conducted July 28 and 29 shows Rogers with a three-point lead over Stevens and in a tie with El-Sayed. A separate EPIC-MRA/MIRS poll from July 24 to 31 shows Rogers with a three-point lead over El-Sayed but two points below Stevens.

The Michigan primary election is Tuesday, and El-Sayed is the current favorite to win the Democratic nomination. The RealClearPolling average shows El-Sayed with a double-digit lead over Stevens, even though Stevens has been endorsed by Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Once again, that polling average may spell good news for Rogers since El-Sayed’s campaign has been shrouded in controversy ever since he announced his Senate candidacy.

Voters in Michigan, which went for President Donald Trump in 2016 and 2024, may not like the fact that El-Sayed:

has been endorsed by far-left radicals like Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).campaigned with U.S.-hater Hasan Piker, who once said, “America deserved 9/11, dude. F**k it, I’m sayin’ it.”bills himself as a medical “doctor” even though he reportedly has never treated a patient, isn’t licensed in Michigan, and has never passed any board exams.employed a campaign staffer earlier this year who is currently under federal indictment in connection with anti-Semitic attacks.

“And it’s exactly why I’ll beat whichever of my radical opponents prevails on Tuesday,” Rogers tweeted Sunday.

RELATED: 3 Senate races that could flip the balance of power: ‘This is a wake-up call’

Sarah Rice/Getty Images

In January 2025, Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) announced unexpectedly that he would not seek a third term. Should Rogers prevail in the election, Republicans would gain another seat, helping fortify their majority. Democrats already need to flip four seats to regain control.

Still, Rogers should not plan to coast his way into November. Rogers narrowly lost the 2024 Senate race to Elissa Slotkin, and Michigan has not elected a Republican U.S. senator since 1994.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here

​Michigan, Us senate, Mike rogers, Republican party, Politics 

Every August, families spend tens of thousands of dollars on college tuition, housing, meal plans, and textbooks. They compare degree requirements, graduation rates, and campus amenities. Yet many never ask the most basic consumer question: What is actually inside the classes they are buying?

Colleges already label the price. It’s time to label the product.

Americans would not buy food without reading the ingredients or take medicine without knowing something about the possible side effects. College courses, however, are often sold by title and catalog description alone. Students register for “Introduction to History,” “Ethics,” or even a science requirement with little idea of the intellectual assumptions the professor will bring into the lecture hall.

That information can be consequential. A course may pursue knowledge through evidence and argument. It may also subordinate the subject to diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, critical theory, gender ideology, Marxist assumptions, or some other political project.

Ideological activism is not confined to philosophy, literature, or religious studies. It increasingly appears across the curriculum, including in professional programs and “hard” scientific fields.

Parents and students have every right to know whether a professor intends to teach the advertised subject, examine competing arguments, and permit disagreement — or use the classroom to promote a political worldview.

The concern is especially urgent at public universities. Faculty members at state institutions are government employees paid by taxpayers. In Arizona, for example, they undertake obligations to uphold the United States and state constitutions. Taxpayers are therefore entitled to ask whether professors are educating students for citizenship in a constitutional republic or teaching theories fundamentally hostile to it.

That’s why I developed what I call the “Intellectual Nutrition Label.”

The idea is simple. A nutrition label does not order shoppers to buy or reject a product. It tells them what the product contains so they can decide for themselves. The Intellectual Nutrition Label would do the same for college professors and courses.

Using public information — university biographies, curricula vitae, books, articles, interviews, lectures, and course materials — each label would summarize the intellectual content students are likely to encounter. Families should not need graduate training or weeks of research to understand what a professor openly teaches.

RELATED: Trump’s Justice Department is shining a light on woke universities — finally

Angela Lewis/Bloomberg/Getty Images

A useful label might ask:

Does the professor encourage the pursuit of knowledge or deny that objective truth exists?Does the course cultivate virtue and self-command or treat desire as its own justification?Does it direct students toward goodness, beauty, and wisdom or toward resentment, envy, and contempt?Does the professor teach students how to examine arguments or tell them which political conclusions a decent person must reach?

A label could also rate qualities such as intellectual honesty, knowledge, virtue, beauty, meaningfulness, and piety. A professor might rank highly for candor and scholarship while receiving a low rating for piety because he publicly rejects belief in God. The point would not be to uncover private opinions or publish anonymous accusations. The ratings would summarize what professors already say about themselves and their work.

Owen Anderson

That distinction is essential. An Intellectual Nutrition Label should not become a blacklist, an invitation to harassment, or a substitute for reading a professor’s work. It must rely on verifiable public evidence, represent a professor’s position fairly, and provide enough sourcing for readers to check the judgment for themselves.

The concept has predecessors. David Horowitz’s 2006 book, “The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America,” documented ideological activism in higher education. The David Horowitz Freedom Center continues to track left-wing activists and organizations. Turning Point USA’s Professor Watchlist sought to alert students to professors who brought political activism into the classroom and briefly maintained a list of recommended faculty.

The Intellectual Nutrition Label would have a narrower purpose: consumer disclosure. It would tell students and parents what intellectual ingredients a professor publicly advertises, in a format ordinary people can understand before registration day.

If a professor teaches that the United States is inherently oppressive, advocates Marxist critical theory, rejects biological sex as fixed, or treats Christianity principally as an instrument of domination, those positions should be documented in the professor’s own publications, biography, lectures, or course materials. An accurate summary of publicly stated beliefs is not censorship.

RELATED: Universities won’t give back the land — but they will bury history

ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images

The more serious objection may be that parents and taxpayers were never expected to notice. Academic language often conceals radical assumptions behind specialized vocabulary. Professors can signal their commitments to colleagues while students discover the course’s real content only after enrollment.

That arrangement is losing its protection. Parents increasingly ask what their children are learning. Taxpayers increasingly ask whether public universities are educating students or recruiting them into political movements. Those are legitimate questions, especially when a single semester can cost more than many families earn in months.

Throughout the coming semester, I will publish Intellectual Nutrition Labels evaluating professors from publicly available evidence. The labels will not decide which courses students may take. They will help families make that decision with their eyes open.

Readers can follow the project on my Substack and at intellectualnutritionlabel.com (coming soon).

When families spend tens of thousands of dollars on a college education, they deserve to know who is teaching, what that professor believes, and which intellectual ingredients will be placed before their children. Colleges already label the price. It’s time to label the product.

​American universities, Christianity, College classes, Higher education, Political activism, Professors, Public universities, Tuition, Woke, Opinion & analysis, Intellectual nutrition label, Diversity equity inclusion, Activism 

WNBA coach Cheryl Reeve has made her opinion on men participating in women’s sports fairly obvious, but it’s a fringe one.

In response to Indiana Fever player Sophie Cunningham stating girls should not have to compete with or share the same locker room as boys, the Minnesota Lynx head coach performed a silent protest that will likely have parents scratching their heads.

‘I think both of us understand that we have platforms.’

During the Fever vs. Lynx game on Sunday, Reeve sported a T-shirt that read “Trans kids belong” and featured a transgender-themed rainbow. While the meaning behind the shirt can be inferred, fans wondered what Reeve and Cunningham were talking about when they were spotted having a conversation before the game.

At the postgame press conference, Reeve was asked by a reporter if she were willing to reveal what was said. After initially saying “absolutely not” to the idea, Reeve went on to say that both parties were focused on educating.

“I think both of us understand that we have platforms, and we both talked about wanting to, more than anything, educate,” the coach explained.

Reeve added, “There are some things that we have in common and maybe some things you differ on just like any issues, and I think it’s how you handle things, and it was nice to be in person [to have the conversation] for sure.”

RELATED: The WNBA’s message to young girls: Stay quiet on trans athletes

Cunningham did not show up for the Fever’s postgame press conference, but star Caitlin Clark was present for a reporter’s question about navigating protests that focused on “trans rights.”

“It’s not really a discussion we really have in our locker room,” Clark claimed, before parrying the core of the question.

“I think it’s for leagues and the governing bodies to work with their athletes to find solutions, but our focus is on basketball, and that’s what we talk about and how we can get wins.”

Clark’s fairly canned response comes after Fever Coach Stephanie White made remarks on Friday about the WNBA being an “inclusive league” that “welcomes everyone.”

“We’re a league that promotes diversity. We promote inclusion, and we’re a league that has always been on the forefront of social change,” the coach affirmed.

RELATED: How the WNBA’s hottest star became the left’s newest headache

David Berding/Getty Images

When asked for her stance on “men or athletes who tested biological male” participating in women’s sports, White stated that she is not “educated enough from a scientific standpoint” to make such a determination.

However, she did say, “I don’t ever believe that exclusion is an answer.”

Cunningham did not make any public comments about the ordeal over the weekend. However, she did take a photo with female athletics activist Riley Gaines, who wore an XX-XY athletics T-shirt from an organization that believes men should not be in women’s sports.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Wnba, Sophie cunningham, Transgenderism, Caitlin clark, Sports 

Since helping Robert Casey Sr. become the governor of Pennsylvania in the late 1980s, James “the Ragin’ Cajun” Carville has been a mainstay in the Democratic Party. The 81-year-old strategist who managed Bill Clinton’s first presidential campaign is, however, now seriously doubting his future in the party.

Carville, who has repeatedly warned about his party’s takeover by democratic socialists, explained on Sunday that he will leave the Democratic Party if it welcomes leftist streamer Hasan Piker.

‘Let the streets soak in their f**king red capitalist blood.’

“I am not going to be in the same party with Hasan Piker, I can tell you that right now,” Carville told Fox News. “If he becomes a force in the Democratic Party, I’m out of here.”

Piker, the multimillionaire son of Muslim immigrants from Turkey, is a former Young Turks contributor turned streamer who has accrued millions of followers on Twitch. This proud supporter of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) who was characterized by New Yorker magazine in December as a “Communist Manifesto”-thumping “old-school hard leftist” has made no secret of his contempt for America.

Piker, who was in attendance at New York City Democrat Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s election party, has, for example:

stated that “America deserved 9/11” and called for another attack;celebrated the “brave f**king soldier” responsible for Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R) losing his eye in the Afghanistan war;identified the colors of Hezbollah terrorists as his “favorite flag”;told viewers who care about Medicaid fraud to “kill” Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), resulting in a temporary Twitch ban;shrugged off sexual violence by Hamas terrorists; andadvocated for murdering landlords who choose not to rent their properties, stating, “Let the streets soak in their f**king red capitalist blood.”

Piker, a self-admitted anchor baby who has said that he has no patriotism in his heart for America, has also lavished praise on Chinese dictator Mao Zedong, a bloodthirsty communist who was responsible for tens of millions of deaths.

RELATED: Democratic socialist leader goes on Fox and admits every extreme thing they want to do

Sam Barnes/Web Summit/Sportsfile/Getty Images

In one stream, Piker said that he “never would and never will” criticize Mao, calling the mass murderer “one of the great leaders of this world, a man who changed the entire universe, the entire planet.”

Carville emphasized on Sunday, “I have no intention of ever being in the same political party with that guy. Now, I think that a majority, [an] overwhelming majority of Democrats agree with me, but this idea that we’re going to seize the means of production and this — just go look at the DSA platform.”

While unclear about how things might pan out for the two-party system in the coming months, Carville said, “I can tell you for certain: Hasan Piker and James Carville are not going to be in the same political party. One of us is going to leave. It might even be me.”

In addition to supporting Ocasio-Cortez, Piker has endorsed Abdul El-Sayed, the 41-year-old Islamic leftist running for the U.S. Senate in Michigan. El-Sayed, who like Piker is the son of Muslim immigrants, has previously called for the defunding of American police and has in recent months attempted to make the election in Michigan a referendum on America’s relationship with Israel.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Democratic party, Democratic socialists, Hamas, Hasan piker, James carville, Mao zedong, Socialist, Politics 

A years-old speech from Anne Hathaway is making the rounds online again, and in hindsight, it served as a warning for the gender madness that was to come.

“With the exception of being a cisgender male, everything about how I was born has put me at the current center of a damaging and widely accepted myth,” Hathaway began in a 2018 speech for the Human Rights Campaign.

“That myth is that gayness orbits around straightness. Transgender orbits around cisgender, and that all races orbit around whiteness. And it is a myth that keeps money and power in the hands of the few instead of being invested in the lives of the free,” she continued.

“I appreciate this community so much, because it’s where I learn to reject this myth. I appreciate this community because together we are not just going to question this myth, we are going to destroy it,” she added.

“What does ‘gayness revolves around straight’ even mean?” BlazeTV host Dave Landau asks, confused.

“It means nothing,” co-host Stu Burguiere says.

“And all races revolve around white … if you’re talking about a global scale, then white is the minority,” Dave says.

“She’s just saying, ‘Listen, I have learned from all of you, who, by the way, I will not be meeting or signing autographs or shaking hands with after this, but I’ve learned from all of you that from a distance, that I am guilty about who I am, and I’m going to stand up here and do what I can to kind of alleviate that guilt,’” he continues.

“That’s all it is,” he adds.

“It’s this idea that you’re constantly victimizing people,” Stu agrees, adding, “and then they cheer for it.”

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave’s lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Stu burguiere, Dave landau, Anne hathaway, Hollywood, Whiteness, Blazetv show, Lgbt 

A prominent public intellectual is getting stomped out on social media after backing a socialist scheme before it came knocking at his door.

Scott Galloway is a professor and podcaster who agrees with many left-leaning political policies, but he changed his tune after New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, allegedly doxxed his address.

‘I came out in favor of this tax. He’s taken a legitimate source of tax revenue and is turning it into a wanted poster.’

Galloway said he was supportive of the Mamdani plan to jack up taxes on pied-à-terre residences, which are luxury second homes that do not serve as primary residences.

But when Mamdani released a list of these residences that allegedly included Galloway’s residence, all of a sudden, Galloway realized that backing a socialist scheme was bad for his personal finances.

“I’ve been doxxed. I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Mayor Mamdani has decided to release a list of the 950,000 residences with addresses and names that might be eligible for his pied-à-terre tax,” claimed Galloway.

“I came out in favor of this tax. He’s taken a legitimate source of tax revenue and is turning it into a wanted poster. And the question I would have is, other than trying to identify and imply these people have done something wrong, and then 18 months after a health care CEO was executed in the streets, and then published the list, what is the upside here? Why is he doing this?”

He went on to defend those seeking success in New York City.

“New York is the last place you want to demonize success! The reason people want to move to New York is they think, ‘I want to be successful on Broadway, I want to be successful in business, I want to be successful in the arts, and no one’s going to get in my f**king way if I am really talented and work hard,'” said Galloway.

“We’re going to celebrate it, we’re not going to put a big ‘R’ on your door and say you’ve done something wrong because you’re successful,” he added.

Kara Swisher, another prominent liberal, called it “creepy” and “very surveillance” on the same podcast.

Both were mocked and ridiculed by those who see Galloway as receiving a consequence of socialist karma.

“Useful idiots. NEVER help a communist,” responded Spencer Pratt.

“The Scott Galloway video is so captivating because it’s one of the rare moments we get to watch a prominent liberal realize the leaders he votes [for] view him as the problem. We’re witnessing the realization happen in real time. Scott, just wait until you understand that violence against the Target List is the whole point,” said one account on social media.

RELATED: Mamdani-endorsed candidate deleted extremist posts about seizing property and abolishing police, prisons

“I can’t believe this commie guy is doing commie stuff,” joked another detractor.

Galloway has been criticized for offering liberal solutions to young males embracing brutish and extremist outlets for feelings of alienation and loneliness.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Scott galloway, Zohran mamdani, Socialism, New york city, Politics 

Nearly half of American adults say health care is difficult to afford, and about one-third have skipped or postponed care because of the cost, according to KFF polling. Even insured Americans are feeling the strain: The average monthly price of health insurance rose nearly 26% in a single year, the Urban Institute recently found.

Many forces drive those costs. One has operated largely outside public view: private equity.

Private equity-owned hospitals charged more, spent no less on patient care, and kept the difference.

Last month, my organization, Campaign for Accountability, released “Overbilled and Overtreated,” a report combining hospital financial data from the National Academy for State Health Policy with the Private Equity Stakeholder Project’s ownership tracker. We compared 71 hospitals acquired by private equity firms with 71 closely matched peers.

After acquisition, private equity-owned hospitals collected $669 more in operating profit per patient. Their operating margins were 6.5 percentage points higher — roughly a 31% increase. Among privately insured and self-insured patients, where hospitals have more freedom to set prices, the gap widened to 10.4 percentage points.

Those profits did not appear to come from running hospitals more efficiently. Private equity ownership produced no statistically significant reduction in operating costs per patient. Costs did not fall. Charges rose.

Court records show what pressure for higher revenue can look like inside medical facilities.

At Steward Health, created after Cerberus Capital Management converted a nonprofit hospital chain into a for-profit company, a former nurse billing auditor alleged that a Massachusetts team systematically reclassified patient charts into more expensive billing categories. A moderate emergency room visit could be elevated to the most severe level; the team, he said, could “only upcharge.”

Three Steward physicians filed a separate lawsuit alleging that hospital staff recorded patients’ blood pressure readings as normal to avoid diagnoses that would require costly treatment.

At Select Rehabilitation, then capitalized by Caltius Capital Management, a whistleblower alleged that therapists were pushed to inflate billable minutes to meet quotas. In one example, the company allegedly billed for 50 minutes of therapy after providing five. The whistleblower also claimed that severely ill patients underwent needless therapy and that discharges were delayed to maximize revenue.

RELATED: Hospital consolidations and ‘nonprofit’ tax breaks are driving up medical costs

Onuma Inthapong/Getty Images

At Surgery Partners, owned by H.I.G. Capital Group, a physician alleged that patients were required to undergo unnecessary urine drug tests at a company-owned laboratory. The tests were billed at $3,200 to $4,600, while physicians were barred from using a $20 alternative. The company later agreed to a $41 million settlement with the Justice Department and received a $45 million federal pandemic bailout days later.

The most disturbing example involved children. USA Today reported that dentists at North American Dental Group, a private equity-backed chain, drilled healthy teeth under pressure to generate revenue. One 3-year-old received seven root canals without first receiving an X-ray. He later required surgery to repair the damage. A reviewing dentist called the treatment a form of child abuse.

Private equity firms are not shy about the strategy. Ardent Health, owned by Equity Group Investments, told investors in 2025 that roughly half its revenue growth would come from higher rates rather than greater patient volume. Surgery Partners boasted of rising “revenue per case.”

Translated from investor language, the promise is simple: Charge more for each patient and call the difference growth.

Private equity is not solely responsible for America’s health care crisis. Hospitals, insurers, drug companies, government payment systems, and professional cartels all contribute to high prices and limited competition. But private equity adds a distinctive pressure: Investors expect rapid returns, while the patients absorbing the costs often cannot shop around, delay treatment, or meaningfully challenge a bill.

RELATED: Caregivers should not have to lie to prove compassion

Benjavisa/Getty Images

Policymakers should account for that pressure. Proposals include barring private equity-owned hospitals and skilled nursing facilities from participating in Medicare and requiring providers to disclose mergers, acquisitions, and changes in ownership or control. At minimum, patients and regulators should know who owns the facility sending the bill.

Stronger disclosure alone will not solve the problem. Regulators and prosecutors must also scrutinize upcoding, unnecessary treatment, discharge delays, and other practices that turn patients into revenue targets.

The evidence in our report is difficult to dismiss: Private equity-owned hospitals charged more, spent no less on patient care, and kept the difference.

That may be an attractive growth strategy for investors. For patients already postponing care because they cannot afford it, it is another bill they should never have had to pay.

​Health care affordability, Hospital profits, Private equity impact, Rising insurance prices, Patient care costs, Private equity, Hospital bills, Surgery, Medical bills, Opinion & analysis 

Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) condemned Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio) on Sunday, characterizing him as a “danger” and calling for his resignation. Miller, who is running for re-election, has denied the allegations advanced by his ex-father-in-law and indicated that he will not scuttle his re-election campaign.

How it started

In May 2021, then-congressional candidate Miller got engaged to Emily Moreno, the daughter of then-Senate candidate Bernie Moreno. The lovers had met while working for Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s failed presidential campaign in 2015 and got married in a civil ceremony on Aug. 17, 2022.

‘I’m winning in November.’

In November 2023, the couple welcomed a daughter into the world, but by that time, their relationship was apparently already falling apart.

Miller — who years earlier was accused by ex-girlfriend and ex-White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham of physical abuse that the congressman’s lawyer said “never happened” — filed for divorce in August 2024. According to a court filing, Emily Moreno Miller had moved with their daughter into a house earlier that month that had been allegedly purchased by a company owned by Sen. Moreno.

As the divorce proceedings grew uglier, a spokeswoman for Sen. Moreno stressed that “it’s a private family matter” and the senator would not be making further comments.

The couple’s divorce was finalized last year. However, their custody battle raged on, and just recently, a leftist site dug up allegations from court filings that paint Miller in a particularly unflattering light.

RELATED: Mike Lee SOUNDS the ALARM after stunning polls from Senate race in Texas

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Mother Jones, citing a trove of court filings and police reports obtained through public records requests, last month detailed allegations of verbal abuse by Miller as well as drug use and violent behavior against multiple individuals.

The leftist site highlighted records related to an investigation by Cuyahoga County’s Division of Child and Family Services into how the couple’s daughter ended up with a broken collar bone — an injury that was not proven to have been the result of abuse. The records reportedly show that Emily Moreno told the detectives investigating the broken bone that Miller allegedly threw hot water at her in June 2024, pushed her, and put a gun to her head.

Mother Jones acknowledged that “some of the accusations contained in the records have not been conclusively proven by a court or law enforcement agency,” and noted that Emily Moreno “never filed a police report against Miller for harm she says he inflicted on her.”

How it’s going

On Sunday morning, Miller — who sued Emily Moreno earlier this year for alleged defamation and suggested in a recent interview that his ex-wife has untreated bipolar disorder and “sadly isn’t all there” — shared a nearly 20-minute video to X where he not only rejects his characterization as an abusive husband and father but confronted and denied each of the key allegations raised against him.

Miller also made clear that he wasn’t dropping out: “I’m not getting out of this race, and I’m winning in November.”

The congressman concluded his video by emphasizing that he will “hold strong” and clear his name and urging skeptics to review the packet of court documents he also released on Sunday, which the congressman evidently regards as exculpatory.

‘I personally wouldn’t wait two years before holding him accountable.’

The summary accompanying the “evidence packet” claims that: “every abuse allegation that has been investigated has been resolved in Miller’s favor”; “Moreno’s own sworn and recorded statements directly contradict her abuse allegations,” including her October 2024 statement that Miller had never harmed their daughter; “no court has ever found that Miller abused anyone”; and in the “‘boiling water’ incident,” Miller had only sprayed his ex-wife with tap water from the sink sprayer.

Stefan Mychajliw, a spokesman for Emily Moreno, said in a statement, “It is shameful that Max Miller decided to go on a bizarre and lie-filled rant about his ex-wife to desperately try to save his political career. There is a documented trove of evidence that Miller has a history of violent and dangerous behavior and no amount of victim shaming will change that.”

“Miller can lie and spin on X, but he cannot do so under oath in a court of law,” added the spokesman. “We are confident that justice will prevail in court.”

Sen. Moreno, among those not buying what his former son-in-law is selling, penned a lengthy social media post on Sunday, stating, “As a father and husband, I can tell you the last two years have been pure hell for my wife Bridget, our daughter Emily, me, and our entire family in the aftermath of Emily’s divorce.”

“It has been horrific to watch this play out in full public view, all while knowing an innocent two-year-old girl is caught in the middle,” continued the senator. “Our priority has always been protecting our daughter and our granddaughter. Out of concern for the safety of my family, I hoped to keep this matter private but Max Miller’s increasingly erratic and dangerous behavior has made that impossible.”

Sen. Moreno noted further that “Max Miller needs serious psychological help. He is a danger to my daughter, and I hold my breath every minute he has custody of my granddaughter.”

According to the senator, Miller’s character is unbecoming of an elected official, and “he should not serve in the House of Representatives.”

Miller said in response to Sen. Moreno’s post, “If my daughter said the same thing to me, I personally wouldn’t wait two years before holding him accountable. You know this isn’t true and the only reason you are speaking out now is to hide from your own media circus. This is all political.”

When asked over the weekend whether Miller should resign, President Donald Trump — who previously endorsed him — said, “Well, I’m going to look at it. I mean so far it’s accusations.”

A poll conducted in late June had Miller leading Democratic challenger Brian Poindexter by only one percentage point.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Max miller, Bernie moreno, Ohio, Republican, Politics 

Remember the radio? Of course you do. It’s not hard to remember. It’s still around. You can buy a little one on Amazon and tune into AM or FM. Cars still have them, for now. You can enjoy classical music on public radio, political commentary on talk radio, the game on a Friday night, or whatever else there is floating around on the airwaves at any given moment on any given day.

Before TikTok there was Facebook, and before Facebook there was MySpace, and before MySpace there was television, and before television there was radio, and before radio there was silence.

‘Who else is listening to this right now?’ That’s what I wonder a little when I’m driving and scanning the radio. There’s no way for me to know.

Imagine what that transition was like — from silence to radio.

Big world

I’ve been reading “Hello, Everybody! The Dawn of American Radio” by Anthony J. Rudel recently, and in it, Rudel writes at length about that time and transition from silence to radio sound.

The world was so big in those days. Rhode Island was so far from Spain, and Ohio was so far from Rhode Island. In that big world of people without Social Security numbers or anything like our panopticon of 2026, there were millions and millions of little worlds. Towns, blocks, clans, families, and people all in their own little worlds, living and breathing in silence.

Radio was, in some way, a beginning of the modern world as we know it. Of course, there have been many symbols of many beginnings in different and disparate domains, and radio was one of them. The ability to transmit a message across the land to anyone else who might want to listen was the beginning of mass communication and mass modern society. In hindsight, it was the first step in a long march toward Instagram, Facebook, and X.

When media was social

But radio was nothing like today’s social media. The people who listened to it still lived primarily in embodied communities — families, churches, neighborhoods, and workplaces. Radio expanded that world; it did not replace it.

Social media has done the opposite. Millions of us now inhabit synthetic networks populated by algorithms, bots, AI-generated content, and strangers selected by recommendation engines rather than real proximity. We are connected to more people than ever while becoming increasingly detached from the human beings physically around us.

Radio felt like a kind of modern magic. Voices traveled across the plains, through the night, and into your living room, making a vast country seem smaller. Yet those voices still pointed back toward a shared human world, answering one of humanity’s oldest questions: Is anybody out there?

Beautiful uncertainty

There’s something beautiful about how terrestrial radio isn’t completely predictable or reliable. Fishing, not knowing what you might catch when throwing your line in the water is like that. Driving and just letting the road go is like that. Tuning into the radio, passing over static as you turn the dial right, hearing faint music or voices covered by the gray sound, and landing on a station you haven’t heard before is like that.

Driving late at night with one hand on the wheel and the other on the dial, scanning from station to station, seeing if there is anything worth listening to is different from looking through Spotify playlists or flipping through CDs like we once did 20 years ago. Spotify playlists somehow feel like shopping at the store, and CDs felt like something private, while radio stations feel like something almost — almost! — communal.

“Who else is listening to this right now?” That’s what I wonder a little when I’m driving and scanning the radio. There’s no way for me to know. There’s no way for the radio station to know. There’s no way for anyone to know who’s listening in their car or in their bedroom or in their kitchen.

The sound is sent out into the world on a certain frequency, and those who are tuned in hear. There is no history of it marked, there is no documentation logged, there is no surveillance state knowing you listened that night. Ah, the sound of freedom.

RELATED: Goodbye, car radio? Big Tech’s plans to control what you listen to behind the wheel.

Ron Schwerin/Getty Images

Batter up

Maybe it’s nostalgia, or maybe it’s aesthetics, but whatever it is, there is something so damn American about listening to a baseball game on the radio. The game sounds better over a little tinny speaker with crackle and static than it looks on a 96-inch flatscreen. The way the announcers sound, the way they describe every detail, the distant cry of the crowd in the background. You imagine sight in your mind behind your eyes as you play out what they tell you.

Maybe the beauty of radio is the fact that we don’t have control once we finally land on a station that’s clear. Someone else chooses the music to play or the words to say, and it’s there in the background, and everyone out there who’s listening listens. Maybe it’s good, maybe it’s bad, maybe it’s all right, but it’s just what there is, and it’s fine. I think we might get sick of making so many choices these days. There’s too many choices. Going on a ride with someone else is nicer than driving ourselves.

If all this is just nostalgia, then it’s a nostalgia for a world that hadn’t quite yet evolved, or rather devolved, into the global cyber panopticon we have today. It was a world teetering on the edge of technological modernity; one still with the magic of the old little worlds; one that was peering over the fence toward the future and everyone else far away. It was a big world out there, and we could only hear just a little of it.

It was tinny, scratchy, and it was magical.

​Community, Culture, Lifestyle, Radio, Social media, The root of the matter, Baseball 

The left suddenly fears that artificial intelligence will replace American workers. It showed far less concern when illegal immigration undercut wages and jobs.

The double standard reveals a larger economic vision: protection for the credentialed class, cheap labor at the bottom, and little concern for the working Americans caught between them.

The left has built a bifurcated economy because it has bifurcated loyalties. Neither side of that arrangement puts America’s working class first.

Progressive warnings about AI often begin with the claim that employers will use new technology to replace costly labor or avoid training new employees. One progressive platform warns that AI could cause massive labor-market disruption. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposes taxing AI so that its gains do not flow only to the wealthy.

The concern isn’t inherently foolish. New technology can displace workers, at least temporarily, and policymakers should consider how people adapt. But the left’s labor solidarity becomes strangely selective when the competing worker entered the country illegally.

The Migration Policy Institute recently estimated that the illegal immigrant population may have reached 15.8 million. The Biden years also produced more than 10 million border encounters, although that figure includes repeat attempts and excludes people who evaded detection.

Meanwhile, the July Bureau of Labor Statistics report counted 7.1 million unemployed Americans. Those numbers do not prove that every illegal worker displaced a citizen. They do make it absurd to pretend that millions of additional workers have no effect on wages, bargaining power, or employment.

The standard answer is that illegal immigrants perform jobs Americans refuse to do. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) put the argument plainly: In a capitalist economy, someone will always do the work others do not want.

But jobs are not fixed objects with permanently assigned wages. When employers cannot attract workers, they must raise pay, improve conditions, invest in equipment, or change the way the work is performed. Labor scarcity gives workers leverage.

Progressives claim to understand that principle when they campaign for higher legal wage floors. The five states with the highest minimum wages are deep blue. Democratic lawmakers routinely demand “living wages” and stronger benefits.

RELATED: The bipartisan farm bill that also grows amnesty

Wenmei Zhou/iStock/Getty Images

Yet the same politicians short-circuit the market mechanism that might raise wages naturally. They permit a large supply of unauthorized labor, including an estimated 8.5 million people working off the books, to fill jobs at wages and under conditions many would never accept.

That arrangement is not compassionate to workers. It allows employers to avoid the higher pay, benefits, and taxes that legal labor would require. It also leaves illegal immigrants vulnerable to exploitation because their status limits their ability to challenge abuse.

The result is a two-tiered labor market.

At the top sit credentialed professionals whose jobs may be threatened by AI. Their anxieties receive white papers, Senate hearings, tax proposals, and sympathetic coverage. At the bottom sit unauthorized workers whom progressive politicians describe as indispensable because they perform society’s least desirable tasks.

Crockett’s own words and similar comments from other Democrats expose the hierarchy. The jobs at the top must be protected from technological competition. The jobs at the bottom must remain cheap enough that Americans supposedly will not take them.

The people excluded from both priorities are working-class citizens.

They are told that automation may eliminate their better-paying opportunities but that low-wage jobs cannot pay more because imported labor must fill them. They face high legal wage mandates and benefit requirements on one side, then competition from off-the-books labor on the other.

Government benefits without strong work requirements can compound the problem by creating a steep penalty for returning to employment. Sanctuary policies then protect the unauthorized labor supply that keeps wages down.

RELATED: Unaffordable housing is still ruining the party

Cemile Bingol/iStock/Getty Images

This is not a coherent defense of workers. It is a coalition strategy.

The modern left protects the professional class that staffs its institutions and the immigrant constituencies it hopes to mobilize. The blue-collar Americans who once formed the Democratic base receive speeches about dignity while policy steadily erodes their bargaining power.

Long gone are the days when the left at least pretended to organize politics around the American worker.

AI may indeed disrupt employment. Illegal immigration can also depress wages and displace workers. A party genuinely committed to labor would confront both pressures honestly instead of treating one as a crisis and the other as a moral obligation.

The left has built a bifurcated economy because it has bifurcated loyalties. Neither side of that arrangement puts America’s working class first.

​Artificial intelligence, Illegal immigration, Labor, Wages, Unemployment, Elizabeth warren, Jasmine crockett, Big tech, White collar, Working class, Living wage, Opinion & analysis