“Three daughters. Hey, hey, hey, three bullets hey, hey, hey." The post Threatening Rep. Maxine Waters Gets You Prison, Threatening a GOP Congressman is Fine appeared first on Frontpage Mag.

On Monday, the Boston Celtics regained their status as the NBA team with the most championships, winning their 18thtitle with a 106-88 victory over the Dallas Mavericks. The Celtics won the series 4-1, cementing their reputation as the NBA’s best team after having boasted the league’s best record over the regular season. Jayson Tatum led the way with 31 points, 11 assists and 8 rebounds.  Jaylen Brown, who was named the Most Valuable Player in the Finals, scored 20 points, Jrue Holiday had 15 points, and Derrick White added 14. The Celtics outrebounded the Mavericks 51-35. Tatum and Brown have been together on the team since 2017, going as far as the NBA Finals but not winning a title until now. The Celtics led by nine points at the end of the first quarter, then built the lead to 21 points at halftime as Payton Pritchard threw in a three-point shot from beyond halfcourt. The outcome of the game was never in doubt after that. The title came 16 years to the day after the Celtics won their last championship in 2008, when they defeated the Los Angeles Lakers, who have 17 titles, in the Finals. Head coach Joe Mazzulla, 35, became the youngest head coach to win the NBA title since legendary player-coach Bill Russell led the team to its title in 1969 to conclude the most dominant run of titles in sports, as that was the Celtics 11th title in 13 years, with a string of eight consecutive championships between 1959-1966. Los Angeles Lakers Hall of Famer Magic Johnson tweeted, “I hate that the Celtics officially have more championships than us now,” adding, “Celtics GM Brad Stevens trading for Jru Holiday and Kristaps Prozingis was an MVP move that made the Celtics the best team in basketball this year! Adding Holiday made them the perimeter defending team in the league, and adding Prozingis made them the most explosive offensive and best starting 5 in basketball this year! … Joe Mazzulla really improved as a coach this season and had the Celtics prepared for every round of the playoffs, making all the proper adjustments on offense and defense.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu dissolved the country’s War Cabinet on Monday, a  week after his longtime political rival, Benny Gantz, left the wartime unity government. A spokesman for the prime minister told the press that there was “no more need for an extra branch of government.” PM Netanyahu told the security cabinet last night that the war cabinet has been officially disbanded. A PMO official tells me that since the war cabinet was part of Benny Gantz's demand to join the war coalition, it is no longer relevant since he left last week. >> — Lazar Berman (@Lazar_Berman) June 17, 2024 The move comes more than 9 months after Hamas launched an invasion of Israeli territory on October 7th, which killed more than 1,200 people – mostly civilians. More than 240 more were taken hostage by terror group Hamas. More than 100 of those hostages have since been released or recovered, but according to the Israeli government as many as 116 are still in Hamas’s custody – including some who are presumed dead.  Gantz, a former IDF general who served as the country’s defense minister from 2020-2022, has been one of Netanyahu’s chief electoral opponents for the better part of a decade, but his party joined Netanyahu’s coalition in a display of national solidarity after the October 7th attack.  However, he and his allies have clashed with other members of Netanyahu’s government on how to best prosecute the war in ongoing war in Gaza – disputes over hostage negotiations, a potential ceasefire, the future of a post-war Gaza and the influence of more hardline elements of Netanyahu’s multi-party coalition had been lingering sources of tension months before the official split. He and Gadi Eisenkot, a former IDF Chief-of-Staff and a member of Gantz’s National Unity Party, left the cabinet on June 9. Even after the defection of the National Unity Party, Netanyahu’s government retains a four-seat majority in the Knesset – the Israeli Parliament – although the loss of support limits his room to maneuver between the competing interests of his coalition which currently contains members from six parties.   Gantz is seen by many as the man most likely to replace Netanayhu as prime minister – although recent polls suggest that his party’s electoral edge is narrowing – and even met with top U.S. officials in March to discuss humanitarian efforts in Gaza and a potential end to the war. That visit was not authorized by the Israeli government and reportedly drew a harsh rebuke from Netanyahu, who, according to the Associated Press, told Gantz that Israel has “just one prime minister.” The Israeli government has been under considerable pressure, both domestic and international, since the war began. Before the war began, Israel was sharply divided over judicial reforms championed by Netanyahu – support for his government declined considerably and thousands of left-wing activists took to the streets of Israel to protest the decision throughout much of 2023. Those protests were essentially put on pause after the start of the war, but the dissolution of the war cabinet could signal an end to the political ceasefire and a renewal of mass anti-government demonstrations. On Netanyahu’s right flank, elements of his coalition have argued that the current government has not been aggressive enough, and have castigated Israel’s humanitarian pauses and provision of aid to Gaza as “delusional.” “The manner in which the humanitarian effort in the Gaza Strip is being managed, in the framework of which aid goes largely to Hamas and helps it to retain civilian control of the Strip in direct contradiction to the goals of the war, has been bad throughout the last few months,” Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said. “This is one of the reasons for the continuation of the war.” National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who repeatedly clashed with Gantz and has long sought more influence over military matters, has already called for an escalation of the war effort in the north.  Hezbollah, an Iranian proxy group that controls much of southern Lebanon and has been intermittently firing missiles, and other artillery into northern Israel in support of Gaza. “Israel is in an unacceptable situation, in which a big part of the country has been deserted,” Brigadier. General Efraim Sneh told the Washington Post. “Israel’s forces are stretched thin between Gaza and the Lebanese border.” “Hundreds of rockets cannot be answered with surgical actions,” Ben-Gvir said last Wednesday, claiming that Netanyahi was “out of excuses” for avoiding all out war after Hezbollah fired 215 missiles into Israel. “You are the prime minister, and you cannot even hide behind Gantz and Eisenkot anymore.” Smotrich and Ben-Gvir were part of the broader security cabinet but had been excluded from the higher level War Cabinet, to their consternation. Gantz was reportedly irritated by the influence they did have over policy and that was one of the major fissure points between him and Netanyahu. Going forward both men are likely to have more say in a smaller, more right-wing governing bloc.   Photo by Gallup While a majority of Americans continue to support Israel, a growing number of Democrats, particularly younger Democrats, are more sympathetic to the Palestinian side, with some college protesters openly lionizing Hamas and celebrating the death of Israeli civilians. The war has become a major wedge issue on the American Left and President Biden has attempted to walk a political tightrope of supporting Israel while simultaneously constraining their war effort.  Biden has openly voiced opposition to Israeli operations in Rafah, a city in southern Gaza where more than a million refugees have fled since the war began, and Hamas’ last major stronghold. In March the president threatened to withhold military aid to Israel and he has continually pressured them to negotiate a ceasefire with Hamas’ leadership, even prematurely announcing a deal. Other countries and international organizations have been even less supportive – last month Spain, Ireland and Norway officially recognized the existence of a Palestinian state, while the International Criminal Court (which has no jurisdiction in Israel or the United States) issued arrest warrants for Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. “I hope [Ireland’s recognition of their state] sends the Palestinian people a message of hope that — in this their darkest hour — Ireland stands with them,” Irish Prime Minister Simon Harris said to members of Ireland’s parliament. “It is no longer enough just to condemn. It is no longer enough just to be repulsed. We must be on the right side of history.” These decisions came shortly after the United Nations reduced its estimate of civilian casualties by nearly 50%. Previous data had been collected by the Gaza Health Ministry, which is controlled by Hamas and was accused of grossly inflating the death toll. By most historical standards, the civilian:combatant death ratio in Gaza is unusually low (between 2:1 and 1:1) despite the fact that Hamas deliberately hides its forces behind civilians. On Monday the Israeli military told ABC that they currently control about 60% of Rafah, and that the main portion of their military operation there should wrap up within “a few weeks.” “We are there to dismantle the military framework of the [Hamas’] Rafah Brigade,”  Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, a spokesperson for the IDF, told the outlet. “We are weeks now just from achieving this goal.”

When Inside Out released in 2015, it represented the best of Pixar: gorgeous animation, brilliant original storytelling, and layers of meaning for kids and adults alike. It was the last truly groundbreaking movie in the “peak Pixar” era. Though there are a few exceptions, much of Pixar’s output since 2015 has been underwhelming at best or annoyingly agenda-driven at worst. Recent box-office flops like Elemental launched much discussion about how Pixar lost its way. Inside Out 2 may be a herald of Pixar’s creative recovery. It nearly matches the magic of its predecessor. For Gen Z and Alpha audiences (and their parents)—those navigating today’s “anxious generation” world with a hyperattuned (maybe overattuned) emotional vocabulary—Inside Out 2 is unsurprisingly resonant. Yet the zeitgeist-capturing appeal of the film is also my biggest caution about it. It’s a movie of our emotionally fluent moment. But this is the same moment in which record numbers of people are mentally unwell. Our emotional fluency isn’t making us happier. In a therapeutic culture plagued by the problems of “too in your head” anxiety and emotional overprocessing, I worry a franchise like Inside Out—for all its artistic merits—may end up drawing kids deeper into themselves when what they need is precisely the opposite. Teen Drama Inside the Brain Most of Inside Out 2’s action takes place inside the developing brain of Riley (voiced by Kensington Tallman), who’s now a 13-year-old hockey player about to enter high school. Puberty has brought new complexity to her inner world. The sequel introduces an array of new emotion characters, chiefly Anxiety (Maya Hawke) but also Envy, Embarrassment, and Ennui, with some brief appearances from Nostalgia. The new “teen emotions” fight with Riley’s original, simpler emotions (Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger, Disgust), and the plot of the film essentially explores the changing balance (or imbalance) of adolescent emotional life. I worry a franchise like Inside Out may end up drawing kids deeper into themselves when what they need is precisely the opposite. The antics of the emotion characters inside Riley’s head are wild and whimsical, and the film’s screenwriters have a field day rendering emotional concepts as fantasy-world geography. You can only smile when the emotion characters take a trip down a rapidly flowing “stream of consciousness,” encounter a gaping “sar-chasm,” and dodge hail-like lightbulbs during a “brain storm.” I especially enjoyed a scene in which the emotions visit the “vault” where Riley’s “dark secrets” are locked up. The creative animation styles and jokes in this sequence alone are worth the price of admission. Reprising the voice of protagonist emotion “Joy,” Amy Poehler shines and—for me—delivers the film’s most heart-tugging moments. When Joy laments her reduced role in Riley’s adolescent life (“Maybe this is what happens when you grow up—you feel less joy”) and then reunites with her in a climactic, cathartic moment, I got emotional. It’s a truism of life that the pure joy of childhood dissipates as we age and encounter more worries, stress, and pain. But we never fully grow out of our need for joy. Inside Out 2 captures this well. Are We Too Enchanted with Our Inner World? As I watched (and largely enjoyed) the film, it struck me that the Inside Out franchise makes vivid what’s assumed in our modern age of authenticity. We’re enchanted less by the world outside our heads and more by the “self” we conjure from the authentically messy menagerie within. In the Inside Out movies, “real life” outside the characters’ heads is less interesting than what’s going on inside. Riley’s inner world is a kaleidoscope of color and a carnival of amusements. Her outer world is mundane by comparison. I get that the movie is trying to specifically explore human interiority, and it does a great job of enchanting us to the wonders within. This is something Christians can celebrate, believing as we do that we’re fearfully and wonderfully made by an intentional designer who “created [our] inmost being” (Ps. 139:13–14, NIV). Every new brain-science discovery—and there are still so many mysteries to uncover—is an opportunity to praise our magnificent Creator. Humans are wonderfully made physically, emotionally, and spiritually. Inside Out 2 may not give credit to a transcendent Creator, yet it can’t help but bear witness to the miraculous wonders of human consciousness. Still, there’s a point when wonder about our inner life goes beyond grateful awe and approaches unhealthy obsession. Is it possible we’re living in an era that’s too aware of the emotional drama inside the self, too prone to jump to therapeutic “processing,” and generally too preoccupied with the self? Abigail Shrier thinks so. Her recently released Bad Therapy presents a compelling case that a major cause of the deteriorating mental health among rising generations is that they talk so much about their mental health. Orienting our thoughts inordinately on our emotions makes us, unsurprisingly, more emotionally burdened. Get Outside Your Head Watching Inside Out 2, I felt compassion for Riley as a proxy for real people I know whose volatile emotional worlds loom dangerously large in their sense of identity and overarching purpose. Yet this is the fruit of contemporary expressive individualism, which has beckoned us to define ourselves on our own terms, favoring internal whims and deeply felt desires over external influences, norms, and expectations. Inside Out 2 may not give credit to a transcendent Creator, yet it can’t help but bear witness to the miraculous wonders of human consciousness. Perhaps the most troubling motif in Inside Out 2 is how it conceives the “sense of self” as an amalgamation of entirely self-referential beliefs. Riley’s beliefs about herself (“I’m a winner,” “I’m kind,” “I’m scared sometimes,” “I need help,” “I’m a good person,” and so on) gradually coalesce as threads wound together into her sense of self. But in the movie, it’s only “I” statements that form these belief threads. Is this adequate? Shouldn’t our sense of self also be formed by what those closest to us (namely our parents, spouses, or close friends) can see that we can’t? Shouldn’t it include beliefs about realities and truths that are independent of us? Isn’t the concrete, bigger world outside our head a more reliable matrix of meaning for our identity than the iffy emotional meanderings within? To have a fuller, richer, more satisfying sense of who we are, we need to get out of our heads. Matthew B. Crawford makes this argument in his excellent book The World Beyond Your Head, which makes the case that we know ourselves not primarily through self-conception but through communal situatedness, not primarily by internal reflection but by external reality. He writes, We live in a world that has already been named by our predecessors, and was saturated with meaning before we arrived. . . . Our private experiences are founded on—would not be intelligible without—the prior disclosure of a shared world. This is the world we encounter first, as babies locked in joint attention with a caregiver. It follows that our experiences are not simply “our own.” What’s inside us is certainly interesting, sometimes inspiring, and often helpful. But so much of what makes us who we are—and almost everything that makes us better versions of ourselves—comes from outside us. Outside In In Psalm 139, David is in awe not that he knows himself but that God knows him. He says “How precious to me are your thoughts, O God!” (v. 17), not “How precious to me are my thoughts.” David is deeply honest about his emotions throughout the Psalms, yet his sense of self is found not in those emotive ups and downs but in the steadiness and sovereignty of the God who formed us and knows our frame. In an age of amorphous self-made identity, “God made me and knows me” is a far firmer foundation on which to build the self. To be sure, emotional awareness and self-knowledge are part of a healthy identity. But so are convictions, beliefs, and worship oriented away from the self and accountable to truths far bigger than us. In the end, a healthy sense of self is formed not only from the inside out but also—and arguably more powerfully—from the outside in.

At 36 years old, as a mom of four, I accepted my first full-time job. I’ve had plenty of part-time jobs in different settings, including several positions where I worked from home. I was primarily a stay-at-home mom for 12 years, yet even during some of those years I worked a few hours a week for a paycheck. But when I took a job that consumed much of my time each week, I had to start asking new questions about what it means to work and to be a woman in the workplace. Chelsea Patterson Sobolik’s Called to Cultivate: A Gospel Vision for Women and Work explores what it means to be a female employee in our modern age. Many books are available about work in general, but few address women’s specific questions. And fewer address the questions of women broadly, not just moms of little children. While it’s important to ask questions about maternity leave and toddler childcare, that’s not what I’ve needed. This book helped me to think through my changing vocations. Variable Vocations Some people describe calling as if it’s a one-time event, a lifelong mission given directly by God. This seems inaccurate in a world where most of us won’t work at one company for an entire career. We need a different approach. Sobolik, director of government affairs for World Relief, writes, “Instead of asking, ‘What is my calling?’ a better question to ask yourself is, ‘What is my current assignment?’” (59). Throughout our lives, we’ll have different vocations; each one is a distinct assignment. In some years, that may be as a student; in others, it may be as a stay-at-home mom or a professional with career aspirations. And it might not happen in this order. These jumps to different assignments don’t detract from our greatest calling: to love God and make him known. This approach gives so much freedom to women. Many women move in and out of the workforce multiple times, which can lead to a sense of confusion about our vocation. For example, the strongest sense of calling I’ve ever felt was to the unreached peoples of India. I was certain my family would live in India. Then we had a child with significant food allergies that made overseas living unmanageable. I was disappointed my circumstances challenged the calling I’d been sure of. If my calling was one job I should do for the rest of my life, then twists and turns in my career could leave a sense of failure. But if I see my life as a series of vocational assignments that God can and will change, then that vision offers freedom. If I see my life as a series of vocational assignments that God can and will change, then that vision offers freedom. Sobolik calls readers to focus on faithfulness rather than on how we can’t fulfill our calling when we change roles. She argues, “Success, in God’s eyes, is faithfully following Him wherever He calls. This frees us up from feeling like the weight of the world is on our shoulders” (60). Women need a vision of following God faithfully as our assignment changes. Whether we change jobs, leave the workforce for a time, or enter back into it, our call is to love God and neighbor in whatever assignment he gives. Dealing with Discrimination Sometimes loving our neighbor means responding to injustice. Sobolik tackles hard questions about misogyny, which seem unavoidable in a book about work for women. When she was a Capitol Hill staffer, Sobolik lost her job because her boss resigned due to sexual misconduct allegations. She writes, “I had to pay the price of someone else misusing their power and authority in the workforce” (103–4). Many women, however, face direct discrimination based on their sex or race. Sobolik shares the stories of real women who’ve faced discrimination at work. Their experiences of pain and loss are tragic; they aren’t just statistics. Unjust discrimination based on sex is antithetical to our essential equality in God’s eyes. Discriminatory or abusive behavior has no place with people who profess the gospel. Sobolik observes, “Throughout Jesus’ ministry, He interacts with women, not based on their gender, but based on their common humanity” (106). Jesus values the humanity of the people he interacts with, and so should we. Sobolik argues, “Our faith should compel us to speak up on behalf of persecuted and vulnerable people” (111). She provides practical guidance for approaching these hard conversations with human resources departments and other groups designed to help organizations do what’s right. Balanced Approach Sobolik offers a balanced introduction to the doctrine of vocation suitable for every believer. Yet it zooms in on gender-specific workplace issues. For example, she explores topics like salary negotiation—an area in which, statistically speaking, women struggle. Within her narrowed audience, Sobolik gives additional guidance for women in diverse seasons of life, which she doesn’t limit to motherhood seasons. Unjust discrimination based on sex is antithetical to our essential equality in God’s eyes. Most significantly, she holds out gracious hope for working women who feel there isn’t enough time for everything. She reminds us that Christians “don’t have to cram as much possible into our lives on earth, because our stories will continue” (140). This is exactly the message many women with multiple vocations need to hear. Called to Cultivate encouraged me to think about my vocations as assignments from the Lord. Whatever season of life I’m in currently, this is where the Lord has me. He may change my assignment, but my calling is to be faithful where I am. This book reminded me of important questions to ask myself and my employer. It’s a great resource for women as we navigate the complexities of jobs, families, and the whole Christian life.

Nestled in southwestern Utah, Zion National Park is a remarkable natural marvel with a rich history. Once known as Mukuntuweap by indigenous peoples, the area was renamed Zion by Mormon pioneers in the late 1800s, signifying its dual role as a sanctuary and refuge. Designated as Mukuntuweap National Monument in 1909 by President Taft, this […] The post 10 Puzzling Disappearances at Zion National Park appeared first on Listverse.

After seven statewide wins in the past two years and not a single loss, pro-abortion activists are advancing constitutional amendments in another 13 states this year to block elected representatives from regulating abortion in any way. The pro-abortion activists are deploying the same winning strategy as last cycle: highlighting medical professionals who cast abortion as essential health care. But for thousands of doctors like me, the facts say something different. As a board-certified OB/GYN, I am guided by evidence-based medicine and a commitment never to use death as a therapy for my patients. Given the overwhelming scientific consensus that life begins at fertilization, I am tasked with the care of not one but two patients when I see a pregnant woman at the hospital. Intentionally ending the life of my fetal patient would violate my ethical responsibility, not just to the child but to my maternal patient by subjecting her to an elective procedure with potentially grave health risks. Proponents of the constitutional amendments—those approved for ballots in Florida and Maryland and those advancing in at least 10 other states—spread fear that women will die because of not being able to receive lifesaving care, ignoring the fact that even the most restrictive state laws already provide exceptions in such cases. Pro-abortion activists use this as a pretense to ban abortion regulations of any type, even those supported by a vast majority of the public, such as requiring abortion facilities to maintain the same health and hygiene standards as other medical facilities. Pro-life physicians are preparing to counter the misleading medicalization of induced abortion. We highlight our own experiences treating patients using safer alternatives, such as the time I sat on a patient’s bed discussing with her the need to induce labor very early in pregnancy, even though we knew the baby would not survive. As pro-life physicians, we’re also highlighting how often we’ve been able to care for women in difficult situations in ways that respected not only their lives, but the lives of their babies as well. The result: healthy mom and healthy child.  This is consistent with how more than 90% of OB/GYNs in America practice. The physicians in our coalition will share the potential harms of induced abortion and the importance of ensuring that patients understand and consent to the risks. The chance of harm increases the later in a pregnancy the abortion occurs. Importantly, our physicians will attest to the fact that increased restrictions on abortions correlate with improved maternal mortality. The state of South Dakota, for example, has seen death rates for mothers decrease since passing a law to prevent all abortions except to save the mother’s life. Abortion advocates falsely appeal to the masses by claiming that proposed constitutional amendments would ban restrictions on abortion only up to the point of fetal viability. They conceal the fact that the measures also protect abortions up to the baby’s due date as long as a health care professional attests that it is in the health interests of the patient—which includes, importantly, the patient’s mental health. This mental health carve-out is a favorite of pro-abortion advocates because it effectively provides a blank check for unlimited abortions. That’s why we’ll inform voters that abortion takes a devastating toll on mental and emotional health, including a greatly increased risk of suicide and alcohol and drug abuse. Getting these messages out isn’t easy. Doctors who speak out in favor of life do so at great personal and professional risk, as much of the medical establishment is controlled by pro-abortion ideology. Two years ago, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology notified physicians that they could lose board certification if they spread “misinformation” about “essential reproductive health care”—claiming the right for itself to determine what constitutes “misinformation.” Nonetheless, thousands of physicians are joining our effort. The organization I lead, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, or AAPLOG, is launching a new 501(c)4 nonprofit this week to enable us to organize these political fights. We’re learning our lessons from 2022 and 2023. We saw the so-called Ohio Physicians for Reproductive Health run scaled-up advertisements via Facebook ahead of pro-abortion activists’ victory last November. We’re countering similar efforts this year with our own statewide physician coalitions in Florida, South Dakota, and Arizona, which we’re arming with organizing muscle, central messaging, media training, and support via digital and media campaigns. For the pro-life movement, the medicalization of these ballot measures has been our Achilles heel. Through fearmongering, our opponents have convinced voters that abortion is a necessary and harmless medical procedure. They have muscled through constitutional amendments that would erase prior state legislative wins and block duly elected representatives from passing sensible abortion protections. We are prepared to counter fear with facts this year, leveraging the expertise of thousands of physicians who understand the medical perils of unregulated induced abortion. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Challenging Cherished Narratives: Restrictions on Abortions Correlate With Fewer Deaths for Mothers appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Sex toys and m*sturbation and groping, oh my! A New York superintendent and her assistant were caught on camera admitting they knew a seventh grade teacher was exposing students to shockingly graphic…

[Order Daniel Greenfield’s new book, Domestic Enemies: HERE.] [Make sure to attend An Evening With Frontpage Editor Jamie Glazov in Los Angeles at the Luxe Hotel on Tuesday, June 18, 2024: Register…