• Original Article Summary:
  “Supreme Court seems ready to let religious groups opt out of unemployment compensation laws”
  The Supreme Court appears poised to side with religious charities in a case that could exempt them from state unemployment insurance laws. The case centers on whether religious organizations should be required to pay into state-run unemployment programs, particularly when their employees are involved in religious activities. The justices signaled sympathy toward the argument that forcing religious groups to comply with such laws could be a violation of the First Amendment. Opponents argue that this could create a loophole for religious employers to skirt basic labor protections. The case could have broad implications for how religious liberty is balanced against government regulations in employment law.

Here’s What They Meant To Say

Liberals Panic as Religious Freedom Makes a Comeback

The horror! People of faith might not be forced to bankroll state-run unemployment schemes that don’t align with their beliefs. According to the Left, letting religious charities have autonomy over their own employment practices is basically the end of civilization. How dare the Supreme Court consider letting religious organizations actually practice their religion without government interference? The justices—clearly recognizing that the First Amendment still exists—seemed to understand that, yes, religious institutions shouldn’t be treated like every other soulless corporation just because it makes leftists feel better at night.

The Real Agenda: Control Over Conscience

Let’s be real—this isn’t about unemployment insurance. It’s about making sure everyone, even nuns and church volunteers, bows to the almighty bureaucracy. The Left wants to force religious charities to play by secular rules or be punished. But if the goal is truly helping people, maybe we shouldn’t be kneecapping the very organizations that feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, and clothe the poor—without demanding tax dollars in return.

How Dare People Believe in Something Higher Than Government

Once again, the Left is clutching their pearls because the Supreme Court might let religious folks live out their faith without government micromanagement. What’s next? Will churches be allowed to believe in God without a permit?

• Original Article Summary:
  “Advocates say flawed ‘checklist’ targets Venezuelans for deportation under archaic wartime act”
  The article laments the deportation of Venezuelan nationals—some of them members of notorious gangs like Tren de Aragua and MS-13—under what activists call an outdated wartime law. NPR highlights the concerns of immigration advocates who argue that the “checklist” used to determine deportations is overly broad and unfairly targets Venezuelans. The article frets about the legality and morality of deporting individuals who could face human rights abuses in their home countries. Despite the criminal affiliations of many deportees, the piece focuses on how the policy might be discriminatory and lacking due process, portraying deportations as a humanitarian crisis rather than a national security measure.

Here’s What They Meant To Say

Criminals Deserve Hugs, Not Handcuffs

Apparently, when we deport gang members responsible for violence, drug trafficking, and chaos, NPR’s bleeding hearts go into overdrive. According to them, it’s “archaic” to use laws that protect American citizens from foreign nationals who belong to actual criminal syndicates. Who cares if they’re in MS-13 or Tren de Aragua? They have feelings too, right? The article barely mentions the safety of Americans—because clearly, our top priority should be the comfort of violent thugs who got caught breaking the law.

Due Process for the World’s Worst

The same people who scream “abolish ICE” are now upset that we’re deporting dangerous criminals instead of coddling them in taxpayer-funded shelters. The “checklist” they whine about is just common sense: if you’re in a violent gang, you don’t belong here. But leave it to the left to twist that into a human rights violation. Heaven forbid we prioritize the safety of American neighborhoods over the vacation preferences of hardened criminals.

In conclusion, how dare we inconvenience international gang members by sending them back to face consequences in their own countries? Next thing you know, NPR will be holding candlelight vigils for cartel enforcers.

Original Article Summary:

• Noor Abdalla, wife of detained Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil, speaks out
  In her first broadcast interview, Noor Abdalla discusses the arrest and attempted deportation of her husband, Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil. She describes the situation as unfair and alarming, arguing that Khalil was simply exercising his right to free speech. Abdalla expresses concern about Khalil’s treatment in detention and criticizes the government’s handling of student protests.

Here’s What They Meant To Say

Playing the Victim Card—Again

Apparently, if you break the law but call it a “protest,” you’re supposed to get a free pass. Mahmoud Khalil, an international student, participated in disruptive demonstrations, and now his wife is shocked—shocked!—that the government is enforcing immigration laws. Noor Abdalla would have us believe that her husband is an innocent activist, but conveniently ignores the fact that his actions had consequences.

No One Is Above the Law—Except Leftists?

Columbia University has become a breeding ground for radical activism, and now that law enforcement is stepping in, the professional protest crowd is crying foul. If Khalil was just “exercising free speech,” perhaps he should have considered whether his visa status allowed for disruptive behavior. But in typical leftist fashion, Abdalla and her allies expect special treatment for their cause.

Actions Have Consequences—Deal With It

Here’s a radical idea: obey the law, respect the country that allowed you to study here, and maybe you won’t get deported. Instead of blaming the government, perhaps Abdalla should reflect on why her husband thought breaking the rules wouldn’t come back to bite him.

Original Article Summary:

• After the strike, New York state prisons are even more short-staffed than before
  New York’s prison system was already struggling with a shortage of corrections officers when a recent strike made the situation even worse. Now, in response to the strike, the governor has decided to bar 2,000 of those officers from returning to work, exacerbating the staffing crisis. Critics argue that this decision puts both officers and inmates at risk, while supporters claim it’s a necessary stand against labor disruptions.

Here’s What They Meant To Say

Progressive Policies Strike Again

New York’s leadership has once again found a way to make a bad situation worse. Already dealing with a shortage of corrections officers—because who would want to work in a state that demonizes law enforcement?—the prison system took another hit when officers walked off the job. Rather than addressing the root causes of the problem, Governor Hochul decided that punishing workers and doubling down on dysfunction was the way to go.

Soft on Crime, Hard on Law Enforcement

It’s no secret that New York’s progressive policies have made life harder for law enforcement while making things easier for criminals. Between bail reform and a general hostility toward policing, the state has created an environment where criminals run free, but the officers keeping them in check are treated like villains. Now, with 2,000 barred from returning, expect even more chaos in the prison system.

Another Left-Wing Disaster in the Making

Instead of working with corrections officers to fix the problem, New York’s leadership has chosen to play politics, ensuring that prisons will be understaffed and unsafe. But hey, at least they’re sticking it to the working class they claim to care about—nothing says “pro-labor” like firing workers for striking!

• Original Article Summary:
  Federal contractors say they’re stuck between nondiscrimination laws and anti-DEI orders
  Since President Trump took office, federal contractors have been scrambling to figure out how to continue complying with nondiscrimination laws without running afoul of his anti-DEI executive orders.

Here’s What They Meant To Say

Government Contractors Panic Over Having to Treat People Equally

Oh no! The federal contractors who spent years checking diversity boxes instead of hiring the most qualified candidates are now in a tailspin. President Trump had the audacity to issue executive orders that prioritize merit over race and gender quotas, and now they’re unsure how to function. The horror of hiring based on qualifications rather than a color-coded spreadsheet must be absolutely terrifying for them.

DEI Bureaucrats in Disarray

For years, these companies built entire departments around “diversity, equity, and inclusion” programs, which often meant pushing identity politics above competency. Now, with Trump’s orders cracking down on these discriminatory hiring practices, they’re suddenly worried about—get this—following the actual nondiscrimination laws they claim to support. Maybe, just maybe, hiring based on merit wouldn’t be such a bad idea after all?

How Will They Ever Survive?

So, to summarize: Federal contractors are confused because they’re being told to stop discriminating in the name of “anti-discrimination.” If only there were a simple solution—oh wait, there is: hire the best person for the job. But I guess that’s too much to ask from the professional diversity enforcers.

• Original Article Summary:
  A Ukrainian refugee on how her life has changed after leaving Western Ukraine for Iowa
  NPR’s Scott Simon speaks with Ukrainian refugee Nataliia “Natalie” Matiisiv about the country she left and the country she now calls home.

Here’s What They Meant To Say

America: The Land of Opportunity (Who Knew?)

Natalie Matiisiv, a Ukrainian refugee, has discovered what conservatives have been saying all along—America is a land of opportunity, not oppression. After fleeing Ukraine, she landed in Iowa, where—shockingly—people welcomed her, helped her settle in, and provided opportunities for work and success. Imagine that! Despite the left constantly decrying America as some cruel, inhospitable place, reality once again proves otherwise.

Small-Town America: Not the Hellscape the Left Describes

To the horror of liberal elites, Matiisiv seems to be thriving in a red state, where the values of hard work, community support, and self-reliance still reign. No mention of systemic oppression or the supposed evils of capitalism—just gratitude for a country that gave her refuge and a chance to build a life. Maybe someone should tell her she’s supposed to be a victim?

So Much for the “America Is Bad” Narrative

Once again, the left’s narrative crumbles under the weight of reality. America remains the greatest country on Earth, where people from all over the world come for freedom and opportunity. Maybe NPR should take a break from their usual doom-and-gloom and admit that sometimes, just sometimes, America gets it right.