https://www.frontpagemag.com/glazov-gang-rashida-tlaib-votes-against-banning-hamas-terrorists-from-usa/
This new Glazov Gang episode features Anni Cyrus being interviewed on The Breanna Morello Show.
Anni discusses Rashida Tlaib Votes Against Banning Hamas Terrorists From USA, revealing When loyalties become more than clear.
Don’t miss it!
https://www.frontpagemag.com/comedy-dies-in-woke-darkness/
Last week four stand-up comedians were disinvited from a comedy club in Seattle, right around the corner from the “Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone” or CHAZ, a glorified squatters’ camp created by antifa and BLM “peaceful” rioters during the 2020 “summer of love.” The four comedians fell afoul of neighborhood wokesters who complained to the club’s management in order to “ensure the programming stayed aligned with the socially diligent enclave’s ethos.”
Such stories have become so frequent that many people just shrug off the seriousness of their implications. But comedy is not just a type of entertainment, or a matter of taste. Comedy is much more than that: it is a critical part of the political institutions in governments in which citizens are free to speak publicly, and have the right to hold their leaders accountable to the people and, in the U.S., the Constitution.
Censorship, “cancel culture,” speech codes––in short, punishing the speech that one faction strives to silence for political gain–– all strike at the heart of our freedom and unalienable rights. Indeed, from the time decades ago that the “politically correct” Nurse Ratched feminists started scolding “sexist” jokes by saying, “That’s not funny!”, the woke have insidiously intensified their war on humor and the First Amendment.
The political heritage of comedy arose with the creation of constitutional rule by citizens in the ancient Greek poleis, particularly in Athens where citizenship was extended to the non-elites as well as to the rich and noble. This epochal development required extensive adjustments to the old order of aristocrats for whom ruling the state was a birthright, what Pindar, the celebrator of aristocrat achievements in the Panhellenic games, called the “splendor in the blood,” the inherited superiority of talent, charisma, wisdom, and character needed to be leaders of men.
https://issuesinsights.com/2024/03/06/biden-trump-stay-neck-and-neck-but-will-winning-2024-popular-vote-be-enough-ii-tipp-poll/
Each side in today’s often-angry political debate over the upcoming presidential election seems convinced that its candidate has a clear advantage. But, as of now, neither President Joe Biden nor former President Donald Trump has an obvious edge in the popular vote as we enter the final eight months of the 2024 election season, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows.
Despite being widely criticized for his lackluster campaign and showing continuing signs of age-related mental impairment, Biden holds a slender 43% to 42% lead over Trump. The online national poll of 1,246 registered voters was taken from Feb. 28 to March 1, with a margin of error of +/-2.8 percentage points.
Among those taking the poll, 8% said they preferred someone “other” than Biden or Trump, while 7% said they were “not sure.”
The partisan breakdown was fairly even, with 85% of Dems favoring Biden and 86% of Republicans favoring Trump. Among independents, a crucial swing vote for both candidates, the prospective vote broke 37% in favor of Trump, 36% in favor of Biden, with a hefty 16% saying “other” and 11% “not sure.”
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20463/losing-war-to-houthis
What is the Biden administration doing wrong? Apart from scale, it’s trying to target Houthi drones and missiles, and some air bases…. This is the same approach that failed in Iraq….
When rockets are targeted, the terrorists run away and regroup, but when the terrorists are targeted, they have to keep running, so they don’t have the time and space to regroup.
That is what the proposed hostage deal and the various calls for a ‘ceasefire’ are really about.
Biden is unwilling to target the Houthis and so they keep attacking.
Given a choice between alienating the country and his party’s terror supporters, he chose a middle ground of “show” strikes… that will avoid offending terror supporters but also will not end the Houthi attacks.
This strategy serves no one except Biden who has sacrificed the nation’s prestige, a major international waterway and the lives of two U.S. Navy SEALs to win an election.
After President Joe Biden came home from his Caribbean vacation, the Deputy Defense Secretary came back from hers and the Secretary of Defense was on the verge of being released from the hospital, airstrikes were finally authorized against the Houthi Jihadis attacking ships in the Red Sea.
Biden said that the air strikes sent “a clear message that the United States and our partners will not tolerate attacks on our personnel or allow hostile actors to imperil freedom of navigation in one of the world’s most critical commercial routes.”
https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/03/05/the-uns-insult-to-women/
‘Why can’t a woman be more like a man?’, sang Henry Higgins in the 1964 film, My Fair Lady. If there were to be a remake in 2024, the film might be called My Fair Ladyboy. It would update the story of a professor of phonetics, who turns a cockney girl into the toast of high society, into the tale of a professor of hormonology, who turns a mockney boy into the toast of café society. For today, a sizable minority of trendsetters and lawmakers think men can be just as good – if not better – at being women.
A man in a frock has even been appointed by UN Women to represent British women on the global stage. ‘Katie’ Neeves was on X last week smarming that: ‘I’m happy to announce that I’ve been accepted as a UN Women UK delegate to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, which is the principal global intergovernmental body exclusively dedicated to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women.’
Neaves’s X handle – @cool2btrans – gives the game away. As does the name of his business, Martin Neeves Photography and Film. Presumably he retained the old name in case potential customers think kooky Katie might be less efficient.
We’ve been here before, of course. The ‘model’ Munroe Bergdorf – born Ian Beaumont to middle-class parents in the picturesque village of Stansted Mountfitchet, Essex – was appointed the first ‘UK champion’ for UN Women towards the end of last year. This understandably caused a right kerfuffle, not least because Bergdorf has shown contempt for the historical struggles for women’s rights. Infamously, he once branded the Suffragettes ‘white supremacists’ – this from an airhead who probably thinks that ‘force-feeding’ means being slipped a few hidden carbs before Marbs by an envious frenemy.
https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-conservative-liberal
Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative, by Jennifer Burns (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 592 pp., $27.73)
Jennifer Burns’s biography, Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative, will be the standard reference for anyone wanting to dive deeply into the life of the great economist and the world in which he flourished. The historical context that Burns provides makes the book almost as much a work of post-1929 economic and intellectual history as a biography of the bespectacled, diminutive professor who so influenced it. Though Burns is not uncritical of her subject, the story she tells will leave most right-leaning readers longing for the days when Friedman was one of their champions.
Before going back to Friedman’s youth in Rahway, New Jersey, and his time at Rutgers University, Burns introduces him at his apex, as economist extraordinaire and public intellectual. She notes that Friedman did more than lead the charge against Keynesianism; he “offered a philosophy of freedom that made a tremendous political impact in a liberty-loving country.” One of Burns’s goals is to “restore the fullness of Friedman’s thought to his public image” and to “approach Friedman as a scholar . . . setting his ideas in context and making his achievements legible for a new generation, either friend or foe.”
She touches all the key points of Friedman’s life, including his time at the University of Chicago as student and professor; the key influences on his thinking; his period away from academia in Washington and New York; his scholarship and leadership of the Chicago School of Economics, especially its “monetarism” and challenge to Keynesian orthodoxy; his work on the consumption function and the permanent income hypothesis, monetary history, the Phillips Curve, and the negative income tax; the controversy over his work in Chile and his relationship with Augusto Pinochet’s regime; his scuffles with mentor Arthur Burns; and the influence of his ideas on the late twentieth century and beyond. Reflecting on Friedman’s long shadow, Burns concludes that by century’s end, “the basics of monetarism had been adopted into conventional wisdom” and that “many of the things he had pressed for throughout his professional life had come to pass.”
https://www.jns.org/bidens-settlement-delusions/
Last week, the Biden administration reversed the “Pompeo Doctrine,” which recognized that Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria are not “per se inconsistent with international law.”
Biden’s record of being wrong on every single important foreign policy issue of the last 50 years remains unblemished. His decision is wrong as a matter of law and fact. It is also bad politics and undermines Israeli and American national security.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken summed up the administration’s position by saying, “It’s been longstanding U.S. policy under Republican and Democratic administrations alike that new settlements are counterproductive to reaching an enduring peace. … They’re also inconsistent with international law. Our administration maintains a firm opposition to settlement expansion. And in our judgment, this only weakens—it doesn’t strengthen—Israel’s security.”
History disproves Blinken’s claim that “settlements are counterproductive to reaching an enduring peace.” In fact, Israel has always been willing to remove settlements to achieve peace.
The 1978 Israel-Egypt peace treaty required that Israel dismantle its settlements in the Sinai. Prime Minister Menachem Begin did so, deploying the IDF to physically remove those settlers who refused to leave. Clearly, the settlements were not a barrier to peace.
In 2005, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered the evacuation of all Israelis from Gaza and turned it over to the Palestinians. Like Begin before him, Sharon sent the IDF to remove the settlers who would not leave. There were no Jews in Gaza for 18 years. Only after the Oct. 7 massacre did Israelis return to exercise their legitimate and legal right to self-defense.
https://www.thefp.com/p/stefan-simchowitz-senate
PASADENA, CA — Stefan Simchowitz, 53, is no one’s idea of a viable candidate, including his own.
“I have no illusion that I can win or that I stand a chance to win, which is also quite liberating, because I’m not running to win a campaign. I have no prayer,” he tells me.
Simchowitz, who is running for Senate as a Republican in a seat that has been held by a Democrat for 32 years, is perched at the kitchen island in one of his four homes, an updated Victorian farmhouse on an acre in Pasadena that he’s been building into an exhibition space and artist residency for the past year or so. He calls it Red Barns.
In a tan Altadena Hardware shirt and one of his signature bucket hats, the contemporary art dealer once dubbed “the Art World’s Patron Satan” offers me sparkling water and a bite of his blueberry muffin. Unlike the Democrats vying for Dianne Feinstein’s open seat—Representatives Katie Porter, who has a $12 million war chest and Adam Schiff ($32 million)—and the Republican front-runner, former L.A. Dodger Steve Garvey, Simchowitz doesn’t seem concerned with shaking hands, kissing babies, or winning votes.
“Sometimes if you know you’re going to lose you can only win,” he says. Stefan sees this campaign as a “vehicle to sell his ideas.” In other words: a performance art project of sorts. How else to make sense of this Democrat-turned-Republican, with no political experience, throwing his hat into the ring?
This outsider approach has served him well as the enfant terrible of the art world, where he’s circumvented the closed-circuit system of MFA programs, critics, museums, galleries, auction houses, and curators that decide whether an artist is marketable, and for how much. Simchowitz came up by finding starving artists—literally on the brink of starvation, he claims—on Facebook and Instagram, then paying for their studios, materials, and sometimes entire bodies of work outright, before flipping them to buyers, or holding them in his extensive private collection.
His clientele—which historically includes tech founders who exited their companies and started itching for a Josef Albers; newly flush poker players; and A-list entertainers—trust him implicitly. “He sees opportunities and then he puts a spotlight on them,” Brian Butler, a longtime gallerist in L.A., tells me. “He’s got a tenacity about him.” (Butler himself is voting for Katie Porter, but says he’d vote for Simchowitz “if I was a Republican.”) Though Butler calls Simchowitz a “super mensch,” he conceded he has a “gruff exterior.”
While his bluntness and allergy to pretension has earned him fans, the management class of the art world scorns him with equal passion. Many collectors, dealers, and artists won’t work with Simchowitz, or anyone who does, arguing that he exploits struggling artists by buying up all their work, then artificially pumping and dumping it. Another L.A. gallerist once called him a “sociopath” and compared him to Charles Manson before walking it back.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2024/03/05/supreme-court-trump-ballot-unanimous-ruling-election/72843559007/
“Nothing in the Constitution requires that we endure such chaos.” Those words from the Supreme Court in its Trump v. Anderson ruling on Monday put an end to the effort of Democratic secretaries of state to engage in ballot cleansing by removing former President Donald Trump from the 2024 election.
The court’s decision was one of the most important and impactful moments in its history.
During the first Trump impeachment in 2019, I cautioned Democrats not to toss aside constitutional standards out of their hatred for the president. I quoted from the play “A Man For All Seasons,” when Sir Thomas More is told by his son-in-law that he would “cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?” More responded, “And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ‘round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?”
As More described England, the United States also is “planted thick with laws, from coast to coast.” The nation’s highest court on Monday decided to leave them standing.
After months of activists and experts calling for the court to allow ballot cleansing by individual states, the justices refused. Figures like Harvard professor Laurence Tribe had insisted that the legal theory allowing Trump’s removal from ballots was “unassailable” and rejected opposing positions as “absurd.”
Many news outlets posted the analysis of former federal court Judge J. Michael Luttig, who also called the theory “unassailable” and denounced the arguments against disqualification as “revealing, fatuous, and politically and constitutionally cynical.” He predicted that the court would simply affirm the Colorado Supreme Court.
Democratic members of Congress further pushed the narrative that only judicial activists and MAGA justices would oppose disqualification. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., declared: “This is their opportunity to behave like real Supreme Court justices.”
Think what you want about Trump.But even liberal justices agree Trump should stay on ballot. Progressives still melted down.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/we-are-the-victims-and-everything-we-do-is-justified/
At the heart of everything from the debate over the Gaza War to DEI to toxic interpersonal relationships is a disastrous loop known as the “self-reinforcing victim/villain” cycle.
The self-reinforcing victim/villain cycle is a deceptively simple and incredibly destructive paradigm for any kind of relationship, national, communal or personal, in which one party constantly attacks the other while claiming that it is the victim fighting against oppression.
The paradigm is guided by the idea that there is a permanently fixed victim and villain, that the victim is constantly suffering attacks from the villain and that anything the victim does is justified because he or she has no agency except to resist the assaults of the villain.
While some Hamas supporters have lied or tried to cover up the atrocities of Oct 7, Ghazi Hammad, a Hamas official, initially denied them, but then burst out with, “the existence of Israel is what causes all that pain, blood, and tears. It is Israel, not us. We are the victims of the occupation. Period. Therefore, nobody should blame us for the things we do. On October 7, October 10, October 1,000,000 – everything we do is justified.”
“We are the victims”, “nobody should blame us” and “everything we do is justified” perfectly capture the cruel workings of the cycle. So many westerners have sided with Hamas because they accept, incorporate and make use of the same cycle in their own politics and lives.
The very same arguments adapted from Marxism and therapy culture play out routinely in “whiteness” and “colonialist” discourse in America, Europe and other free world nations.
The “self-reinforcing victim/villain” cycle dispenses with arguments, evidence or any reasoned assessments of rights. These may occasionally be thrown in when convenient, but make no real difference because the central premise of the cycle is the lack of any objective standard that both sides have to meet. International law, racial tolerance, peace treaties or negotiations are invoked in a purely one-sided fashion. It is understood that the officially designated victim never has to abide by international law, to stop hating or to sincerely agree to stop the violence.
Top Stories @ Fox News