On Wednesday, MRC founder and president L. Brent Bozell appeared on WMAL’s O’Connor and Company to break down ABC’s awful debate moderator performance put in by anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis. Bozell told the O’Connor and Company’s Julie Gunlock and Andrew Langer that the hatchet job by the moderators was expected: “Speaking for the Media Research Center — we weren’t in the slightest bit surprised at what happened last night.” Bozell added that Trump has “Gone through it with every network but ABC has clearly been the worst all along.”     Bozell didn’t pull any punches as he blasted: “Let me tell you something, whoever it was on the Trump campaign who selected ABC should be fired this morning….The President said last night ‘You should fire incompetent staff,’ this was an incompetent staff.” Bozell implied the Trump staff should have seen the attack coming from ABC’s moderators as he cited MRC research:  Look at the study we just did and it’s one of countless studies. One-hundred percent positive coverage of Kamala Harris during a time where she either won’t do pressers, won’t do interviews, puts out no policy positions, says in speeches things that are flat-out untrue lies. There is a record that could be reported if they had wanted to. Bozell continued: “ABC gave her 100 percent positive news. At the same time, when Donald Trump is gaining in the polls, when Donald Trump has a magnificent convention. When Donald Trump — damn it — is shot in the head 93 percent negative coverage. And someone said “Let’s do an interview on — let’s do, let’s do a debate on ABC because it’s going to be fair.” Bozell then went to the “stats sheets” to further buttress his point:  If you look at the favorable questions it’s 2 to 1 in favor of Harris. But now consider the fact that while Donald Trump was giving an answer they fact-checked him six times….How many times was Kamala fact-checked? Every single answer she gave, she lied. She obfuscated, she dodged it, she wouldn’t answer the question. She tried to blame Donald Trump for Afghanistan….How many times did the moderators say “Now wait a minute, you’re wrong about that?” Zero!  The following is the full segment as aired on the September 11 edition of WMAL’s O’Connor and Company:  JULIE GUNLOCK: Joining us now is Brent Bozell, Media Research Center. Brent, my goodness! Where to start? Have you ever witnessed such a spectacle as what we saw last night with David Muir and Linsey Davis, firefighting and helping Kamala Harris? L.BRENT BOZELL: Well I have to tell you — speaking for the Media Research Center — we weren’t in the slightest bit surprised at what happened last night. The only difference was it was for all of America, not just ABC’s audience but all of America to see what Donald Trump has gone through with ABC News. He’s gone through it with every network but ABC has clearly been the worst all along. And let me tell you something, whoever it was on the Trump campaign who selected ABC should be fired this morning. That is a person who is an utter incompetent and has no idea what he or she is doing — whoever it was. And make no bones about this. The President said last night “You should fire incompetent staff,” this was an incompetent staff. Look at the study we just did and it’s one of countless studies. One-hundred percent positive coverage of Kamala Harris during a time where she either won’t do pressers, won’t do interviews, puts out no policy positions, says in speeches things that are flat-out untrue lies. There is a record that could be reported if they had wanted to. Forget the press conferences, forget the interviews. Why not just do the news? Why not just look at the fact that as border czar she’s never been to the border. Never been to a conflict zone. Why couldn’t they have reported this? ABC gave her 100 percent positive news. At the same time, when Donald Trump is gaining in the polls, when Donald Trump has a magnificent convention. When Donald Trump — damn it — is shot in the head 93 percent negative coverage. And someone said “Let’s do an interview on — let’s do, let’s do a debate on ABC because it’s going to be fair.” GUNLOCK: One of the most galling moments was when — just as you mentioned — you know Trump brings up the assassination attempt and they cut him off. Let’s play cut 45. [Begin clip] DONALD TRUMP: This is the one that weaponized. Not me. She weaponized. I probably took a bullet to the head because of the things that they say about me. They talk about democracy. “I’m a threat to democracy.”  DAVID MUIR: President Trump. TRUMP: They’re the threat to democracy with their fake “Russia, Russia, Russia” investigation that went nowhere.  DAVID MUIR: We do have a lot to get — we have a lot to get to. Linsey? [End clip] GUNLOCK: Unbelievable! They say “Moving on, moving on!”  ANDREW LANGER: Right, nothing to see here.  GUNLOCK: No exploration. BOZELL: Look, I’m gonna say it. Donald Trump did not prepare. She prepared magnificently and that has to be said. But in that soundbite Donald Trump was 100 percent correct.  LANGER: Right. BOZELL: The Left is painting him in such an ugly way that their looney supporters are taking to the extremes of wanting to kill him. And so that’s true what he said and that’s what David Muir knew was to be true. And that’s why he cut him off.  LANGER: You know, and I think you’re right there, Brent. We’re talking with Brent Bozell from the Media Research Center. I don’t think Donald Trump was particularly prepared and he was drawn down these rabbit holes but — right? They were rabbit holes that were created because the moderators were just teeing up these softball questions. You know it was, it was like this — you know? “Donald Trump, why are you evil? Kamala Harris, why are you wonderful?” And, and you know Kamala Harris gives her everything — “Well I’m wonderful because X,Y and Z. Oh and Donald Trump doesn’t have people going to his rallies.” Which — you know — and he, and he went right for, right for the trap. But the traps couldn’t have been sprung if the moderators would have asked her any – anything sort of remotely approaching a tough question.  BOZELL: You are entirely correct, Andrew. Here’s the stat sheets on this. If you look at the favorable questions it’s 2 to 1 in favor of Harris. But now consider the fact that while Donald Trump was giving an answer they fact-checked him six times. They ought not to have fact-checked him once. They fact-checked him six times. How many times was Kamala fact-checked? Every single answer she gave, she lied. She obfuscated, she dodged it, she wouldn’t answer the question. She tried to blame Donald Trump for Afghanistan. LANGER: Right. BOZELL: How many times did the moderators say “Now wait a minute, you’re wrong about that?” Zero!  LANGER: There you go! That was the question, whether or not they’d done it once?  BOZELL: So you look at it that way, and the number is 4 to 1.  GUNLOCK: There was one interesting moment where they were talking about abortion and suddenly — on the issue that the Left considers her strongest on, you know killing babies —  suddenly her mic was left on. What do you make of that? On purpose?  BOZELL: I don’t know, I don’t know. But I do know this, I do know this. I do know she didn’t answer the question, when she was asked “What are the limits?” And I do know this. That when Donald Trump said that their laws allow babies to die after they are born and he was fact-checked by David Muir. David Muir needs to be fact-checked because David Muir got it wrong and Donald Trump was right. Again, I mean if they can’t win telling the truth they try to win telling a lie.  GUNLOCK: Listen Brent, I was looking forward to this conversation all morning because I knew that you would have great analysis. Thanks so much for joining us this morning.  BOZELL: Thanks as always for having me. 

After CNN’s Dana Bash interviewed Kamala Harris, which was the first formal interview Harris has done since she was installed as the Democrat candidate, Bash sat down for her own interview with Mediaite's Aidan McLaughlin on "Press Club." And despite being from one of the most liberal news outlets in the country, Bash admitted that Harris, who her network has backed, was not prepared for the interview. Dave Rubin plays the clip of Bash explaining how Harris dodged questions she was unprepared for. - YouTube www.youtube.com “The right – their problem was that you didn't necessarily, they felt, hold her down on some of her more nebulous policy positions. What would you say to that?” McLaughlin asked. “I tried. I mean, you can’t force somebody to answer a question, and I asked to follow up. I tried to get more into the nitty-gritty and get the answer,” Bash explained. “In my experience doing interviews, once you ask once, fine. Twice, fine. Three times, if you don’t get a clear answer, that’s kind of your answer,” she told McLaughlin. “How persistent do you feel like you should be in these kind of interviews where you're speaking with the vice president or presidential candidate?” McLaughlin pressed. “It totally depends on the question, on the place you are in the calendar, on the importance,” Bash said, adding, “There are a million factors.” Dave, while he still doesn’t like Dana Bash, appreciates the flicker of honesty. “It's nice to hear you say right there what cannot be denied, which is that they didn't answer any of the questions honestly,” he says. To watch the footage of Bash’s interview, check out the clip above. Want more from Dave Rubin?To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

It’s easy to misremember "The Karate Kid." In the 40 years since its release, the movie has been memed into caricature, distilled into a series of catchphrases: wax on, wax off. You beginner luck. Sweep the leg! Daniel wants to win. And that’s maybe the smartest thing about the movie, the thing that sets it apart from all the treacly morality tales it gets confused with. And the plot almost fits into one of the most hackneyed blockbuster templates, so it can get filed away in the mind as a cut-and-dried product of its time: Bullied nerd with heart fights mean jocks and wins. Macho Macchio But that’s actually not quite how "The Karate Kid" goes. Daniel LaRusso, played by icon-in-training Ralph Macchio, is never portrayed as a weakling or a dweeb. From the start, as he drives across the country with his widowed mother (Randee Heller), he is a tough New Jersey transplant — scrappy, athletic, and charming. He draws the interest of Ali (“with an I!”), a glamorous California girl played with confident grace by Elisabeth Shue. Ali is the prize of the school, but Daniel doesn’t shrink from her or botch his first attempt at romancing her. The whole reason he gets into trouble with the kids from the Cobra Kai dojo is because their ringleader, Ali’s ex-boyfriend Johnny Lawrence (William Zabka), starts pushing her around. Ali is no wilting flower, but she obviously needs a champion, and Daniel is the only one brave enough to volunteer. At this point, one might expect him to receive an abject pummeling, but he puts up a decent fight. In other words, the confrontation is set up not as a face-off between two ideals of manhood — the good and retiring sweetheart versus the evil alpha male — but between the noble and the corrupted versions of one kind of man: the red-blooded American kind. Brute realities Daniel scores higher than Johnny on the good-guy scale, but he has to confront the hard truth that Johnny simply has more physical power: He is bigger, stronger, better trained. The movie is about those brute realities of being a man and how Daniel’s going to deal with them. At first, he cowers. It’s only after a couple of beatings that Daniel starts to sulk and cringe through the halls of the school, desperate to evade the facts of his situation. If there’s a kind of wimp that Daniel might become, it’s not the sensitive bookworm but the resentful loner, darkly brooding over the unfairness of life and plotting twisted forms of revenge. Not Bastian Bux from "The Neverending Story" but Dostoevsky’s seething underground man. Instead, of course, Daniel meets Nariyoshi Miyagi of Okinawa. Predictably, in the brain-dead race criticism of Current Year America, Mr. Miyagi has gone down as a perverse stereotype of “the perpetual foreigner who exists to serve the whiteness that surrounds him.” Embodying dignity Nonsense. Miyagi is a richly layered tragic hero, and the movie’s finest achievement is how patiently, even reverently it approaches the heart of his story. The central scene of "The Karate Kid" isn’t the final tournament but a late-night drinking binge in which Mr. Miyagi reveals that his wife and baby boy died in one of FDR’s Japanese internment compounds while he was fighting dutifully for America. Once again the movie executes a poignant bait and switch: You think you’re watching the story of a fatherless son, but it’s equally about a sonless father. And in fact it is about race and class, too, though not in the plodding and sanctimonious way that might satisfy the film studies crowd. If Pat Morita’s broken English has a touch of Kabuki melodrama to it, the effect is nevertheless an utterly recognizable portrayal of a person every American has met and loved — the first-generation immigrant who brings his ancient customs like a gift to his adopted country. Sometimes those people do have a hard road to acceptance, one that lies for Miyagi not just through the atrocities of war but past the occasional drunken idiot who jeers and squints at him. He’s even the butt of a running microagression: It’s Miya-GI, not Miya-JEE, and no one can seem to get it right. Miyagi puts his adversaries to shame not by insisting petulantly on his own dignity but by simply embodying it, toweringly, regardless of circumstance. And that’s the shining secret he imparts to Daniel in all his lessons: When they pick on you, when they strut and bluster, when they fight dirty and go for the knees, you simply stand back up. And you breathe, and you refuse to be overthrown. Will to win If Daniel can do that much, his friends say, he’s already won. Ali reveals herself as the woman you never let go when she assures him that if he gets knocked out in the first round, “we’ll leave early.” Even Mr. Miyagi assures him that “win, lose, no matter.” That’s the right thing for them to say. But Daniel wants to win. And that’s maybe the smartest thing about the movie, the thing that sets it apart from all the treacly morality tales it gets confused with. There’s truth to the idea that being a good person is its own victory. But what’s really been done to death is the notion that all we need is for the world to be nicer to nice guys. Daniel knows that’s never going to happen, which means nice won’t cut it: He also has to be strong. Miyagi knows it too, but he has to let Daniel say it. And so the movie ends — not with Daniel holding the trophy, but one shot after that, with a wordless close-up on his teacher’s face. He has said everything that needs to be said. This essay originally appeared in the Rejoice Evermore Substack.

Many undecided voters who tuned into the presidential debate on Tuesday night walked away uncertain about border czar Kamala Harris and broke in favor of former President Donald Trump, according to reports from multiple outlets.Though the sample sizes are notably small and viewers are still processing many of the claims made during the debate, so far, the results appear devastating for Harris, even though many political pundits claimed she outperformed expectations.'You can't pay for groceries with style points. She failed to explain how she's going to help people afford to live.'Reuters spoke with 10 undecided voters who have voted for Republicans and Democrats in the past. Of those, just three have decided to vote for Harris while six now lean toward or plan to vote for Trump."I felt like the whole debate was Kamala Harris telling me why not to vote for Donald Trump instead of why she's the right candidate," said Robert Wheeler from the swing state of Nevada."I still don't know what she is for," added Mark Kadish of Florida. "There was no real meat and bones for her plans."The New York Times reported similar findings in an article entitled "Pundits Said Harris Won the Debate. Undecided Voters Weren’t So Sure.""She didn’t, kind of, separate herself," said Shavanaka Kelly from Wisconsin, another swing state. Kelly told the Times she's still "on the fence."Jason Henderson of Arizona, a former Obama turned Trump voter, was even more blunt. "Trump had the more commanding presentation," he said. "There was nothing done by Harris that made me think she’s better. In any way."Henderson, however, also told the Times that he may eventually "come back to [his] senses," though whether he meant he would switch to Harris or boycott the presidential election entirely is unclear.Other undecided voters interviewed on camera likewise expressed misgivings about Harris' performance and promises."When facts come to facts, my life was better when Trump was in office," one woman told CNN.A man from the same focus group told CNN that he was disappointed in the Biden-Harris administration's handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, calling it a "travesty."A man from Arizona whose family came to the U.S. legally told MSNBC he was frustrated by the preferential treatment seemingly given to illegal aliens. "My family went through a long process to get here legally — I feel that it's unfair for hundreds of thousands to get here without problems and for the federal government to help them out," he explained.An undecided voter in Pennsylvania told NBC News he was upset that Democrats effectively boxed voters out from the electoral process by allowing Harris to receive the nomination through delegates even though she never participated in the 2024 Democratic primary. "Harris received zero votes. I would have liked a say in the primary. I feel like they think they know what's best for me. Harris hasn't said anything," the man said. He also said he thought Harris "stole" many of her ideas from Trump.Dr. Phil McGraw spoke with a woman who claimed she'd had high hopes for Harris going into the debate and was left feeling underwhelmed. "I really, really wanted Vice President Harris to hit it out of the park," the woman said. "I don't think she did."When pressed, the woman said Harris' economic plans lack specifics. "What is an 'opportunity economy'?" the woman wondered. "What does that mean?"Tim Murtaugh from the Trump campaign told Blaze News he's not surprised by viewers' ambivalence toward Harris and her ideas, claiming she and President Joe Biden are "so connected, like conjoined twins, that not even Dr. Ben Carson could separate them.""Kamala Harris needed to achieve a couple of major things to reach undecided voters and she failed. First, they wanted to hear an explanation for why she claims to have reversed herself on so many important issues. She didn't do that and Americans know she's hiding her true radical self. Second, she wanted to try to distance herself from the failed Biden-Harris administration and she didn't even come close," Murtaugh told Blaze News."The media can have their little party for her, like they did after she became the candidate, but you can't pay for groceries with style points. She failed to explain how she's going to help people afford to live."Mere moments after the debate ended on Tuesday night, the Harris team issued a statement calling for a second debate:Under the bright lights, the American people got to see the choice they will face this fall at the ballot box: between moving forward with Kamala Harris, or going backward with Trump. That's what they saw tonight and what they should see at a second debate in October. Vice President Harris is ready for a second debate. Is Donald Trump?Trump responded to the call for a second debate by declaring victory in the first. "She wants a second debate because she lost tonight very badly," he said during an interview in the post-debate spin room.As for a second debate, Trump said he'd "have to think about it." His running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, and Harris' running mate, Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, are scheduled to debate on October 1.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Dead by Daylight is a game filled with big-name horror licenses, including the Alien from Alien, Chucky from Child’s Play, Freddy Krueger from A Nightmare on Elm Street, and Sadako from The Ring. There’s plenty more too, as well as a few licenses from outside horror such as Lara Croft and Dungeons and Dragons. Where DBD excels, however, is in its original characters, and several are getting a permanent price reduction. Continue reading DBD permanently slashes prices of some of its original characters MORE FROM PCGAMESN: DBD killer tier list, Best horror games, DBD codes

As gratifying as it can be to carefully construct buildings in games like Rust or Valheim and entire cities in Cities Skylines 2 or Frostpunk 2, there's a different, more immediate kind of enjoyment that comes from smashing those structures apart. Games like Red Faction Guerrilla, Just Cause 4, and Teardown understand this. So, too, does Demolish and Build 3, a new demolition company simulator that lets players use machines and tools to break down buildings that's just launched on Steam. Continue reading Demolish and Build 3 is a building game in reverse, and it’s out now

Feckless Hillary Clinton Swings and Misses During Political Twitter Back and Forth

Brian Stelter Dunked Into Next Week After Hot Take on Debate Moderators vs. Trump Completely Misses Point

Follow the Money: Biden/Harris Admin Facilitated the Entry of Venezuelan Gangs in Aurora, Colorado

Watch: Kamala Harris and Democrats Have to Stand Awkwardly as People Cheer for Trump at 9/11 Event