Books book review Breaking Free of Queer Tragedy: Chuck Tingle’s Bury Your Gays A review of Chuck Tingle’s new horror novel By Sasha Bonkowsky | Published on September 10, 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share If you’ve spent too much time on TVTropes—like I have—then you’ve probably heard the term bury your gays. The term refers to the disproportionate killing of LGBTQ+ characters in media, and a broader sense that queer characters are seen as inherently more expendable or more tragic than their straight counterparts. While this trope is as old as negative opinions of queerness, it was codified (at least in American media) by the Hays Code, a set of guidelines created by the Catholic Legion of Decency meant to prevent “sinful” behavior from being portrayed on screen. Its more lenient version, updated in the 1950s, still required that any character depicted as queer paid for their crimes, usually via death. And it’s not limited to older media: Fifty years after the end of the Hays Code, a full 10% of all character deaths in TV were queer women, far higher than the mortality rate among straight characters. Bury Your Gays is also the name of the newest Chuck Tingle novel, a book that actively explores how queer characters are treated—and mistreated—onscreen. Misha Byrne is a screenwriter for Harold Brothers studio in Los Angeles. His most famous project is the television show Travelers, featuring two female leads with a whole laboratory’s worth of chemistry between them, but nothing confirmed—at least, not yet. Misha plans to reveal their love for one another in the season finale, but then he’s called into a meeting where he’s told that, if he confirms his leads’ lesbian relationship, he has to kill them off. Harold Brothers, riding high on its AI-generated portrayal of a dead actor, have run the numbers and concluded that burying their gays is most profitable. “Go fuck yourself,” is Misha’s response to that. Buy the Book Bury Your Gays Chuck Tingle Buy Book Bury Your Gays Chuck Tingle Buy this book from: AmazonBarnes and NobleiBooksIndieBoundTarget Despite his bravado, however, Misha isn’t sure how he’s going to write himself out of this one—or if he can write himself out. He’s gay, and a significant amount of his film- and television-making is inspired by his queerness or his experiences surrounding it, but he’s never confirmed it publicly, letting viewers choose to read between the lines but retaining plausible deniability. Nor is he out to his family and childhood friends back in Montana, even though he has a longterm boyfriend, Zeke, who he’s certain he’ll ask to marry someday. A series of strange and bloody events also do nothing to help his writer’s block. Just after leaving his writers’ meeting with Harold Brothers, a falling piano messily crushes one of its longterm cartoonists facing a sexual-harassment lawsuit. A few weeks after that, just as Misha is beginning to recover from the trauma, his own horror-movie villains begin to stalk him. First is The Smoker, a pale ghost with haunting, expressionless eyes who’s never without a cigarette, and who kills you in five days if you don’t give him a light. Next is a black lamb that appears innocent but harbors an eldritch parasite inside it. And appearing on his plane ride from Montana is Mrs. Why, an unnerving figure from the far future—and antagonist from Travelers—who floods her victim’s minds with visions of the end of the universe. In trying to kill Misha, they threaten to turn him into a queer tragedy himself: a closeted gay man killed before he dares to make his relationship or sexuality public. The core of Bury Your Gays is this fascinating layering: Misha and his friends at Harold Brothers are both creating queer narratives, however they can fit them in under the corporate eye of Harold Brothers, and part of a narrative in which their lives are at stake. Bury Your Gays doesn’t quite break the fourth wall, but it nods at it—almost de rigueur for a book about storytelling. Misha is a wonderfully realized character, especially in the book’s flashbacks to his childhood. Growing up, Misha was ostracized and punished for being gay, and still holds the memories of his chain-smoking uncle blackmailing him for it, or getting beaten up by his crush Richie after Richie’s older brother caught them together. Tingle is very good at drawing the through line from those experiences to Misha’s screenwriting, the villains and the stories he creates, but despite how real Misha feels, there’s also a sense throughout the book that he’s just a character, and so we should rather think of him in terms of character arc and narrative beats. It’s a strange, fascinating balance, asking readers to think about what it might feel like, to be locked into a predetermined path, especially one of tragedy or death, with seemingly no way out. The secondary plot of the novel builds on this, dealing with Harold Brothers’ AI-created rendition of actor Chris Oak, and their rights to create artificial versions of any of their employees, actors, or IPs. (This is based on the recent negotiations between film companies and the actors and writers guilds, where one of the unions’ major demands was preventing studios from creating unauthorized AI replicas of performers.) It’s an illustration of everything Bury Your Gays is about, a company being able to exploit tailored queer narratives to pad its profit margins, without benefiting a single real person. Of course, Bury Your Gays is also a Chuck Tingle novel. Accompanying its tense, gripping horror and metatextual commentary is plenty of celebratory queerness—a brilliant, rainbow-colored world so long as we dare to break out of the narratives prescribed to us.[end-mark] Bury Your Gays is published by Nightfire. The post Breaking Free of Queer Tragedy: Chuck Tingle’s <i>Bury Your Gays</i> appeared first on Reactor.

DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—The attorney helping Vice President Kamala Harris with debate preparation is also defending Google from the antitrust lawsuit brought by the Biden-Harris Department of Justice, which government transparency advocates say presents a conflict of interest. Karen Dunn, who is helping Harris prepare for today’s debate against former President Donald Trump, gave the opening statement Monday during Google’s trial. While there is nothing explicitly preventing Dunn from taking on both roles, experts say the campaign’s decision to work with her should raise concern. “Somebody in the Harris Campaign should google ‘conflict of interest,’” Protect the Public’s Trust Director Michael Chamberlain told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Imagine being a DOJ attorney, working on this case in good faith. Your potential future boss is entrusting her campaign to someone who is working for one of DOJ’s most formidable opponent litigants—against you. That’s disheartening.” Chamberlain noted there is “tremendous potential for abuse with the overlap of the Vice President’s political world and an executive branch agency.” “Relationships like these ignite howls of outrage when they involve other campaigns,” he said. The DOJ’s lawsuit threatens to break up the tech giant. Last month, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, an Obama appointee, held in a 277-page ruling that Google has an illegal monopoly on its search engine. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called the ruling a “victory for the American people.” Biden-Harris Cabinet Secretary Claims 'Punishing Schedule' Makes It Impossible For Kamala To Answer Questions pic.twitter.com/CvOExXOsg8— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) September 9, 2024 “If this is a preview of how a future Harris Administration would handle potential conflicts of interest, it could be great news for progressive special interests,” Pete McGinnis, communications director for the Functional Government Initiative, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The big losers would be the American public who expect their government to act objectively and without bias from conflicted decision-makers.” Dunn has helped Democratic candidates in every presidential election since 2008 prepare for debates, according to The New York Times. Matt Stoller, director of research at the American Economic Liberties Project, told The New York Times that “you can’t serve both sides.” “If these were legal cases, she would be ethically barred from doing what she’s doing,” Stoller said. Stoller told the Daily Caller News Foundation that there’s no formal ethics rule restricting Dunn because “the Harris campaign is a political campaign, not a lawsuit.” While Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer during the George W. Bush administration, told the Daily Caller News Foundation he sees the “theoretical conflict,” he also explained that “helping with debate prep is a way of volunteering for a campaign.” “Lots of people and organizations both volunteer for campaigns and provide financial backing to campaigns that have business before the federal government,” Painter said. The Trump campaign called Harris out over the potential conflict in August. “Kamala Harris will never stand up to Big Tech because she’s being coached on what to say in the debates by Google’s top lawyer,” Trump campaign senior adviser Tim Murtaugh told Fox News. “Think about how outrageous it is—their administration is suing Google, but Harris is taking political advice from the defendant’s lawyer.” The debate between Harris and Trump, which will take place at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia is scheduled for 9 p.m. tonight on ABC News. The Harris campaign and Dunn did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post ‘Potential for Abuse’: Kamala’s Debate Prep With Lead Google Attorney Sets Off Alarm Bells appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Former United States President Donald Trump’s pledge to safeguard the First Amendment was a highlight of his recent campaign rally in Wisconsin. Standing against the Big Tech censorship attempts by the ruling Biden-Harris administration, Trump stated his commitment to protecting the free speech of Americans, “I will sign an executive order banning any federal employee from colluding to limit speech, and we will fire every federal bureaucrat who is engaged in domestic censorship under the Harris regime.” https://video.reclaimthenet.org/articles/trump-government-censorship-ban-9842.mp4 His remarks come in the wake of heightened debate around safeguarding free speech rights. The First Amendment, recognized as the bedrock of American values and rites, guarantees every citizen the right to voice their opinion, peacefully protest, and practice their religion without intrusion from the government. However, these liberties have come under fire in the online world, with government pressuring social media platforms to censor speech. Under the Biden-Harris governance, the administration has been accused of muzzling so-called “misinformation.” Congressional investigations like those conducted by the Select Subcommittee Government Committee on Weaponization and lawsuits against the administration have brought many incidents of censorship pressure to light. This suppression undermines public trust in institutions by concealing inconvenient information. In 2022, the administration introduced the short-lived Disinformation Governance Board. The board was shut down following pushback over First Amendment concerns. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Trump Pledges to Fire Federal Employees Engaged in Censorship Pressure appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

'I'm Getting Arrested': Tyreek Hill Arrest Video Released, And ...

It's general election season, and the presumably more centrist voices on CNN and MSNBC were anything but this morning. On Morning Joe, Willie Geist has traditionally been a relatively temperate voice, a counterweight to the rabid liberal partisanship of Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski. And Mark McKinnon, a co-founder of No Labels, is at least in theory the embodiment of bipartisanship. But on today's Morning Joe and CNN This Morning, Geist and McKinnon  tilted strongly in favor of Harris and the Democrats. Discussing the disastrous Biden-Harris withdrawal from Afghanistan, in which 13 US servicemen were killed by a suicide bomber at Abbey Gate, McKinnon rose to the Democrats' defense, and even shifted blame to Donald Trump. McKinnon began by contradicting host Kasie Hunt, suggesting that the withdrawal will not be a big campaign issue: "I don't get a sense that American voters are sitting here today going, oh, we really screwed up in Afghanistan and it's Biden's fault." McKinnon went on to explain away Biden-Harris' failure. Declaring "wars are hell," McKinnon said, "Trump's the one who planned the exit, and Biden got it done, which is an incredibly hard thing to do." It's one thing to negotiate an exit. It's another to actually exit. You can't blame Trump for this incompetent outcome, which could hardly have been worse. Within days, Afghanistan's government collapsed and the Taliban, which had given shelter to al Qaeda terrorists behind 9/11, returned to power. Billions of dollars of US military equipment were left behind in Taliban hands. And above all, 13 American servicemen's lives were lost in a tragic and humiliating event. Meanwhile, on Morning Joe, Geist suggested that down-ballot races in Arizona and North Carolina could hurt Trump at the top of the ticket. When he searched for the "polite" word to describe Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Robinson, Jonathan Lemire offered, "controversial." But Geist countered: "Crazy. I was going to take it one step further." Geist's description of Republican Arizona senatorial candidate Kari Lake was arguably even more insulting. Geist called Lake "the residue of Donald Trump." That's tantamount to describing Lake as a lingering stain! So what got into Geist and McKinnon this morning? With the campaign entering its final, decisive, phase, are the two showing their true color -- blue? Here are the transcripts. MSNBC Morning Joe 9/9/24 6:13 am EDT WILLIE GEIST: Let's remember, yes, these are all within the margin of error. But where this race was before Kamala Harris came on board, which is to say, and we all talk to many of the same people around the campaign, who privately conceded that North Carolina, probably Nevada, Arizona, and maybe even Georgia, they were going to let those go, effectively. They were going to fight for them, but they were not counting on them. They just had to win the three blue wall states. Well now, those are in play. And John, we should also point out that, place like Arizona, on those tickets, there's still the residue of Donald Trump in a candidate for Senate in Kari Lake, who's not doing well. She's connected to Donald Trump, helping Ruben Gallego take a lead in that race, potentially helping Kamala Harris there as well. The gubernatorial candidate inn North Carolina is, uh, what's the polite way of saying it? JONATHAN LEMIRE: Controversial. GEIST: Controversial? Crazy. I was going to go one step further, but we'll leave it with those two. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Weird. GEIST: Weird, okay. That obviously could help Kamala Harris, as well, in North Carolina. ------------------------- CNN This Morning 9/9/24 6:15 am EDT JOE BIDEN: Now, some say we should have started mass evacuations sooner, and couldn't this have been done in a more orderly manner? I respectfully disagree. I was not going to extend this forever war, and I was not extending a forever exit. KASIE HUNT:  Thirteen American servicemen lost their lives during the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan on August 30, 2021. House Republicans and Democrats releasing dueling reports on Monday, casting blame for the botched exit on each other. The Republican report highly critical of the Biden administration, claiming the President and Vice President Harris lied to the American people at every stage of the withdrawal. . . .  Mark Mckinnon, this was obviously a really, really difficult moment in American history, period. What happened at Abbey Gate, obviously it's become a major political focal point of this campaign.  And it also speaks to the bigger issue that the Trump campaign is dealing with, as they try to tie Kamala Harris to President Biden. Because one of the things this report did was talk more about Harris' role than it likely would have were she not at the top of the ticket. How should she be addressing this this issue? It's obviously become an issue as well with what happened at Arlington cemetery. MARK MCKINNON: Well, I mean, wars are hell. I mean, we, how long were  we in Afghanistan? Decades. And have we ever withdrawn from a war easily or casually, or without casualties? I don't think so. Loss of any American life is, is never acceptable and it should certainly be a worthy of an investigation to find out what went wrong and what could have been done better. But I don't think, I don't get a sense that American voters are sitting here today going, oh, we really screwed up in Afghanistan and it's Biden's fault. I mean, Trump's the one that planned the exit and Biden got it done, which was incredibly hard thing to do.

On his Sunday HBO show, Last Week Tonight host John Oliver mused about the sex lives of Donald Trump and JD Vance, all while insisting that they are the “weird” ones. After playing a clip of Trump defending himself and Vance from the “weird” accusation, Oliver began his descent into Freudian non-sequiturs by recalling the fake news story about Vance having sex with a couch, “But that is the weirdest possible way to address that accusation. ‘He's a solid rock. I happen to be a very solid rock.’ What are you talking about? I'm not sure I'd describe any part of JD Vance as ‘Rock solid.’ Unless, of course, he was in a West Elm showroom.”     Oliver was just getting started, “Though Trump's half right! He and Vance are lots of things: they're misogynists, narcissists, men who cum dead silent, plausible Masked Singer contestants. But they are also deeply weird. And each day seems to bring new evidence of Vance failing to connect with ordinary Americans from being booed by firefighters, whom he referred to as ‘haters,’ to the viral clip of him utterly failing to make small talk in a donut shop.” Meanwhile, Kamala Harris will not be booed at a speech because restricts herself to friendly venues. Additionally, the late night comedians love the Democratic talking point that Republicans are weird, but they also enjoy the sex lives of various GOP politicians, so who are the weird ones again? As it was, Oliver was not done with the sex talk. Later, after a clip of Trump’s address to the Economic Club of New York, he mocked, “What was that? That applause isn't satisfaction with the answer, it's relief that it's finally over. That is the public-speaking equivalent of an audience faking an orgasm. ‘You did it, you did it, you can stop now, please.’" Oliver then declared, “Look, the bad news is, for the next two months we're going to be subjected to an excruciating amount of nonsense like that. The good news is, come November, there's a chance for America to reject that bullshit once and possibly forever. And if that happens, it's hard to put into words how liberating that might feel.” Later in the show, Oliver switched gears to attacking Republicans past and present for not being supporters of free universal school lunches, referring to Rep. Virginia Foxx as “heartless” and one Minnesota lawmaker as an “asshole.” Here is a transcript for the September 8 show: HBO Last Week Tonight with John Oliver 9/9/2024 11:05 PM ET JOHN OLIVER: But that is the weirdest possible way to address that accusation. "He's a solid rock. I happen to be a very solid rock." What are you talking about? I'm not sure I'd describe any part of JD Vance as "Rock solid." Unless, of course, he was in a West Elm showroom.  Though Trump's half right! He and Vance are lots of things: they're misogynists, narcissists, men who cum dead silent, plausible Masked Singer contestants. But they are also deeply weird. And each day seems to bring new evidence of Vance failing to connect with ordinary Americans from being booed by firefighters, whom he referred to as “haters,” to the viral clip of him utterly failing to make small talk in a donut shop, with the low being this. … 11:10 PM ET OLIVER: What was that? That applause isn't satisfaction with the answer, it's relief that it's finally over. That is the public-speaking equivalent of an audience faking an orgasm. "You did it, you did it, you can stop now, please."  But look at his answer. This is the full text. It's like ChatGPT having a mental breakdown. A bunch of incoherent rambling around nonspecific implications that tariffs will fix everything, which of course, they won't.  Look, the bad news is, for the next two months we're going to be subjected to an excruciating amount of nonsense like that. The good news is, come November, there's a chance for America to reject that bullshit once and possibly forever. And if that happens, it's hard to put into words how liberating that might feel. Luckily, I know of one particular sticker that gets that feeling across pretty fucking well. 

Monday’s White House press briefing led off with national security spokesman and frequent Karine Jean-Pierre crutch John Kirby defending the Biden-Harris administration’s deadly withdrawal from Afghanistan in light of a House Foreign Affairs Committee report, arguing they’ve done plenty of soul-searching, but feel proud of what happened and want to move on. Thankfully, a few reporters had some questions about that, including CBS’s Ed O’Keefe. Unfortunately, his bosses didn’t think they were that important as his exchange with Kirby and the wider topic were both ignored from Monday’s CBS Evening News and Tuesday’s CBS Mornings.     After starting off easy by asking whether the administration would cooperate in any future congressional investigations (to which Kirby said he was unaware of any future probes), Kirby moved to this: “Has anyone from the White House or the broader administration been invited to tomorrow’s gold medal ceremony for the families of the 13 service members?” Kirby admitted no one from the White House would, but instead the Pentagon would be representative of the regime: “There will be — there will be quite a few from the Department of Defense, both in terms of active duty, admirals and generals and civilian political appointees and high leadership positions that’ll be there.” This segued in O’Keefe’s simple but biting question about real accountability. “[G]oing back to sort of accountability and — and after action, was anyone ever held accountable by the President directly for what happened with the withdrawal in Afghanistan, and if not, remind the audience why not,” he asked. Kirby gave a remarkable answer, twice insisting “[w]have all held ourselves accountable”, adding the first time that they’re particularly proud of “the progress of the withdrawal across the administration and it was a true interagency effort to get those 120,000 people out and to — uh — make sure we removed our diplomats and our military personnel safely.” “[N]ot everything went according to plan. Nothing ever does. Um — and we mourn the loss of — of those 13 lives at Abbey Gate every single day here. Um — their sacrifice doesn’t — doesn’t — uh — is not forgotten,” Kirby added in quite the understatement. AFP’s Danny Kemp also brought up Afghanistan and the basic question of whether the withdrawal was a failure: AFP’s @DannyCTKemp: “[O]n Afghanistan, so are you — would you argue that the withdrawal is a success, or do you admit that there were failings involved in that?” WH’s John Kirby: “We have — I’d point you to the after action report where I think we've been very clear about the… pic.twitter.com/XnI46FyIl3 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 9, 2024 Voice of America’s Anita Powell brought up the concern that the collapse of Afghanistan has made America less safe (click “expand”): POWELL: Well, let’s talk about Afghanistan then. Chairman McCaul drew a direct line and countered something you just said, which is you said they helped make us a safer nation. He believes that the withdrawal from Afghanistan — [TO HEINRICH] do you need a minute? He argues that the withdrawal from Afghanistan has in fact made the United States more susceptible to terrorism because of those prisoners released from Bagram. What can you say to the American people to assure them that this administration is trying to keep them safe and how safe are they? KIRBY: Well, just go on CENTCOM’s website. Look at the press releases that they send every time they take out a leader of ISIS or an al-Qaeda leader. We have proven the case about over the horizon counterterrorism capability to a fairly well. Now, that doesn’t mean we’re sitting back resting fat, dumb, and happy. That’s a kind of capability you have to keep working at and keep trying to improve and we are. Um, I think it’s also important to look at what else is going around the world. You know who — who would have loved for us to be stuck in Afghanistan for another 20 years — is President Putin, President Xi, they would have loved that. But now because we’re not in a ground war in Afghanistan, a ground war for which the original mission had long since been accomplished, we’re able to focus on those more — those more modern and relevant threats to our national security posed by nation states and non-nation states around the world. But as for counterterrorism capability, again, we have proven time and time again that we are able to monitor the threat and deal with the threat sometimes in near real time if need be, not taking it for granted, not saying we don’t always have to keep sharpening it, but believe me, we’re focused on it. Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich finally got her turn once Jean-Pierre took to the podium and had this bullseye on Harris’s campaign strategy: JACQUI TIME: “31 percent of registered voters said in a New York Times/Sienna poll that they still need to learn more about Vice President Harris. So, why is she spending so much time trying to define Trump and link him to Project 2025 rather than define herself?” KJP: “I mean,… pic.twitter.com/HV4DTiatKV — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 9, 2024 When Jean-Pierre shrugged at these questions since she’s not on the Harris campaign, Heinrich replied she asked since “the campaign is not holding regular briefings” or “a Q&A forum like we have here and you’re the spokeswoman for the Biden-Harris administration.” Heinrich’s last question was even more simple than the ones on Afghanistan: “Does President Biden define Vice President Harris as a progressive Democrat?” Behold this world salad from Jean-Pierre as she avoided giving Harris any ideological label (and then Heinrich’s follow-up) (click “expand”): JEAN-PIERRE: Look, the Vice President has been a critical partner — a critical partner to this President. All you got to do is look at the record and what we have been able to do in the past three and a half years — the Biden-Harris administration has been able to do. You think about the economy, you think about healthcare, and you think about these really important — uh — generation changing legislation that are now laws, obviously. I just talked about beating Big Farmer [sic]. That’s important. That was the Inflation Reduction Act that only Democrats voted for now, Republicans want to repeal. They want to take that away — take that away — taking away lowering costs for the American people. And so — uh — to be clear, lowering costs on — on medical care and — and pharmaceutical drugs and also energy bills — right — that’s two really big parts of the Inflation Reduction Act. The President — the President is not going to be labeling the Vice President. She has her policies that she is — obviously, that he’s in line with that they — that she has put forth in the past week or so. He supports her. Uh — he believes in her leadership, and that’s what I can share with you. HEINRICH: So, we allowing for a contrast with Trump, but not a contrast with other Democrats? Because Senator Bernie Sanders, for instance — JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. HEINRICH: — said that he still views her as a progressive Democrat and said that she’s, in fact, not abandoning her ideals but making a pragmatic play toward the center to win the election and that sends a chill down the spine of some people who might be in the middle or to the center right — JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. HEINRICH: — considering her and when she’s been trying to position herself as — JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. HEINRICH: — a more moderate figure now than she was in 2020. Where — where does she stand exactly? JEAN-PIERRE: So, first of all, the senator is going to speak for himself. That’s for him to speak to. I’m not gonna get into a I agree or disagree with him. What I can tell you is this President believes in her leadership and believes in her bold policy agenda. That is something that the President is in line with her on, right? And we’re talking about strength in the middle class. That’s what we believe her — her bold policy agenda continues to do, and that’s important. You hear the President talking about building a — building an economy from the bottom up but allow and strengthening the middle class. We’re in line. More economic opportunity. The President wants to see that. And we’re thinking — we’re talking about the tax cuts for working people, fighting corporate pricing guz — gouging, lowering costs, having the wealthy pay their fair share. We’re in line. We’re in line with — uh — with what the Vice President is putting forth — her bold policy agenda to make sure that we do not leave people behind. I’m not going to stand here and label the Vice President. The senator has every right to say whatever he wants to say. What I can say is the President agrees with her bold policy agenda and — and her leadership. Fox Business Network’s Edward Lawrence closed things out with the decline in manufacturing jobs: FBN’s @EdwardLawrence: “[T]he Biden-Harris administration has been touting manufacturing jobs for the —” KJP: “Yeah, yeah.” Lawrence: “— for the past year, but the last jobs report showed that manufacturing lost —” KJP: “Yeah.” Lawrence: “— 24,000 jobs, and the trend over the… pic.twitter.com/5cdeKVYIBm — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 9, 2024 To see the relevant transcript from the September 10 briefing (including one from NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell about the White House’s pivot from saying “Biden administration” when talking about itself to “Biden-Harris administration”), click here.

Golden State Warriors All-Star point guard Stephen Curry has announced he’s supporting Kamala Harris. “Endorsing Kamala is important for me, for my family,” he stated in an interview. When asked what issues he cared about the most, Curry gave the typical leftist answer: “Women’s rights.” “We need to be in a position where women have the right to choose what’s best for them,” he regurgitated. “Knowing Kamala and having been around her, I understand she's qualified for this job. She's, I think, representing what it means to be a great leader and being a decent human being in terms of representing our country the right way, so it's an easy choice for me,” he explained. Curry’s answers, according to Jason Whitlock, spit in the face of his alleged “Christian faith.” - YouTube www.youtube.com “Women’s rights and women’s right to choose – that’s obviously abortion,” he says. “I don't think you can be pro-abortion and be a legitimate Christian. … Steph’s doing what’s comfortable for his social life, comfortable as an athlete in San Francisco.” T.J. Moe agrees: “Steph Curry is not a Christian, and everybody should stop pretending so, and we should stop talking about him like he is a Christian.” However, Moe also notices that Curry pointing to “women’s rights” as the policy he cares most about reveals an even bigger issue: We don’t know what Kamala Harris’ policies are. “He didn't know any of her policies because she won't tell us any of her policies,” he criticizes. “We're 60 days out from the election, and she's held one interview.” As for Curry’s assertion that Kamala Harris is “a decent human being,” Moe laughs at the glaring hypocrisy. “Yes, murdering children in the womb is making us innocent people,” he mocks. “Proverbs 6 says there are six things that the Lord's hates; one of them is hands that shed innocent blood.” According to Jason, Curry’s endorsement reveals that he’s “taken the very easy path.” He’s “trying to serve two masters. You want to be rich, you want to be famous? Or do you want to be obedient to God?” he asks. Curry “wants to be rich and famous more than he wants to be obedient to God.” Want more from Jason Whitlock?To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

In a world rapidly becoming overcrowded with live service games that cock their hats at infinity, it’s a surprising breath of fresh air to see a developer announce that the next DLC for a title will be the last one. We’ve known for a while that The Dark Horizon for Remnant 2 will be its final DLC, and now that day is finally nearly here. The launch date for both this slice of content and an accompanying free game mode have been announced, and there isn’t long to wait. Continue reading Remnant 2 gets launch date for final DLC along with new free game mode MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best co-op games, Remnant 2 review, Best action-adventure games

Arrowhead Game Studios is now a decent chunk of the way into its 60-day plan to get its co-op shooter Helldivers 2 back on track. While it soared to dizzying heights early in the year, it’s now in something of a slump, but here’s one small but significant piece of news about its upcoming balancing update that might tempt ex-Helldivers to come out of retirement. Flame weapons are receiving a generous buff, and they may even become better than they were before Helldivers 2’s controversial Escalation of Freedom update. Continue reading Helldivers 2’s upcoming patch includes a fiery flamethrower buff MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Helldivers 2 weapons, Helldivers 2 stratagems, Helldivers 2 system requirements