Imagine the delight of zookeepers at the Toronto Zoo as they watched Da Mao‚ a giant panda‚ hilariously demolish a snowman they had lovingly built for him. This scene is reminiscent of a toddler gleefully knocking down a tower‚ filled with the same innocent mischief and joy. The keepers had dedicated time and effort to... The post Panda spots giant snowman in home and his adorable excitement melts hearts appeared first on Animal Channel.

Legacy media outlets scrambled to save the pro-Bidenomics narratives they’ve been spewing after new data showed inflation came in hot in December. The latest Bureau of Labor Statistics report indicated that the price of all goods rose 0.3 percent in December on a month-to-month basis and 3.4 percent on a year-to-year basis‚ which was hotter than expected. Fox Business analyzed that the new‚ sticky numbers underscored the “challenge of taming price pressures within the economy.” But don’t expect the rest of the leftist media to report this development straight without trying to gaslight readers to protect their boss in the White House.. MRC Business tallied nine leftist media outlets who desperately attempted to sugarcoat the fact that the inflation rate jumped from its previous figure in November against expectations. Among them were typical culprits like The New York Times‚ The Washington Post and The Hill‚ with a number of them attempting to spin rising prices as “progress.” Yes‚ you read that right.  Despite the negative impact that higher prices will inevitably have on the economy‚ The New York Times claimed that the economy is still “making progress back toward a normal pace.” In an article headlined‚ “Fresh Inflation Data Shows Intact‚ but Bumpy‚ Cool-Down‚” The Times kept at its nonsense by predicting that the consumer prices will “moderate” in the coming year and ignoring the persistent negative effects of the still-high inflation rates will have on everyday Americans. The Washington Post took a similar approach to the inflation numbers. The article’s absurdity spoke for itself: “Inflation rose slightly in December‚ offering the latest sign that the economy has made significant progress since prices spiked to four-decade highs — but that there’s still a ways to go.” How are bad inflation numbers a “sign” of “significant progress”? Beyond that‚ prices are still going up‚ so they haven’t “spiked” by any means. But wait‚ there’s more‚ courtesy of The Hill. Instead of focusing on the fact that the numbers for December‚ The Hill decided to focus on the supposed “far slower price growth” from the past year. Like The Times‚ The Hill ignored the fact that prices are now more than 17 percent higher than at the beginning of President Joe Biden’s term. MarketWatch was also not immune to the news-spinning. Despite the hotter numbers‚ MarketWatch actually published a piece with an absurdly contradictory headline: “CPI posts biggest increase in three months‚ but little sign of rising inflation.” What does that even mean? The outlet wasn’t finished.. MarketWatch also complained in a separate piece of propaganda that the recent bad numbers gave ”ammo” to those who are more critical of the state of the Biden economy‚ and also absurdly said that Americans should “look past signs of sticky inflation.” Never mind the fact that Americans are actually struggling to make ends meet against an increasingly tenuous cost-of-living crisis. Next on the list came CNN. Like some of the other outlets‚ CNN praised the supposed drop in the inflation rate in 2023‚ and ridiculously claimed that the recent report is “mostly‚ ‘steady as she goes‚’” quoting Wendy Edelberg of the Hamilton Project. NBC News followed a similar path. The sub-headline of its report reeked of leftist spin: “As price growth continues to moderate‚ consumers are still adapting to a new normal.”  Bloomberg News in particular tried to get ahead of the news a day before the BLS report when it put out a piece predicting that 2024 inflation would nearly drop to the Fed’s target 2 percent rate (down from the current over 3 percent). It claimed that some prices were in a “downdraft.” When the report immediately pushed back against Bloomberg’s prediction of lower inflation for consumer goods in a “surprise‚” the outlet instead echoed CNN and NBC in its praise of the “year in which inflation broadly eased without doing much damage to the labor market.” Similarly‚ The Guardian insisted in its coverage of the December inflation that even though prices rose‚ “inflation continued to soften.”  The Associated Press‚ meanwhile‚ whined about the “disconnect” between the media spin on inflation and how real Americans are experiencing the price squeeze.. “Americans’ average after-inflation take-home pay is up‚” the AP claims. But studies show that the average American family needs more than $11‚000 a year more than January 2023 just to mainntain the same living standard they had in January 2021. Conservatives are under attack. Contact The New York Times at 800-698-4637‚ The Washington Post at 1-800-477-4679‚ The Hill at 202-628-8500‚ MarketWatch at 888-485-2378‚ CNN at 404-827-1500‚ NBC News at (212) 664-6192‚ Bloomberg News at 212-318-2000 (East Coast) or 415-912-2960 (West Coast)‚ The Guardian at customer.help@theguardian.com‚ and The AP at 844-777-2006 and demand that they stop trying to spin bad inflation news

When you have the Fox News Channel and CNN asking the same thing this week during White House press briefings‚ that’s a bad sign for any administration. Such was the case as‚ on Wednesday and Thursday‚ CNN’s M.J. Lee and Fox’s Peter Doocy pressed the ever-inept Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre where has Joe Biden been this week as he wasn’t seen in public on Tuesday‚ Wednesday‚ or Thursday. Lee asked on Wednesday a simple question: “[C]an you tell us what the President is up to today?” A lot of nothing from KJP in response to a basic question about what Biden was up to today... CNN’s @MJ_Lee: “And can you tell us what the President is up to today?” KJP: “Yeah‚ I have a couple of things I can share with — what the President is doing today. As he as he always… pic.twitter.com/YndAzPl9S6 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 10‚ 2024 Jean-Pierre’s only real answer was being briefed by his national security team (which a President has everyday‚ regardless of their schedule)‚ having lunch with Vice President Harris‚ a phone with Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA)‚ but otherwise included drivel such as this: “As he as he always does‚ he’s working around the clock‚ focusing on the issues that matter to the American people — everyday Americans‚ obviously.” Lee’s follow-up snuffed out her non-answer‚ but couched it in leftist hackery: “Since there isn’t anything on his public schedule. What would the White House say to any Democrats that might say‚ you know‚ we’re now getting closer to the election‚ the people — the American people need to see him every day‚ out in public?” A day later‚ Doocy reupped these concerns: “President Biden has not had any events at the White House in the new year‚ and he’s been kept from public view for three full days now. Why?” WATCH -- KJP says January 6 took place in 2011‚ not 2021. DOOCY TIME: “President Biden has not had events at the White House in the new year and he’s been kept from public view for three full days now. Why? KJP: “The President had a three-day swing — went to four states in the… pic.twitter.com/vTgx0jC2Xi — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 11‚ 2024 This time‚ Jean-Pierre more or less admitted that Biden needed a few days off: “The President had a three-day swing‚ went to four states in the new year.” She then recapped his “three-day swing” through Pennsylvania and South Carolina for (rabidly partisan campaign) speeches‚ Texas for a funeral‚ and a stop home in Delaware as proof he’s active for the American people. Once she added the caveat he’d be seen in public on Friday‚ Doocy dispatched with the pleasantries and went hardball: “So‚ he did a three-day swing‚ but for the last three days — Tuesday‚ Wednesday‚ Thursday — none of his constituents have seen him doing anything. Who decided that the American people are best served by seeing less of President?” Jean-Pierre cartoonishly said she “would disagree....[Americans] saw less of the President” since he spent three days out in public‚ adding one other piece of business from Wednesday was a meeting with the sister of Paul Whelan‚ an American held in Russia since 2018. Doocy’s other question was intriguing‚ but drew a filtered statement about how “proud” Team Biden is of “taking...rules very seriously”: “There’s an item in Axios that President Biden was advised by the White House Counsel to stop giving big-dollar donors tours of the Oval Office. While he has been out of view of the public for the last three days‚ has he given any wealthy campaign donors tours of the Oval Office?” Rewinding to earlier in the briefing‚ NBC’s Gabe Gutierrez asked National Economic Council Chairwoman Lael Brainard what she’d “say to Americans who are worried about food prices” even as she claims “inflation has cooled” and “‘Bidenomics’ has not caught on.” Brainard downplayed these concerns‚ arguing groceries and the purchasing power of Americans is more or less just peachy (pun intended). Fox Business’s Edward Lawrence turned up the heat with facts: “[S]ince President Biden came into office‚ overall CPI inflation is up 17.6 percent. Food‚ you’re talking about‚ is up about 34 percent. Electricity is up 27 percent. So‚ what’s your message to Americans who are feeling this every day when they buy and use things?” FBN’s @EdwardLawrence: “So‚ if you run down inflation from since President Biden came into office‚ overall CPI Inflation is up 17.6%‚ food — you're talking about — it’s about 34%‚ electricity is up 27%. So‚ what's your message to Americans who are feeling this every day when they… pic.twitter.com/lZdqKHDNLM — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 11‚ 2024 Brainard insisted Biden’s “fighting for American consumers‚” but rejected his question because of “real gains” in the economy and‚ where there’s pitfalls‚ she blamed “corporations that were all too eager to raise prices”. Lawrence had another big reality check: “But in that same timeframe...real wages are down 2.5 percent. So‚ people are — are feeling that pain”. Brainard interjected that “[r]eal wages are up since pre-pandemic‚” but Lawrence noted it’s only “0.8 percent from February of 2020.” She replied that’s only for “average hourly earnings” whereas “[r]eal wages are up over a percent for all workers‚ and they’re up over 3 percent for moderate-income workers.” Considering inflation has been more than twice that and the recent inflation report pegged it at 3.4 percent‚ that still means what Americans make is worth less. During the John Kirby portion of the briefing‚ Nadia Bilbassy of Saudi-funded Alarabiya‚ the AP’s Seung Min Kim‚ Patsy Widakswara of taxpayer-funded Voice of America‚ and one unidentified reporter pestered and‚ in some cases‚ hounded him to accept South Africa’s anti-Jewish and outlandish lawsuit before the International Court of Justice that Israel — not Hamas — has been committing genocide (click “expand”): BILBASSY: Today at the hearing of the ICJ‚ the judge said that under Article 51 of the Convention that Israel is a signatory to‚ Gaza is an occupied territory. Despite the fact that Israel has withdrew troops‚ Gaza — Israel maintains control over land and sea‚ and therefore‚ the protection of civilians in Gaza is a legal obligation of Israel. So‚ number one‚ do you agree that Israel is — Gaza is occupied?  And second‚ is protection of civilian legally under the Israeli jurisdiction? KIRBY: I’m not going to render a legal opinion from this podium‚ Nadia. We have said         repeatedly that we believe these allegations‚ this case is unfounded and that there is no basis for accusations of genocide against — against Israel. That’s not a word that ought to be thrown around lightly and we certainly don’t believe that it applies here. Now‚ to the question about civilians. Again‚ I’m not — I’m not an international lawyer. I’m not going to pretend to be‚ but we have‚ since the beginning‚ talked to our Israeli counterparts about the special burdens that modern militaries‚ particularly modern democratic militaries‚ have when they conduct military operations to protect innocent civilians and to protect civilian infrastructure. Those conversations continue‚ including on Secretary Blinken’s trip. BILBASSY: Okay. Since you’re not an international lawyer‚ I will advise you to read what the judge said‚ which is Israel is in violation of Article II(a)‚ II(b)‚ II(c)‚ II(d). He said that the bombing campaign in Gaza is the heaviest in the history of modern warfare‚ including what Russia is doing in Ukraine. So‚ he asked the Israelis to suspend immediately the military operations in Gaza. The White House position is no ceasefire. So‚ is the Biden admin- — administration in violation of international law — KIRBY: No. BILBASSY: — and the call of the judge — KIRBY: No. BILBASSY: — to suspend military — KIRBY: No. No. BILBASSY: — operation in Gaza? KIRBY: The judge statement notwithstanding‚ the answer is absolutely no. Israel has a right and a responsibility to defend itself. We’re going to continue to make sure that they can do that. We’re going to continue to supply them with the tools and capabilities they need to do that. No country should have to live to that kind of threat next door. So‚ no‚ we are not in violation and we’re going to continue to make sure Israel has what it needs. I’ll add one more point. We’re going to also continue to make sure that humanitarian assistance can get to the people of Gaza; that Israel conducts its operations in the most precise‚ careful‚ deliberate way possible so that they can minimize civilian casualties.  BILBASSY: Will you change your position if the final ruling is actually that you are in violation? KIRBY: I — I’m not going to get into — I’m not going to get into hypotheticals from here. We have made our position clear.  (....) KIM: You obviously made the position of the U.S. clear‚ but will the U.S. accept the court’s decisions or penalties if Israel is found by the court to have committed genocide? (....) KIM: Can the Isr- — can Israel count on the U.S. to block any potential sanctions that are levied by the court should it come to that? (....) WIDAKUSWARA: But if you’re saying‚ as you have said to my colleagues last week‚ that the U.S. is not actively assessing whether Israel is using these weapons in accordance to the laws of war because you don’t see any indication that Israel is violating those laws of war‚ and if there’s no congressional oversight‚ no State Department internal review process‚ and no verification process on the ground‚ then how do we know that Israel is using these weapons in accordance to U.S. and international law? (....) UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: I want to follow up on the ICJ. We have 22 Arab countries‚ including some of American allies — from Jordan‚ Saudi Arabia — are supporting South Africa. Do you have any comment on that? KIRBY: Each country should speak for themselves about this particular case and what their view is. I have spoken for the United States and — and what our view is‚ and that hasn’t changed. To see the relevant transcript from the January 11 briefing (including even more questions‚ solid and completely bizarre)‚ click here.

I recently came across an old propaganda poster from the Soviet Union. Vladimir Lenin stands in front of a giant red Soviet emblem. His right arm stretches forward with a caption that reads: “To the bright future of communist society‚ universal prosperity‚ and enduring peace.” The Politburo‚ party officials‚ and the KGB would use the phrase “to the bright future” as an excuse to lay a heavy hand on their people. You don’t like reporting on anything but propaganda and lies in the Soviet media? Don’t worry — it’s for your safety. To the bright future! You don’t want your family member to go to the re-education camp? Don’t worry — it’s for your safety. To the bright future! For all the people suffering under Communist control‚ the phrase became a sort of coping mechanism. Sure‚ this is all terrible‚ but ... to the bright future‚ I guess? In the name of securing “universal prosperity and enduring peace‚” the Soviets injected political commissars and KGB thugs into every aspect of society: industry‚ pseudo-businesses‚ the media. The state — which is always called “the people” for some reason — had its tentacles in everything. No decisions were made without state approval‚ order‚ or manipulation. The Twitter Files showed us how outside political actors have a far too friendly relationship with Big Tech‚ and these companies are all too willing to do their bidding. We see this in totalitarian leftist governments all over the world. Chinese companies are completely infiltrated by their politburo overlords. Under Xi Jinping‚ a national intelligence law signed in 2017 states: “Any organization or citizen shall support‚ assist‚ and cooperate with state intelligence work according to law.” Think about that the next time you use a phone made by Huawei‚ or you fire up TikTok to watch a string of cat videos with funny music‚ or you purchase a Chinese-made watch that looks suspiciously like a near-perfect clone of an Apple watch. The product you are using can be used to support Chinese national intelligence work. They’ve told us this up front‚ of course‚ but we use them all anyway. Knowing the way both the Soviets and the Chinese treat businesses and their own people‚ it’s worth asking how is our current system any different? Social media collusion The FBI‚ the political commissars themselves‚ admitted last year to holding regular meetings with all the big social media companies. The bureau and the companies maintained “relationships‚” to use their words‚ and “met weekly.” Mark Zuckerberg hinted on a Joe Rogan podcast at what some of the meetings involved. He said the FBI warned Facebook about some Russian propaganda that was about to be released. We now know that this referred to Hunter Biden’s laptop. But here’s the thing: The FBI already had a copy of the laptop’s contents. Authorities knew it wasn’t Russian propaganda. So why was the FBI feeding misinformation to social media companies to give a little “wink-wink‚ nudge-nudge” on what they should do when Hunter’s laptop came out? We already know the FBI didn’t want Donald Trump to become president. We saw that when an FBI lawyer was caught falsifying evidence in order to get a FISA warrant to spy on Trump campaign official Carter Page. Awaiting accountability Speaking of FBI lawyers‚ it was the FBI’s top lawyer‚ James Baker‚ who helped facilitate the meeting between Democratic operative Michael Sussman and FBI investigators to look into the bogus Trump/Alfabank smear. Baker would then leave the FBI‚ and guess who quickly hired him: Twitter‚ of course. We now know from Elon Musk’s Twitter Files disclosure that James Baker‚ as Twitter’s top lawyer‚ helped to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story. But wait! There’s more!When Musk tried to release the files showing how Twitter suppressed the story‚ Baker intercepted the evidence to “vet” as it was about to get released. Did he do that to remove all the parts that showed FBI involvement? Musk wasn’t amused and fired James Baker. I wouldn’t be surprised if he just returned to his old job at the FBI. Last year‚ the Twitter Files showed us how outside political actors‚ usually from the left‚ have a far too friendly relationship with Big Tech‚ and these companies are all too willing to do their bidding. We knew all of this already. It was obvious. But it’s a heck of a sight to see it from their own emails. One year later‚ has anyone been held accountable? Let’s return to my original question: What’s the difference between us and the Soviet Union and China? The difference is that the people of the Soviet Union and China had this kind of behavior forced on them. Today‚ Silicon Valley and the media do it of their own accord. As the saying goes‚ “To the bright future!” Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn’s FREE email newsletter with his latest insights‚ top stories‚ show prep and more delivered to your inbox.

Biden’s open-border policies have thrown America into a state of chaos‚ and it’s only getting worse. The more illegal immigrants who pour into our country‚ the more the American people drop lower on our administration’s priority list. Just look at what happened at James Madison High School in Brooklyn‚ New York‚ earlier this week. American students were forced out of school in order to house a mass influx of illegal aliens. Heading into the 2024 election‚ people want to know what the candidates plan to do about the invasion should they win the presidency. Dave Rubin plays a clip of Donald Trump explaining his bold plan to stabilize the nation regarding illegal immigration. “We are going to have the largest deportation effort in the history of our country‚” he said over the applause of the audience. “We’re bringing everybody back to where they came from. We have no choice.” “Can you do something about the sanctuary cities?” one woman from the audience asked. “Well‚ they’re gonna be ended because the Democrats are gonna end them‚ because you can’t sustain it‚” Trump answered‚ referencing Mayor Eric Adams‚ “who now is really hostile to the administration” after New York’s “tough time.” “You have to decide – do you think that he will actually do it?” asks Dave. “And do you think that that's the right policy – to remove people and some of the children who've been here?” “It's very easy to say‚ ‘I'm going to get rid of everybody‚’ [but] he didn't last time‚ right? He offered amnesty to an awful lot of people.” However‚ “things have changed‚” he acknowledges. “Enough people have woken up to what's going on at the border. Maybe he'd have more juice to do it this time.” 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.

A study by a health care data and analytics company showed that transgender people are less likely to be employed‚ have health insurance‚ or be married. They also are "at a higher risk" of developing mental and behavioral issues‚ getting sexually transmitted infections‚ and using and abusing substances.The study was conducted by Definitive Healthcare‚ a company that has described its mission as wanting to "transform data‚ analytics and expertise into healthcare commercial intelligence."The study looked at medical interventions in those who identify as transgender and the volume of individuals who are suffering from gender dysphoria in the United States."About 1.6 million Americans aged 13 and older identify as transgender‚" the study began. "Transgender people are less likely than non-transgender people to have a college degree‚ be employed‚ insured‚ or married. They also report having more days of poor mental and physical health than their non-trans peers."The report looked at increases in gender dysphoria diagnosis across the United States and their increases from 2018 to 2022. The study found that the number of cases rose in every state in except South Dakota‚ which saw a 23% decline in that period.The authors interestingly noted that South Dakota became the sixth state to restrict "gender-affirming care" for minors in February 2023.Some states saw a rise of gender dysphoria of over 200%. This was the case for Virginia (274%) and Indiana (247%). Other states saw a more than 100% increase. This included Utah (193%)‚ Alaska (183%)‚ South Carolina (171%)‚ and Delaware (170%).Hawaii and Connecticut saw the smallest increases at 6% and 10%."Transgender patients’ access to care has received heightened national attention in recent years as the LGBTQ community’s work to promote visibility and equality has been met with legislative efforts to limit or ban trans-specific care services in nearly half of U.S. states‚" the study stated.The organization blamed "social stigma and discrimination‚ shortages of hormones and other drugs‚ and a lack of specialists with expertise in transgender care" as reasons why transgender patients have had "limited" access to health care.Of course‚ the organization suggested that the solution to these issues was to provide money and accept transgender people's state of dysphoria."Ensuring access to care will require improving awareness around transgender issues‚ normalizing trans identities‚ and allocating additional resources for trans people.""This comes in part through increased representation of trans people‚ especially in clinical trials and other healthcare studies‚" it added.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) made a racist argument on Thursday to justify mass immigration into the United States.During a House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity‚ Security‚ and Enforcement hearing‚ Nadler used his opening statement to slam Republicans — claiming only Democrats are interested in solving the border and migrant crises — and made his case for why the U.S. needs more immigrants.Why does American "need" more immigrants‚ according to Nadler? So they can pick crops."We need immigrants in this country‚" he said. "Forget the fact that the farm — vegetables would rot in the ground if they weren't being picked by many immigrants — many illegal immigrants!" — (@) America not only needs immigrants to pick vegetables‚ Nadler went on to say‚ but he wants the immigrants to replenish the American population."The birth rate in this country is way below replacement level‚ which means our population is going to start shrinking‚ and the ratio of people on Social Security and Medicare is going to increase‚ relative to the number of people supporting them‚" he said. "This is a problem faced by every major country in the world. Few countries‚ however‚ have the means to solve this problem through immigration."People want to immigrate to the United States. They do not want to immigrate to China or Russia. We are very lucky in that respect‚ and we should promote it‚" he added.All of Nadler's arguments — that the U.S. needs migrants to work farms‚ to increase the domestic birth rate‚ and to fix Social Security and Medicare's insolvency problems — are dehumanizing because they reduce migrants to their bodies.It's true that migrants often accept employment in agriculture‚ trade industries‚ and service work. But it is dehumanizing to assume that simply because someone is a migrant‚ he will work in those industries. It is also dehumanizing to consider only what migrants can do for America rather than to see them as people. It should go without saying‚ but apparently it needs to be said: Migrants — like any other person — can benefit society beyond their ability to pick crops‚ have more babies‚ and pay into the social safety-net systems.Republicans‚ meanwhile‚ want increased border security‚ to tamp down on illegal immigration‚ and to improve mechanisms for legal immigration. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Military officials and leftists in Washington have long bemoaned the overwhelming presence of white people in the U.S. military. Now that race obsessives have gotten their way and far fewer recruits from the disfavored group are enlisting‚ officials are beginning to fret. According to Military.com‚ the U.S. Army fell 10‚000 short of its 65‚000 enlistment target in 2023. This drop was largely driven by a significant drop in the number of white recruits. In 2018‚ 44‚042 new Army recruits — 56.4% of the total — were white. Over the years‚ that number has plummeted‚ hitting 25‚070 or 44% of the overall recruits in 2023‚ down 6% from the previous year. This demographic group has seen a uniquely dramatic decline when compared to other racial groups. Overall recruiting totals have remained relatively flat for black and Hispanic recruits‚ but as white recruits have turned out in smaller numbers‚ the proportions of black and Hispanic recruits in the pool have increased from 20% to 24% and from 17% to 24%‚ respectively. Military.com indicated it encountered even more damning data speaking to a dramatic "shift in demographics" but that Army officials wrote it off as a "system coding error." Army officials told Military.com that there is not one single cause for this decline but indicated obesity and the poor quality of the public education system might have been factors. While these factors might explain a drop in recruitment across the board‚ they wouldn't explain a racially specific drop in proportion of 12.4 points over a five-year period. An Army official suggested the decline may have also been political‚ driven by conservatives' critiques of the Biden administration and its politicization of the military. The official‚ paraphrased by Military.com‚ credited conservative lawmakers and right-wing media in particular with souring their "overwhelmingly white audience" against the military over its identity politics and with prompting would-be recruits in the mix to "abando[n] their warfighting priorities." "There's a level of prestige in parts of conservative America with service that has degraded. Now‚ you can say you don't want to join‚ for whatever reason‚ or bad-mouth the service without any cultural guilt associated for the first time in those areas‚" said the official. Besides taking issue with the Pentagon's radical LGBT activism‚ abortion promotion‚ and its sweeping accusations of extremism‚ the erosion of such guilt among white people and conservatives might also have something to do with the military's apparent animus toward them. A 2011 report ordered by Congress claimed the military was too white and too male. The Pentagon released a manual blasting "healthy‚ white‚ heterosexual‚ Christian" men for having "unearned advantages of social privilege." The former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff‚ Army Gen. Mark Milley‚ complained in 2021 that the military was not diverse enough‚ stressing‚ "We must get better." He also defended the Pentagon's embrace of critical race theory‚ stating‚ "I want to understand white rage." A battalion commander reportedly stressed in 2021‚ "If you're a white male‚ you are part of the problem." It appears that in remedying a perceived problem‚ the Army created a real problem at a time of great international instability. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A young NBA guard who will earn nearly $2 million this season has been accused of shoplifting basic personal items from Target on multiple occasions.Ryan Rollins has had a rough week. On Monday‚ the Washington Wizards elected to waive him‚ a move that Sports Illustrated Wizards beat writer Gage Sheets initially described as "puzzling" since the team had just acquired Rollins from the Golden State Warriors last July‚ and at just 21 years old‚ he seemed to offer them a lot of value for his $1.7 million guaranteed salary.By Wednesday‚ Sheets was likely no longer confused by the Wizards' decision. That day‚ documents were filed in Alexandria General District Court in Virginia alleging that Rollins had shoplifted items from Target seven different times between September 9 and November 9 of last year — while he was still on the Wizards' roster.According to reports‚ Rollins took everyday household items‚ such as groceries‚ body wash‚ and candles. All of the allegedly stolen items were worth less than $1‚000.Because of the low value of the items‚ Rollins has been charged with seven counts of petit larceny‚ a Class 1 misdemeanor. In Virginia‚ such misdemeanors carry a maximum sentence of 12 months behind bars and a maximum fine of $2‚500.Court documents listed Nathan Muyskens as Rollins' defense attorney‚ but Rollins has reportedly not yet entered a plea. He is scheduled to appear in court again on February 7."We just recently learned of the charges against Ryan‚" said a statement from President Michael Winger of Monumental Basketball‚ which owns several pro basketball teams in our nation's capital‚ including the Wizards. "We cannot comment on that matter‚ or the basis for our roster decisions."We do take our role very seriously as ... representatives of our fans and a team our community can be proud of‚" the statement continued. "These are expectations‚ not aspirations. We're eager to move forward with our team as constituted and pursue excellence on and off the court."In his short stint with the Wizards‚ Rollins appeared in 10 games and averaged 4.1 points. He played an additional 22 games with the Warriors‚ the team that selected him in the second round of the 2022 draft. Originally from Detroit‚ Rollins played college ball at the University of Toledo.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Google has established itself as the arbiter of "truth" in the digital age. The company controls the flow of information and can amplify or bury stories on a whim. Its leaders have given themselves god-like powers over shaping human opinion. So when they change their rules over what information they can censor in a "Sensitive Event" scenario‚ it's worth examining closely. If you’ve ever advertised with Google‚ you might have received this email yesterday: Dear Advertiser‚ In February 2024‚ Google will update the Inappropriate content policy to clarify the definition of Sensitive Events. A "Sensitive Event" is an unforeseen event or development that creates significant risk to Google's ability to provide high quality‚ relevant information and ground truth‚ and reduce insensitive or exploitative content in prominent and monetized features. During a Sensitive Event‚ we may take a variety of actions to address these risks. Examples of Sensitive Events include events with significant social‚ cultural‚ or political impact‚ such as civil emergencies‚ natural disasters‚ public health emergencies‚ terrorism and related activities‚ conflict‚ or mass acts of violence. Examples of what we prohibit (non-exhaustive): •Products or services that exploit‚ dismiss‚ or condone the Sensitive Event‚ including price gouging or artificially inflating prices that prohibits/restricts access to vital supplies; sale of products or services which may be insufficient for the demand during a sensitive event •Using keywords related to a sensitive event to attempt to drive additional traffic •Claims that victims of a sensitive event were responsible for their own tragedy or similar instances of victim blaming; claims that victims of a sensitive event are not deserving of remedy or support; claims that victims from certain countries were responsible or deserving of a global public health crisis What does this mean? Google — quite reasonably — doesn’t want to sell ads about certain things. If you peruse Google’s inappropriate content policy‚ you’ll see a long list of things advertisers tend to shy away from: animal cruelty‚ derogatory content‚ sexually explicit content‚ and then the oddly specific “hacked political materials.” Likewise‚ the Sensitive Event rule is — at least on the surface — quite reasonable‚ because Google doesn’t want to be seen as profiting from a tragedy. As far as I can tell‚ the Sensitive Event policy has not changed appreciably since 2021. In April 2019‚ it was limited to “Content that may be deemed as capitalizing on or lacking reasonable sensitivity towards a natural disaster‚ conflict‚ death‚ or other tragic event.” In September 2020‚ the policy was expanded in response to COVID: “Content that potentially capitalizes on or lacks reasonable sensitivity towards a natural disaster‚ conflict‚ death‚ public health emergency‚ or other tragic event.” By October 2021‚ it had been expanded to two full bullet points: Ads that potentially profit from or exploit a sensitive event with significant social‚ cultural‚ or political impact‚ such as civil emergencies‚ natural disasters‚ public health emergencies‚ terrorism and related activities‚ conflict‚ or mass acts of violence Ads that claim victims of a sensitive event were responsible for their own tragedy or similar instances of victim blaming; ads that claim victims of a sensitive event are not deserving of remedy or support And that’s the policy that exists today. So what is actually changing in February? On the surface‚ there doesn’t seem to be any change‚ but let’s look closely. In the current policy‚ Google doesn’t give a “dictionary definition” of what it considers a Sensitive Event. Instead‚ it defines a Sensitive Event by what’s specifically prohibited. Under the new policy‚ Google is using a much broader interpretation of a Specific Event and even giving itself broad leeway to address those events: A “Sensitive Event” is an unforeseen event or development that creates significant risk to Google's ability to provide high quality‚ relevant information and ground truth‚ and reduce insensitive or exploitative content in prominent and monetized features. During a Sensitive Event‚ we may take a variety of actions to address these risks. It then uses the old definitions as examples of what constitutes Sensitive Events: Examples of Sensitive Events include events with significant social‚ cultural‚ or political impact‚ such as civil emergencies‚ natural disasters‚ public health emergencies‚ terrorism and related activities‚ conflict‚ or mass acts of violence. Do you see the difference? Under the existing rule‚ an ad capitalizing on a natural disaster is specifically banned. Under the new rule‚ an ad capitalizing on a natural disaster is merely an example of what is banned‚ and what is actually banned is left to Google’s own interpretation. Specifically‚ "an unforeseen event or development that creates significant risk to Google's ability to provide high quality‚ relevant information and ground truth …” In other words‚ Google is creating a broader policy to “reduce insensitive or exploitative content in prominent and monetized features” for content that doesn’t match Google’s definition of “ground truth.” What can we take away from this seemingly minor rule change? My read is that Google foresees an unknown event that the company wants to have the ability to restrict the flow of information around. In plain English‚ Google doesn’t know what’s coming exactly‚ but it might be something previously unconsidered by Google’s lawyers‚ and Google wants to be able to restrict what information is presented about that event. Google's leaders have given themselves the power to censor any event for really any reason. This is exactly why Blaze Media decided to move to a subscriber model. We can't allow Google‚ through the power of its platform‚ to dictate what stories we can and can't cover. If you haven't signed up yet‚ please consider supporting Blaze so we won't have to get permission from Google to cover certain stories. You can subscribe here.