Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Put the racing sausages on ice, Wisconsin GOP demands

Racing Sausages

The Wisconsin Republican Party is warning that having the Milwaukee Brewers' famous racing sausages in Miller Park while people are voting would violate state election law.

Jeffrey Phelps/Getty Images

The Republican Party is telling the Wisconsin Election Commission and the Milwaukee Brewers that election law would be violated by the mere presence of the baseball team's popular racing sausages when people vote in the stadium.

And, no, it wasn't a joke meant to inject a little levity into the intense debate about election integrity and voter fraud.


The legalistic letter was sent Tuesday by the state GOP chairman, Andrew Hitt. He sent a similar warning to the Milwaukee Bucks about Bango, the NBA franchise's mascot.

Littered with references to specific provisions of state law and precedent-setting court cases, the letters seek to find out what is being planned for Miller Park and Fiserv Forum when they are used as voting sites from Oct. 20 to Nov. 1.

"We want to ensure that no one engages in electioneering or other improper activities at those sites," the letter states. (You see, there are real people inside those goofy and outsized costumes.)

Hitt said he became concerned because a registration drive at Miller Park last week, on National Voter Registration Day, "prominently featured the Brewers Racing Sausages."

To be precise, they are actually the Johnsonville Famous Racing Sausages. Which is trademarked, by the way. And for those who don't know, five oversized costumed characters — representing bratwurst, hot dog, polish, Italian and chorizo — race around the stadium before the bottom of the sixth inning at the Brewers' home games.

While baseball's efforts to promote civil engagement are "commendable," Hitt wrote, having the sausages on hand while voters are marking their ballots would violate the Wisconsin law banning "any activity which is intended to influence voting at an election."

The prohibition, the GOP argues, does not just cover the promotion of candidates. It also guards against any encouragement of the very act of voting.

Neither team has announced plans to put Bango and the racing sausages to work enticing people to get out and vote in one of the year's most important tossup states

But the state GOP asked to be notified if any celebrities are going to be at the arena or ballpark when they are being used as polling places.

Who knows: Maybe they want to make sure to bring condiments.


Read More

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less