POTATUS Pardon-Palooza: Rubin Doesn't Want to Be 'Jenny From the CELL Block'

Some union leaders are self-destructive idiots. America’s ports have fallen behind. Not a single one ranks in the top 50 worldwide. A big reason is that dock unions stop innovation. This fall, the International Longshoremen’s Association shut down East and Gulf coast ports, striking for a raise and a ban on automation. They got the raise. Now union president Harold Daggett says longshoremen will strike again in January if they don’t get that ban on automation. His statement in my new video makes it clear that he knows how badly his strike would damage other Americans. “Guys who sell cars can’t sell cars, because the cars ain’t coming in off the ships. They get laid off,” says Daggett. “Construction workers get laid off because materials aren’t coming in. The steel’s not coming in. The lumber’s not coming in. They lose their job.” Obviously, labor leaders aren’t necessarily “pro worker,” says Mercatus Center economist Liya Palagashvili. “They’re saying, ‘We don’t care if these other jobs are destroyed as long as we get what we want.’” Daggett is unusually clueless. He doesn’t understand that a ban on automation will also hurt his members. As Palagashvili puts it, “They’ll save some jobs today, but they’ll destroy a lot more jobs in the future.” That’s because today’s shippers have options. Daggett’s union only controls East and Gulf coast ports. Shippers can deliver their products to ports that accept automation. “We’re going to see less activity in ‘Stone Age’ ports,” says Palagashvili. “Stone Age?” “They want to ban automated opening and closing of port doors,” she points out, requiring workers to pull heavy doors themselves. Weirdly, the union boss makes his demands while also pointing out that dockworker jobs are dangerous. “Very dangerous ... We’ve had 17 people killed in the last three years!” That’s terrible, but it’s an argument for automation! Using machines instead of vulnerable humans protects human workers. Daggett’s arguing against himself! I see why he wouldn’t agree to an interview. “It’s backwards,” notes Palagashvili. “(If) you care about the safety of these workers, you should enhance their jobs and make them safer and better. And the only way you can do that is with technological advancements in automation.” Other countries have used automated cranes for years. They’re 80% faster than the human-operated cranes in many American ports. “The best ports,” says Palagashvili, “are Asian and Middle Eastern ports. They allow for innovation and technological advancements. If you look at Chinese ports, they’re actually sitting behind a computer and directing port activity through the screen. That’s a better job.” “I bet there are fewer of them,” I push back. “Some port jobs will definitely be lost,” she says, “but that’s not a bad thing. Look at it historically; we had hundreds of thousands of blacksmiths and candlemakers and watchmakers.” Obviously, those and other jobs were destroyed by new technology. But unemployment didn’t surge. New jobs emerged -- jobs people at the time didn’t imagine: programmers, mechanics, electricians, medical technicians ... That’s capitalism’s “creative destruction.” It constantly creates new jobs. That makes most everyone richer. The media rarely cover that, because it’s a slow, non-exciting, good news story, and the new jobs appear in many different places. By contrast, when a factory closes, the union assembles the media, and we report the tragic story about workers losing their jobs. “That reporter doesn’t follow up with the worker two years later,” says Palagashvili, “but research does, and research shows that that worker gets a new job.” “On average, (a) better job,” I note. “Better jobs,” agrees Palagashvili, “and higher wages.” Higher wages because innovation allows workers to accomplish more. “Bulldozers and crane trucks made construction industry workers better off,” says Palagashvili, “and the real wages of those construction workers increase.” Daggett and his union just don’t get it. They fight to keep American ports dangerous and inefficient. That will hurt their own workers and, eventually, themselves.

Moms for America is a nonprofit, grassroots organization with over 500,000 members spread across all 50 states that aims to “activate, empower, and mobilize moms to promote and advance freedom in our homes, communities and through our vote.” The organization recently awarded Missy Robertson with a Mothers of Influence Award for using her platforms to promote morality and virtue. During her powerful acceptance speech at the 4th annual Mothers of Influence and Champion of Freedom Awards, which was hosted at Mar-a-Lago on November 22, Missy and Jase were surprised to see none other than Donald Trump in the crowd. Jase recounts the incredible experience. “I was the most underdressed person there,” Jase admits, adding that he was surprised to see that what was just a start-up organization seven years ago has since evolved into a “who’s who.” “This place was packed. It was all these people you see on TV,” he tells Al. As for Trump’s unexpected appearance, Jase says that he just happened to come in from playing golf at the exact moment Missy was scheduled to give her speech. Jase explains that the people coordinating the event initially weren’t sure what to do when they got the call that Trump was on his way in. But before they could make a decision about potentially moving Missy’s speech, the announcer introduced her and she was ushered on stage, knowing the president would be in the crowd. “Missy told me, she said, ‘When that happened, I just felt a peace come over me,”’ says Jase, who knows that the mysterious timing “wasn’t an accident.” “So she starts giving this speech that was focused on Jesus, and she got to Acts chapter 17” — which Jase explains is a powerful passage in which Paul preaches the gospel message of salvation through Jesus Christ — and “right as she got to that point ... I looked up and saw the president looking at my wife,” Jase recounts. When Missy’s speech concluded, “Every person in that room (and there were hundreds) who loves Jesus descended on me and my wife, and there were songs, prayers, tears,” he says. “This is not an accident. This needed to happen.” “I’ve never been as proud of my wife as I was in that moment.” To hear the rest of the incredible story, watch the episode above. Want more from the Robertsons?To enjoy more on God, guns, ducks, and inspiring stories of faith and family, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

President Joe Biden's administration has reportedly made a last-minute push for Ukraine aid in the upcoming government spending bill Congress will need to pass by December 20. The Office of Management and Budget sent a request in late November urging Congress to approve another $24 billion of emergency funding toward weapons and equipment for Ukraine in the upcoming funding package. Speaker Mike Johnson, however, has expressed disinterest in approving additional aid. 'It is not the place of Joe Biden to make that decision now.'"I'm not planning to do that," Johnson said during a press conference Wednesday when asked about Biden's request. "There are developments by the hour in Ukraine," Johnson continued. "I think, as we predicted and as I said to all of you weeks before the election, if Donald Trump is elected, it will change the dynamic of the Russian war on Ukraine. And we're seeing that happen." Johnson noted that he would prioritize the suggestions of incoming President-elect Donald Trump over the current Biden administration. "It is not the place of Joe Biden to make that decision now," Johnson said during the press conference. "We have a newly elected president, and we're going to wait and take the new commander in chief's direction on all of that." Congress will have to pass another funding bill by December 20 in order to avoid a government shutdown before the holidays. Johnson noted earlier this week that he is expecting the funding to go into March while others within the conference have advocated for a funding bill that would go into January. The reality is the longer the funding bill is extended, the less wiggle room for the incoming administration to set its legislative agenda.Republicans are also expecting at least three vacancies in the upcoming Congress due to Trump's nominations, tightening the already slim House majority. As a result, Republicans will likely have to rely on Democrats to approve a spending bill, weakening their bargaining power. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

After Mike Tyson lost to Jake Paul by a decision in November, a government executive from Saudi Arabia reportedly offered Tyson $700 million to take have a rematch.As reported by several outlets including MMA Weekly, Saudi Arabian adviser and minister Turki Alalshikh offered Tyson the money if he is willing to participate in a "real" fight with Paul.Alalshikh is the current chairman of the board of directors of the General Entertainment Authority in Saudi Arabia and is widely considered to have transformed the boxing landscape, typically with large injections of cash.'Jake Paul is a joke.'The $700 million offer was seemingly first reported by an Instagram page called FTTV, which cited Alalshikh as saying "Jake Paul is a joke."Alalshikh then offered the caveat that Tyson would have to knock Paul out within the first three minutes of the fight to earn the money."I am giving Mike Tyson $700 million if he agrees to fight Jake Paul, this time in a real fight, and wins by KO in a maximum of three minutes," Alalshikh reportedly said.It's difficult to know whether the offer is real, given that Alalshikh hasn't made any other public comments about Tyson since he was promoting the fight online in November.The Saudi wasn't the only person seemingly unhappy with the outcome of the Netflix bout, with many notable celebrities saying they felt duped by the result.NFL Hall of Famer Michael Irvin — who sat in the second row at the event — called the event a "lie" and even theorized that there were contract stipulations preventing Tyson from throwing his preferred punches."That fight was a lie," Irvin claimed. "Everybody's lying. ... They had no intentions to really strap it on. If you look through that, I didn't see one patented uppercut by Mike Tyson. What did Mike Tyson win on? Uppercut.""He couldn't body and then uppercut. Like, how can you put that in a fight contract?" Irvin said.At the same time, the enormous offer to Tyson showcases exactly what UFC President Dana White said is wrong with the current state of boxing.Despite Alalshikh's previous claim that he was going to "fix" a broken sport, White said in October that the current boxing model "doesn't f***ing work. ... It takes a f***ing Saudi trillionaire to make boxing work."White's words were in response to claims that he doesn't pay fighters enough and that there is more money for athletes, particularly UFC fighters, when they transition to boxing."Even Saudi trillionaires get tired of f***ing bulls***. It's all a myth," White said about the pay scales."All the people that are trying the boxing thing, they all end up losing s***loads of money."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

REEE! Libs of TikTok Calls Taylor Lorenz OUT for Being a Hateful Unhinged LUNATIC and She Just Can't DEAL

RUH-ROH! Adam Schiff Believes People Getting PREEMPTIVE Pardons Must Be GUILTY (At Least He DID - Watch)

Joke's On HIM! Weirdie Creates ENTIRE Thread Around VIRAL PhD Trolling, Blames 'Rage Curators' at Twitchy

Imagine it's the 1970s. The Internet is new, Google isn't a thing, and electronic games are still in their infancy. Luckily, word processing is a feature of all personal computers. Words are the building blocks of stories, and what are most games if not interactive stories?

RedState Sports Report: Bark Versus Beef for the SEC Championship