DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., demanded in a letter Thursday that corporate media networks answer for “biased” coverage of the 2024 presidential election. The North Dakota Republican’s letter, obtained exclusively by the Daily Caller News Foundation, is addressed to top network executives at CBS, Disney Entertainment, NBCUniversal, and Fox Television Stations Group. (Disney Entertainment owns ABC and ABC News.) In the letter, Cramer called out the networks for biased coverage of President-elect Donald Trump. “Eight years ago, I sent a letter to your predecessors on behalf of concerned citizens nationwide, addressing the blatant media bias observed during the 2016 presidential election,” Cramer wrote. “To date, none of your perspective networks have responded. Following the 2024 presidential election, I find myself compelled to write once more—this time with even greater urgency.” Letter Addressing Media Bias Post-2024 Election There have been various examples of apparent media bias in the past few years, such as when ABC News journalists Linsey Davis and David Muir faced criticism after they moderated the network’s Sept. 10 presidential debate between Trump and Harris, as many viewers said they thought it was unfairly rigged against Trump. “Unfortunately, the concerns expressed in my 2016 letter have not only gone unaddressed but have worsened,” Cramer added. “Public confidence in your national news operations and programming has plummeted to unprecedented levels. Last month, a Gallup survey revealed the public’s trust in mass media has hit an all-time low, with only 31% of Americans expressing confidence in media integrity, and a mere 12% of Republicans maintaining any trust in the fairness of national news coverage.” Americans’ trust in the mass media was at a record low ahead of the election, according to a Gallup survey published Oct. 14. Around 36% of those surveyed said that they have “no trust at all” in the mass media, while 31% expressed a “great deal” or “fair amount” of confidence and 33% expressed “not very much” confidence. Cramer’s letter demands answers from the executives regarding how they would address concerns of partisan bias at their networks; it also asks about what hiring practices the networks had in place to promote fair journalism. Media coverage of the 2024 presidential election by national broadcast networks was the “most lopsided in history,” according to an Oct. 28 report published by Media Research Center’s NewsBusters. Cramer cited the report in his letter, mentioning how in July, several major networks including ABC, CBS, and NBC gave Vice President Kamala Harris 78% positive coverage, compared to Trump’s 85% negative coverage. “The editorial slant of your national news programming not only betrays the trust of Americans, but also undermines the exceptional work of local affiliates,” Cramer wrote. “These affiliates, especially those serving rural communities, work tirelessly to provide fair and valuable reporting, but their credibility is eroded by association with biased national coverage.” The networks didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post Sen. Kevin Cramer Demands Answers From Corporate Media Networks Over ‘Biased’ Election Coverage appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Here’s another way to look at why Republicans swept the 2024 elections: It’s the fault, only partly, of course, of the gerontocracy of the Democratic Party. Going back through history, it’s hard to find a time when a party’s leadership was so far along in years. The founder presidents retired in their mid-60s. Andrew Jackson retired at 69, Abraham Lincoln was murdered at 56, and Ulysses S. Grant retired at 54. Theodore Roosevelt died at age 60, Franklin Roosevelt at 63. Quite a contrast with President Joe Biden, older when he was inaugurated than Ronald Reagan was on his last Air Force One flight home to California. Biden, born in 1942, was installed as the Democratic nominee in 2020 by then-House Majority Whip James Clyburn (1940) and was pushed out of the 2024 nomination by the still very active former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (1940). So far as has been reported, neither Clyburn nor Pelosi tried back in 2022 or 2023 to persuade Biden not to run for reelection, though both must have had some awareness that aging was diminishing his powers. It’s not an easy thing to do: A century ago, Chief Justice William Howard Taft said his hardest duty was to tell the 80-year-old Justice Joseph McKenna he must retire. Also not stepping in were the similarly aged near-majority of senators from the 19 states counted as safe Democratic in this election: Richard Blumenthal (1946), Ben Cardin (1943), Tom Carper (1947), Richard Durbin (1944), Mazie Hirono (1947), Angus King (1944), Edward Markey (1946), Patty Murray (1950), Jack Reed (1949), Bernie Sanders (1941), Charles Schumer (1950), Jeanne Shaheen (1947), Elizabeth Warren (1949), Peter Welch (1947), and Ron Wyden (1949). (Cardin and Carper did not seek reelection this year.) All seem to be in fine physical and mental condition, so far as I know, but each must be aware of the decline of many of their contemporaries. As one of the latter (born in 1944), I’m aware of how many of them, as well as Biden, have political roots in the years dominated by Vietnam and Watergate. From Vietnam, they took the lesson that America must extract itself from seemingly unwinnable military commitments. You can see that impulse in Biden, who opposed military aid to the flailing South Vietnamese in 1975 and who pressed for what appears to have been an overhasty withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. It’s also visible in the records of these and many other Democrats who opposed, with equal vehemence, the Gulf War resolution in 1991 and the Iraq War resolution in 2002, though the former is now regarded as uncontroversial. From Watergate, they retained the idea of driving a Republican president out of office for his misdeeds. The failure of the pursuit of Reagan over Iran-Contra in 1987-88 did not prevent them from pursuing against President-elect Donald Trump the Russia collusion hoax first hatched by the unsuccessful campaign of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (1947). These same senators harshly and, in my view, justifiably criticized Trump for failing to prevent the Jan. 6 assaults on the Capitol, and for casting a pall on the legitimate transfer of power. But they themselves collaborated in or passively enjoyed the anticipated political benefits of undermining the legitimacy of the transfer of power from former President Barack Obama (1961) to Trump, on grounds which turned out, predictably in my view, to be utterly baseless. They were pleased as well to bless, or at least say not a word against, the kangaroo court prosecutions of Trump in Manhattan and Atlanta, and the documents possession charge, which was brought against him. But not against Biden for the same offense or against Hillary Clinton for creating an email system far more penetrable by the nation’s enemies than Trump’s Mar-a-Lago or Biden’s Delaware garage. Trump’s election by a clear plurality is evidence that most American voters regard this Democratic lawfare as illegitimate and unworthy of respect. Some of the blame for Democrats’ across-the-board defeat this year is that the Democratic gerontocracy has forgotten some of its own successes over the years. Plainly, one reason that younger Hispanics and blacks switched to Trump is Democratic misgovernance of central cities and whole states, misgovernance that has even caused California, with its great climate and beauty, to lose population. You have to really misgovern to get people to flee California. Forgotten now by Democrats, it seems, were the crimefighting and welfare-reform initiatives of the 1990s, initiated by Republicans such as Rudy Giuliani in New York and Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin but imitated and adapted by many Democrats across the country, not least former President Bill Clinton (1946). Instead, the Democratic gerontocracy bowed down to demands to defund the police and denounce America as an inherently racist nation. Voters had something to say about this last week. The other reforms the Democratic gerontocracy forgot were the changes in the presidential nominating system, which began just as many of their political careers. I sat in the audience at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago and checked down the list on the proposal for a commission to reform the delegate selection rules. It was the one roll call the Lyndon B. Johnson convention managers lost, as New York liberals and Michigan United Auto Workers loyalists cast decisive yeas. The delegate selection process has been criticized and tinkered with, but it replaced a system that was only a husk, dominated by party leaders with no real accountability to the wider electorate. At least in versions of the new system, Democratic and Republican voters have had a chance to assess competing candidates and make their choices. Until recently, that is. The Democratic gerontocracy has allowed the bypassing of the system, as Obama discouraged Biden and effectively installed Hillary Clinton as the nominee in 2016, and as Clyburn effectively ended the process by endorsing Biden in the black-majority primary in his home state of South Carolina. Then, after this year’s June 27 presidential debate, we saw Pelosi maneuver Biden out of the race on July 21, with Biden three hours later endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris, Pelosi’s fellow San Franciscan, whose political career was launched by the still-vibrant Willie Brown (1934). Did Obama collude with Clyburn in 2020 to install Biden, or with Pelosi in 2024 to oust him? That’s unclear, but Obama is the only president since Woodrow Wilson to stay on in Washington after his term, in a mansion 2.4 miles from the White House. How much influence he has been wielding is a subject only Tablet’s David Samuels, in his interview with historian David Garrow, has explored, but perhaps the journalists who wrote hundreds of thousands of words about the nonexistent Russia collusion hoax might want to take a stab at it. It’s unlikely the Democratic gerontocracy will be able to block the voters from deciding the party’s presidential nomination in 2028—the first one in 20 years. It’s unfortunate, however, that neither party has developed an alternative to having vice presidential nominees chosen by a single person. Often in the past half-century, both parties have made good choices. But it’s increasingly hard to say that of Obama’s choice of Biden in 2008, Biden’s choice of Harris in 2020, and Harris’ choice of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz in 2024. The Republican gerontocrat Trump, disruptive as he may be, did better in picking then-Indiana Gov. Mike Pence in 2016 and Ohio Sen. JD Vance in 2024. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post The Democratic Gerontocracy Forgets the Lessons of Its Youth and Maturity appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The United States military, charged with defending the nation, is instead using defense research and development dollars to learn how to compost. According to the latest U.S. Army Budget Proposal, $3 million has been allocated this year for what has euphemistically been labelled “Installation Composting for Land Resilience.” This misguided project is both a waste of taxpayer dollars, and a distraction from the military’s core task of providing combat capability to defend American security interests. Unfortunately, military research and development accounts are rife with this sort of science project with no military benefit. This project is part of a broader $14 million initiative spread over the next five years which falls under the Army’s Net Zero program. The Net Zero strategy aims to reduce the Army’s environmental impact by focusing specifically on energy, water, and waste management. Sounds great, right? Wrong. It points to a deeply concerning shift in the military’s focus. The $3 million dedicated to compost research is explicitly described as funding for “demonstration of composting operations” and “climate change guidance for Integrated Solid Waste Management.”  How many studies must be done to understand composting, something which has been around for centuries? The U.S. Army has been consistently “researching” such matters and spending $14 million more over the next five years is unlikely to produce different results.  On top of that, the redundancy of this research initiative is astounding. Not only has the U.S. Department of Agriculture already invested $11.5 million in composting and waste reduction projects across the states, but the Environmental Protection Agency has dedicated billions to the research of climate resilience. The Army is essentially duplicating an effort already undertaken by a federal agency specifically tasked with agricultural or environmental concerns.  It doesn’t stop there. A similar study was conducted by the Army in 2013 and 2014 in which profound conclusions were drawn such as that composting is the “most direct means of addressing all waste components.”   The Army justifies such research expenditures by pointing to a future reduction in costs associated with solid waste disposal, but at least some cost reductions should have been achievable base wide in 2015 after the first study with guidance for composting operations went public. Composting has been an inherent aspect of military installations for decades since the DOD requires each base to develop an integrated solid waste management plan. That’s been the case since at least 2008. That’s not to say the military should ignore environmental concerns completely or that composting is bad. Composting is great. But such considerations should simply be integrated into existing operations, not a cycle of standalone multimillion-dollar initiatives that risk compromising the Army’s primary purpose.  The issue isn’t just the three million wasted taxpayer dollars, or even $14 million if you view the project in its entirety, it’s the precedent it sets. Will we see funds for producing our already depleted missiles diverted to trace the carbon footprint left by firing such weapons?  Thus, the broader issue at hand extends well beyond an incessant $14 million escapade into supposed composting research. The Net Zero Program, of which composting research is but a small part, demonstrates a significant shift in military priorities. Another central goal of the program is to decrease Army greenhouse gas emissions 50% by 2030 and reach net zero emissions by 2050. In fact, Defense Secretary Loyd Austin remarked back in 2021 that the department would “immediately take appropriate policy actions to prioritize climate change considerations in” military operations. These ambitious goals are unrealistic on a large scale and extremely detrimental to national security.   While the U.S. prioritizes reaching net zero emissions, adversaries like China continue to expand their military capabilities without such aggressive self-imposed constraints. The Army’s priority should remain focused on effective defense and readiness; defense dollars spent elsewhere wastes valuable resources on redundant, non-essential, feel-good initiatives that present minimal military benefit. At this point, regardless of whether or not the military has grasped composting fundamentals, the continued investment in projects and climate change policies under the Net Zero program diverts critical funds from military readiness. As America faces an increasingly unstable global security landscape it is critical the military’s core mission of being combat capable is the priority. No matter how climate-resilient the U.S. is, our advanced waste management systems or lack of emissions will most likely not provide an adequate deterrent to our adversaries. The post The Army Is Wasting R&D Dollars on Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Garden maintenance is necessary in all seasons, especially in the summer. As temperatures continue to rise, our survival gardens need extra care. This summer, some states are experiencing record highs, therefore, our summer gardening tips deserve proper consideration! Like humans, plants need food, water, and protection against disease to survive and thrive. Let’s give them a fighting chance in one of the hottest summers in recent years. In this article, I’ll go over these summer gardening tips: Feeding your plants Proper watering for your plants Protecting your plants against pests and disease Weed control Also, I’ll cover vegetables you can plant in the summer! Let’s get started! Summer Gardening Tips: Survival Garden Feeding Your Plants Even if you added compost at the time of planting, keeping your plants fed throughout the summer season is important as plants produce more when they’re well fed. About mid-summer, add a very thin layer of compost throughout the soil about 1 inch away from the plant making sure not to disturb the root system. Adding a layer of mulch on top of the compost will help keep the soil moist which will help keep those necessary nutrients provided by the compost in place. You should not have to compost more than once throughout the summer months. If you use fertilizer, never add more than is directed as it can burn the plant’s root system. Also, avoid adding it to any plant in extreme heat or drought as this can put stress on your plants, which can make them more susceptible to things like plant disease. Proper Watering For Your Plants During the summer months, vegetable gardens require about 2 inches of water a week to stay hydrated. It is important to know that the amount of water you give them is just as important as how you water them. Here are some great tips for watering your survival garden throughout the summer season: Make sure the water is reaching the plants root system and not just sitting on top of the soil. Also, leaves that are wet continuously is an invitation for plant disease to set in. As I said before, add mulch to your survival garden! In the case of watering, adding 2-3 inches of mulch to your garden beds will help keep the root systems at a steady cool temperature, conserves water, and helps to prevent weeds. Ground pine bark, wheat straw, and pine straw make great mulch for your survival garden. If you are growing your vegetables in containers, they will require daily water. Containers tend to dry out much faster than garden beds. Consider a soaker hose or irrigation system as these are the best options for watering your garden beds as they allow just the right amount of water to reach the roots. Protecting Your Plants Against Pests And Disease The summer months are when your plants are most susceptible to pests and disease! Follow these steps to help protect your survival garden against plant disease: First and foremost, proper sunlight, feeding, and watering all play a role when it comes to keeping your plants disease free! Keep garden beds free of debris as debris can carry disease organisms. Keep your garden tools clean. Clean them after every use. Wash your gardening gloves as often as you can. To help control pests this summer, look out for damage on each plant often. Catching pests early is key to getting rid of them quickly. Check out my article, 4 Organic DIY Insect Sprays For Your Survival Garden, for all natural solutions for pest control. Weed Control Controlling weeds in your survival garden can seem like an impossible task at times, especially in the summer! Applying mulch, cultivating, and using weed mats all help tremendously but, will not guarantee a weed free garden. If you are in search of all natural solutions to killing weeds, check out these articles: 6 Benefits Of Using Vinegar In Your Survival Garden 8 Baking Soda Uses For Your Survival Garden To Try 6 Secret Survival Uses For Hydrogen Peroxide You Didn’t Know! Vegetables You Can Plant In The Summer If you are looking for a few more vegetables to add to your survival garden but, aren’t sure which ones will do well being planted this time of year, consider these vegetables. Beans Zucchini Celery Squash Peppers Corn If you would like to know which plants would make great companion plants to these vegetables, check out my article Companion Plants To Benefit Your Survival Garden. Do you have summer gardening tips to share? Share with us in the comment section below. Check out these other great articles on survival gardening: Survival Gardening – How To Grow Lettuce Indoors Survival Gardening Hacks To Achieve The Perfect Tomato Plant Composting For Beginners | The Building Blocks To A Better Harvest  

Mike Tyson, Existentialist

Vandals Target Home of University of Washington President

While President-elect Donald Trump has spent the last few days publicizing his provocative Cabinet nominations, newly elected Senate GOP leader John Thune said that "all the options" are on the table for their confirmation process. Trump's Cabinet nominations have sparked a slew of controversies. Most notably, Trump nominated former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for the Department of Health and Human Services as well as Republican former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida for attorney general. "We're gonna work with him to see that he gets his team installed as quickly as possible so he can implement his agenda," Thune said in a Fox News interview Thursday. 'But we also are not going to allow the Democrats to obstruct or block President Trump and the will of the American people,' Thune said."All these nominees are, it's a, you know, advise and consent," Thune continued. "That's the Senate's constitutional role when it comes to confirmation of nominations to the executive branch of government, and we take that role seriously."Over the weekend, Trump demanded that the three Senate GOP hopefuls publicly support recess appointments. With recess appointments, the incoming Trump administration would be able to appoint nominees to federal positions without the Senate's approval.Otherwise, all nominations would need to be approved by the Senate with a simple majority. Since Republicans will hold 53 seats, and with Vice President-elect JD Vance working as a tiebreaker, each candidate will be able to lose only three Republican votes and still be confirmed. "But we also are not going to allow the Democrats to obstruct or block President Trump and the will of the American people," Thune said. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Veteran "Saturday Night Live" cast member Kenan Thompson said actors and comedians no longer have the freedom to write edgy material, and those who do are "suppressed."Thompson, who has starred in movies like "Good Burger" and "D2: The Mighty Ducks," said that comedians sometimes struggle to align their comedy to public "sensibilities," especially when they are used to speaking a certain way in their private lives.The 46-year-old noted that while some comedians can emerge out of the industry's blanket censorship, most edgy comedy is shut down by film studios."There's supposed to be freedom of speech. They keep trying to suppress, but then you have the [comedians] that pop up out of that suppression," Thompson revealed.'That's where it felt like was the end of the road for the freedom of wanting to be funny.'During an interview with comedians Mark Normand and Sam Morril, Thompson said it was disheartening to see how few comedies get a green light in modern Hollywood."There's not enough comedies anymore. There's no comedies to be seen right now. It's so sad.""Of course the classics like the 'Tropic Thunders' of it all, but that's where it felt like was the end of the road for the freedom of wanting to be funny kind of thing. ... I'm looking for that era," Thompson explained.Ben Stiller's "Tropic Thunder" received very little backlash when it was released in 2008 despite its frequent use of the word "retard" and the simple fact that actor Robert Downey Jr. was in blackface for nearly the entire film.Thompson also cited movies like Mike Myers' "Austin Powers" and "Baseketball" as edgy movies that likely couldn't be made today."It should be allowed to be done!" Thompson declared.Host Normand then asked Thompson about recent episodes of "Saturday Night Live" in which comedians Bill Burr and Dave Chappelle took a moment to acknowledge how sensitive the show's audience has become."Everybody was like, 'This is crazy; this is so offensive,'" Normand recalled. "Did you find it was a little touchy over there?" he asked the cast member."It's touchy everywhere," Thompson replied. "That audience comes in and like, there is some clutching of the pearls."Thompson implied that the studio audience at SNL is usually on edge and afraid to laugh at anything that could be deemed offensive. This results in comedians often receiving little "support" from the live viewers when they perform stand-up comedy on the show.Despite this, the actor claimed the executive producer of SNL, Lorne Michaels, is reasonable in his approach about what can or cannot be said by performers. He said Michaels will simply say "good luck" to a comedian and let the audience reaction do the talking.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The editor in chief of Scientific American has resigned from her position after going on an unhinged rant about the supporters of President-elect Donald Trump.On Thursday, Laura Helmuth took to the social media platform Bluesky to announce that she was stepping away from Scientific American, the oldest continuously published magazine in American history."I’ve decided to leave Scientific American after an exciting 4.5 years as editor in chief," she wrote. "I’m going to take some time to think about what comes next (and go birdwatching)."The statement itself is rather innocuous, seemingly obscuring the hate-filled context in which it was made.On election night, Helmuth descended into a foulmouthed meltdown on Bluesky after Trump emerged the winner. Rather than direct her ire at the once and future president, Helmuth took aim at the 75 million or so Americans who cast a vote for him, as Blaze News previously reported.Her statements that night included:"I apologize to younger voters that my Gen X is so full of f****** fascists";"Solidarity to everybody whose meanest, dumbest, most bigoted high-school classmates are celebrating early results because f*** them to the moon and back";"Every four years I remember why I left Indiana (where I grew up) and remember why I respect the people who stayed and are trying to make it less racist and sexist"; and"The moral arc of the universe isn't going to bend itself."In a post shortly after the election, she added: "Any advice on what workplaces can do to help people who are devastated by the election? Thanks so much."Her comments quickly went viral online, where users began demanding her resignation.Helmuth then attempted to quell tempers by issuing an apology a few days later, admitting that her foul-mouthed remarks had been "offensive and inappropriate" and claiming that the "shock and confusion" of the election results had gotten the best of her.She also insisted that she does "respect and value people across the political spectrum" and remains "committed to civil communication and editorial objectivity."While her apology seemed to offer a spirit of bipartisanship, Helmuth reverted back to left-wing ideology in the Bluesky thread announcing her resignation. Perhaps in homage to herself, Helmuth also included in the thread a list of Scientific American articles she has "been so proud to support," some of which focus more on promoting far-left narratives than actual science. Not only does one headline — "Gender-affirming care for trans kids is good health care" — encourage the genital mutilation and possible sterilization of children, but three also profess to tell "justice"-related "stories":"Racial justice is a science story";"Environmental justice is a science story"; and"Reproductive justice is a science story."Kimberly Lau, president of Scientific American, told CNN that Helmuth left the outlet of her own accord and that leaders there are already in the process of seeking her replacement."We thank Laura for her four years leading Scientific American during which time the magazine won major science communications awards and saw the establishment of a reimagined digital newsroom," Lau said in a statement. "We wish her well for the future."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Racism is alive and well in America — but it’s not coming from the Republican Party, as the Democrats have led us to believe over the past decade. “I think Sunny Hostin is the most racist person on television,” Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” tells Megyn Kelly, who believes Joy Reid and Elie Mystal are the Democrats that actually take the cake. “It’s amazing to watch, like you really can’t believe that they’re allowed to say the things they say. It’s insane on her show, and also her Instagram,” Kelly says, noting that Reid was recently “mocking white women’s tears” on the social media platform. “I want to give some free advice to the white progressives, particularly white progressive women who may be thinking about marching against the Trump victory, maybe putting back on the p-word hats and doing that thing. I would just say, probably don’t send any of those invites to any black women,” Reid said in a video post. “I’m just going to tell you right now, they’re not coming. I’m pretty sure black women have resigned from the save America coalition, save democracy coalition, and definitely the save the Democratic Party coalition,” she continued. “Just keep those invites maybe among your own friends.” Reid went on to explain that “black women are now on the save black women, prioritize black men, and prioritize black communities, black businesses, and you know, the black spaces.” Kelly can’t believe what she’s hearing. “Can you imagine, if when I was on Fox News in the prime time, if I was like, ‘Oh, look at the black women crying over George Floyd,’” Kelly says. “I would have been fired so fast. But she can get away with doing that to whites.” “Why again? Because MSNBC and NBC allow blatant racism on their airwaves every single night. She’s not the only purveyor of it, she just happens to be the worst. Also, I’m pretty sure she’s not a natural blonde,” she adds. 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.