Britney Spears became a pop icon with her mother, Lynne Spears, always by her side. Her signature sound and incredible dance moves set the music industry on fire. Britney sold more than 150 million records worldwide, and it seemed her family was among her biggest fans. However, her family relationships fractured as Britney wanted to make her own career decisions. She famously lived under a 13-year conservatorship, which gave her father, Jaime Spears, complete control of her life professionally, personally, financially, and medically. It was an undoubtedly extremely difficult time for the Spears family, but Britney seems to have come out stronger. This year, on Britney Spears’ birthday, her mother made a sweet Facebook post dedicated to he daughter. She wrote, “Happy Happy Birthday to my beautiful daughter, Britney! You will always have that beautiful smile! Wishing you the happiest birthday ever!” Lynne Spears Seemed To Offer An Olive Branch To Britney Spears On Her Birthday In addition to the kind words, Lynne shared a baby picture of Britney Spears. Lynne’s friends extended warm greetings to the pop singer. One wrote, “Happy Birthday Britney- this is a beautiful baby pic!” Lynne claims she’s tired of reconnecting with Britney, but it seems her daughter isn’t interested in a reunion just yet. In 2023, her mother shared a photo on Instagram denying claims she’d gotten rid of her daughter’s things. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Lynne Spears (@lynnespears_rf) She wrote, I’m not sure who told you I got rid of your dolls and journals but I would never do that! That would be cruel because I know how much they mean to you. They are special to me too because of the years we spent collecting them. Of course I still have your things, and I am happy to send them to you if you’d like me to. Please let me know and know how much I love you!” Britney Spears celebrated her 43rd birthday at their home in Mexico. She doesn’t mention her family life or her mother, but she seems to enjoy life. She periodically posts videos of herself dancing on social media but doesn’t appear interested in returning to the spotlight. Hopefully, one day, she and her mom will reach a place of peace. This story’s featured image is by Tinseltown via Shutterstock. The post Lynne Spears Sets Aside Differences To Send Daughter Britney Spears A Special Birthday Message appeared first on InspireMore.

BY THE OPTIMIST DAILY EDITORIAL TEAM The holiday season is a time for joy, connection, and—of course—great food. But for many, family gatherings can feel like navigating a social minefield, especially when unsolicited comments about food and body size start flying. Whether it’s a relative pointing out how much you’re eating, a friend commenting on your body, or someone dropping calorie facts about your favorite dish, these remarks can be as unwelcome as burnt pie crust. As Amber Stevens, PsyD, a psychologist specializing in disordered eating, explains: “You can appreciate someone’s intent in offering what they believe to be a positive comment while gracefully offering a correction and redirection.” In other words, it’s all about striking a balance between standing your ground and keeping the peace. Polite but firm responses to body comments A well-meaning relative might say something like, “You look great! Have you lost weight?” While intended as a compliment, this kind of remark reinforces harmful societal standards. Instead of awkwardly laughing or brushing it off, you can redirect the conversation. Dr. Stevens suggests responding with something like: “I think you meant that as a compliment, but this is a sensitive topic for me. What have you been up to lately?” or, “I’m working hard to focus less on my body right now. Let’s talk about something else.” This approach acknowledges their good intentions while firmly setting boundaries. For comments about someone else’s weight fluctuations, you can try to normalize change by responding with something like: “All bodies change over time for so many reasons, including ours. Personally, I’ve been more impressed by how warm and welcoming they were to everyone at dinner.” Handling food remarks with grace (or sass) Food talk often veers into diet culture territory, with remarks like, “Wow, that stuffing is so high-calorie!” or “I could never eat that much.” Leah Tsui, RD, advises tailoring your response to your comfort level. A neutral reply could be: “Thanks for letting me know!” If you’re feeling witty, go with: “Wow, thanks! I had no idea!” Alternatively, a straightforward response works too: “Yes, it is high-calorie, and I’m going to enjoy every single bite.” When someone comments on the size of your plate—“Are you really going to eat all that?”—dietitian Katy Gaston, RD, recommends humor: “Maybe I will, maybe I won’t. I guess we’ll have to see!” Or, if practicality is more your style, try: “I like to fill my plate, but I also love leftovers, so I can always save some for later.” Reframing conversations around movement and food Post-holiday exercise talk often ties movement to guilt over food, with comments like, “I need to hit the gym tomorrow after all this food!” or “Let’s hike to burn this off.” These remarks can perpetuate unhealthy relationships with exercise and eating. If the idea of a group activity appeals but the framing doesn’t, dietitian Samantha Barash, RD, suggests saying: “A hike sounds fun, but I’m working on not using movement to ‘earn’ my food. Let’s do it for fun instead!” If you’re uninterested in the conversation entirely, a polite decline works wonders: “Thanks for thinking of me! I’ll see how I’m feeling tomorrow and decide then.” Protect your peace this holiday season Navigating tricky food and body conversations during the holidays can feel overwhelming, but having a few prepared responses can help. Whether you choose humor, assertiveness, or redirection, the key is to protect your peace while staying true to your values. “Know that you are not obligated to justify how much or what you eat to anyone,” Gaston reminds us. So fill your plate, enjoy your pie, and let the comments roll off your back like butter on a biscuit.The post How to handle unwelcome food and body comments during the holidays this year first appeared on The Optimist Daily: Making Solutions the News.

BY THE OPTIMIST DAILY EDITORIAL TEAM For the first time in half a century, researchers discovered a breakthrough cure for asthma attacks, giving hope to millions of sufferers worldwide. Benralizumab, an injectable medication, has the potential to revolutionize the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) flare-ups. “This is a game-changer,” said Professor Mona Bafadhel of King’s College London, the lead researcher. “We’ve not had a change in treatment for 50 years. It will revolutionize how we treat people when they’re really unwell.” Benralizumab, which is already approved for severe asthma, has shown promising results in preliminary studies, implying that it could be used more extensively to treat the estimated two million asthma episodes in the UK each year. How benralizumab targets inflammation Asthma and COPD flare-ups frequently include trouble breathing, chest tightness, wheezing, and coughing—symptoms that can become life-threatening. Traditionally, these attacks have been treated with inhalers and steroids, the latter of which may cause weight gain, diabetes, and bone weakness. Benralizumab provides a more targeted approach. It works by reducing eosinophils, which are white blood cells that cause inflammation and lung damage. According to the study, eosinophils play a role in around half of asthma attacks and one-third of COPD flare-ups. “Now we can see there are different patterns of inflammation,” Bafadhel said. “We can be smarter and get the right treatment to the right patient at the right time.” In a study published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, researchers followed 158 patients for three months after they received treatment for a flare-up. The study found that patients receiving benralizumab had a lower rate of treatment failure than those receiving steroids (74 percent vs. 45 percent). Patients who received the new medicine were less likely to be hospitalized, need extra treatment, or die from complications. Real stories, real impact Benralizumab has a revolutionary impact on patients. Alison Spooner, a 55-year-old Oxfordshire resident who took part in the experiment, described her experience. “They seemed to be getting worse,” she said of her asthma attacks. “The severe lack of breath was quite frightening when you’re gasping and there’s nothing to gasp at.” After the injection, Alison felt a “drastic difference.” While she still uses her inhaler, it is now more for precaution than necessity. “Unfortunately, no drug gets rid of asthma completely, but this is the nearest thing. It’s a bit of a miracle, actually.” Geoffrey Pointing, aged 77, also benefited from the trial. Unlike steroids, which interrupted his sleep, benralizumab produced no serious side effects. “The first day of the study, I could sleep that first night, and I was able to carry on with my life without problems,” he shared. What’s next for benralizumab? Despite its promise, benralizumab is not yet fit for widespread use. A larger trial will begin in 2025 and run for two years, evaluating the drug’s cost-effectiveness and validating its benefits. Monoclonal antibodies, such as benralizumab, are pricey, which may limit accessibility. Dr. Sanjay Ramakrishnan of the University of Oxford expressed optimism: “This shows massive promise. Treatment for COPD has been stuck in the 20th century despite being one of the leading causes of death worldwide.” In the United Kingdom alone, four people with asthma and 85 people with COPD die every day. While the new treatment has enormous potential, scientists warn that anyone who is presently taking steroids or other medications should continue to follow their doctor’s advice. Dr. Samantha Walker of Asthma + Lung UK called the results “great news,” but said, “It’s appalling that this is the first new treatment for those suffering from asthma and COPD attacks in 50 years.” Benralizumab, with its potential to minimize hospitalizations, improve quality of life, and possibly save lives, gives millions of people hope. As trials develop, researchers and patients alike anticipate what may be a game-changing advancement in respiratory care. Source study: The Lancet Respiratory Medicine— Treating eosinophilic exacerbations of asthma and COPD with benralizumab (ABRA): a double-blind, double-dummy, active placebo-controlled randomised trialThe post A new dawn in asthma care: the first new treatment in 50 years offers hope first appeared on The Optimist Daily: Making Solutions the News.

There have been instances where ethics reports were disclosed

Getting Tired of Playing the Progressive 'Guess Who Is the 'Victim' Here' Game

Why Trudeau is Going to Lose the Next Election

Brian Thompson, the CEO of UnitedHealth Group, was fatally shot Wednesday morning outside of his New York City hotel in what police have described as a premeditated, targeted attack. The 50-year-old CEO was shot multiple times by a masked gunman who had been waiting outside the Hilton hotel along Sixth Avenue, where the Thompson was hosting an investors’ conference. According to his wife, Thompson had received threats, and the bullet casings recovered at the crime scene had a personalized message hand-engraved on the shells: “deny,” “depose,” and “defend.”This chilling event raises serious concerns — not just about security but about the rising tide of disillusionment and rage in our society.We must resist the temptation to take shortcuts to justice. Instead, we need to demand better from our leaders, our institutions, and ourselves.For years, I’ve warned about the potential for chaos when people lose faith in institutions. Back in 2010, while on Fox News, I vividly recall saying that the very people enabling today’s revolutionary rhetoric would one day find themselves dragged into the streets by mobs and beaten to death on live television.It sounded dramatic then. Now, it feels prophetic.The purpose of governmentThe crumbling of faith in our institutions is largely due to our willful ignorance of the very purpose of our government. Unlike governments throughout history, ours wasn’t designed merely to enforce laws or keep the peace. The Declaration of Independence boldly asserts that governments are instituted among men to protect our unalienable rights — life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These rights aren’t granted by any king, congress, or court; they are inherent.The founders understood something critical: When governments become hostile to those rights — when they oppress rather than protect — it is not just the right but the duty of the people to replace them. However, the Declaration also offers a sobering reminder: People are often more willing to endure suffering than to risk the unknown.This principle resonates deeply with me. As a recovering alcoholic, I know the temptation to stick with the devil you know. I lived in the pain of addiction for years, afraid that sobriety might only reveal my worst fears: that I was irredeemable, unworthy of anything better. But when the pain became unbearable, I was forced to take the leap.America is at a similar inflection point.Pain breeds change — but it must be lawfulWe’re living in a time of immense collective pain — pain exacerbated by COVID-19, economic instability, and institutional corruption. Many Americans are willing to embrace the unknown, as we witnessed in this past election. Cohorts from the left moved across the aisle to support Donald Trump. That willingness is a sign of desperation — and an opportunity for renewal.But it’s also dangerous. The Declaration of Independence was never a call to mob violence or vigilante justice. It was a framework for lawful, peaceful change. America’s founders understood that revolutions driven by hatred and chaos destroy justice rather than uphold it.When institutions fail — and make no mistake, they have failed — it’s easy to see why people might turn to violence as an outlet for their anger. Marxist revolutionaries, anarchists, and disillusioned citizens will be tempted to act as judge, jury, and executioner. We’ve seen this before in history, from the French Revolution to the riots that followed George Floyd’s death.But let me ask you: Is shooting someone in the street justice? Even if the victim is guilty — say, a corrupt pharmaceutical executive exploiting the vulnerable — is killing him how justice works?Justice isn’t about vengeance. It’s about accountability. It requires evidence, due process, and impartiality. Mob justice, on the other hand, tears at the fabric of our society. It replaces the rule of law with chaos and ensures that no one, rich or poor, is truly safe.A dangerous pattern emergingBrian Thompson’s murder may be just the beginning of a disturbing trend. As faith in institutions erodes, more people will take matters into their own hands, targeting pharmaceutical executives, health care leaders, and others they perceive as symbols of corruption. This is not justice. It’s anarchy disguised as righteousness.If we succumb to this mindset, we lose the very principles that make America worth defending. Our nation’s strength lies in its commitment to reasoned debate, lawful protest, and a system where justice is blind.We must resist the temptation to take shortcuts to justice. Instead, we need to demand better from our leaders, our institutions, and ourselves. The pain we feel as a nation is real, but if we channel it constructively, it can lead to meaningful reform.The Declaration of Independence gave us the blueprint: a vision for building something greater, not tearing everything apart. It’s up to us to follow that example — with prudence, reason, and care.This isn’t just about one man’s tragic death. It’s about whether we will uphold the principles of justice or descend into chaos. The choice is ours.Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Authorities told the New York Times they believe a gunman targeted a northern California school Wednesday — wounding two kindergartners — because of the school's affiliation with the Seventh-day Adventist Church.The shooting victims — two boys, ages 5 and 6 — are now in "critical but stable condition," the Butte County Sheriff's Office told KOVR-TV in a Thursday report. The suspect was found dead with a self-inflicted gunshot wound, the sheriff's office added to the station. A California Highway Patrol officer found a handgun next to the suspect, KOVR noted.A 6th-grade student said she helped her teacher comfort younger students as the gunman was outside the classroom.The shooting happened around 1 p.m. Wednesday at the Feather River School of Seventh-Day Adventists in Palermo, authorities told the station.The Times said authorities did not provide more information about why the gunman wanted to target the Seventh-day Adventists, but the paper added that Sheriff Kory Honea said it was believed to be an isolated incident.While authorities weren't aware of any prior threats the gunman made against the school or other schools connected with the Seventh-day Adventists, the Times said neighboring communities were alerted about the possible motive, and police were dispatched to other schools affiliated with the church.What else do we know?The two shooting victims were taken to a Sacramento-area hospital and were in "extremely critical condition," Honea said Wednesday, according to KOVR.While they were in "critical but stable" condition Thursday, the station said the two students are continuing to received treatment at a local hospital.The sheriff's office told KOVR the suspect has been positively identified, but his name has not been released. Deputies said they don't believe there is any connection between the suspect and the victims, the station said.Honea added to KOVR that investigators are looking into a "story" that the suspect called a few days prior to the shooting to schedule a Wednesday appointment at the school with an administrator. The station said reports indicate the suspect showed up trying to enroll a child, but deputies don't believe a child was with him.After the Wednesday meeting with the administrator, gunshots were heard, Honea told KOVR. A 6th-grade student said she helped her teacher comfort younger students as the gunman was outside the classroom, the station said.The school serves about 35 students from kindergarten to eighth grade, KOVR said, adding that Honea indicated no security officer was stationed at the school, and that's not part of the school's everyday routine.Students were taken to the gymnasium until authorities could bring school buses to the scene, the station said, adding that they were taken to the Oroville Church of the Nazarene where they were reunited with their families.Honea also told KOVR an Uber driver dropped off the suspect at the school, and investigators are interviewing the driver to learn more information about what may have transpired before and during the ride.More from the station:The shooting appears to be isolated to the Feather River School of Seventh-Day Adventists, but Honea said he provided other law enforcement agencies in California with information to be vigilant when it comes to Seventh-Day Adventist schools as it appears the school may have been targeted due to its affiliation.The Times said Elizabeth Lepe Arredondo — a former teacher at the school whose children were also students — described Feather River as a beautiful school “out in the open country" with a strong sense of community and values deeply rooted in the teachings of Seventh-day Adventist Church.KOVR described Palermo as a town populated by more than 5,000 people and situated just south of Oroville, about 30 miles south of Chico, and 65 miles north of Sacramento.You can view a video report here about the shooting.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Never-Trumpers on both sides of the political aisle are raging over Trump’s plan to use recess appointments to expedite filling his Cabinet and bypass lengthy confirmation processes. Since Cabinet confirmations took an average of 30.9 days during his first term, Mark Levin of “LevinTV” doesn’t see a problem with his approach. “A president needs to be able to push back. Now, some of them will do it in the wrong way, some of them will do it in a way that damages the Constitution. Trump hasn’t done anything yet, other than announce that he plans to do it,” Levin says. “I’ve taken this position: There are a couple nominees that I’m not hot on, but who cares? I’m not president,” he continues, adding, “I think he should be able to have his team. He believes this is the team he needs to get things done, to accomplish what he said he was going to accomplish.” Trump didn’t get a chance to accomplish what he planned during his first four years as president, as Democrats immediately jumped down his throat with investigations and impeachment hearings. “He’s lived through that, and he said, ‘Not this time. I get four years; that’s all I’ve got,’” Levin says. “My eyes are wide open about this. I don’t think there’s any liberty issue or constitutional crisis issue,” he adds, noting that other presidents have done the same thing — like former President George W. Bush and his recess appointment of John Bolton as the acting ambassador to the United Nations. “Of all people, Barack Obama was abusing the process,” Levin explains. “The courts said, ‘No, no, that’s not right.’ But they didn’t eliminate it, they didn’t torpedo it, it’s still there.” “Donald Trump isn’t creating the practice of a recess appointment for a Cabinet officer or any other officer. The issue isn’t whether it’s a Cabinet officer or any other officer; the issue is whether the Constitution provides him with the ability to do it,” he continues. “And as has been the practice, the answer is ‘yes.’” Want more from Mark Levin?To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives shot down a resolution supported by Democrats to release a congressional report about accusations made against Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida. 206 members were against the resolution while 198 voted for the release of the report. One Republican voted for the release, Rep. Tom McClintock of California. 'That would open up Pandora's box and I don't think that's a healthy thing for the institution.' The report by the House Ethics Committee details accusations that Gaetz had sex with a minor and participated in illicit drug use. He has denied the allegations, and a federal investigation into the claims did not result in any charges against him. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana previously said he opposed the release of the report. "I do not believe that that is an appropriate thing," he said. "It doesn't follow our rules and traditions and there is a reason for that. That would open up Pandora's box and I don't think that's a healthy thing for the institution." Democratic Rep. Sean Casten of Illinois lambasted Republicans for defeating his resolution. “Today, the majority of the House of Representatives took the easy way out,” he said. “They could have ensured a vote on whether or not former Members should be held accountable when they face serious and credible allegations of sexual misconduct, including having sex with minors. Instead, the House voted to sweep these allegations under the rug and set an unfortunate precedent that, if you are ever facing scrutiny, resigning from Congress can make your problems go away."President-elect Donald Trump surprised many when he announced Gaetz as his pick for the U.S. Attorney's Office. Even some Republicans publicly decried the nomination and vowed that Gaetz would never be confirmed as the highest law enforcement official of the U.S. Gaetz eventually withdrew his nomination and thanked Trump for the nomination. "While the momentum was strong, it is clear that my confirmation was unfairly becoming a distraction to the crucial work of the Trump/Vance Transition," Gaetz said at the time. "There is no time to waste on a needlessly protracted Washington scuffle, thus I'll be withdrawing my name from consideration to serve as Attorney General."Gaetz had resigned from his seat following the nomination and left the office open. Trump went on to nominate Pam Bondi, a former Florida attorney general, to the office. Many opined that Bondi would pass Senate confirmation far easier than Gaetz would have. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!