Imagine Dame if Giannis got traded to Miami

'not helpful for him to be out'

The post 15+ Delicious Foods That Help Unclog Arteries appeared first on Shareably.

News The Hole Film Adaptation of Hye-young Pyun’s The Hole Casts Theo James as Lead By Vanessa Armstrong | Published on October 31, 2024 Credit: Theo James provided by Mingle Media TV via CC BY-SA 2.0 Comment 0 Share New Share Credit: Theo James provided by Mingle Media TV via CC BY-SA 2.0 Divergent alum Theo James (who is also appearing in the upcoming adaptation of Stephen King’s “The Monkey”) is set to star in The Hole, an adaptation of Hye-young Pyun’s 2017 Shirley Jackson Award-winning book. According to Deadline, James will play Owen, a professor living in South Korea who is bedridden after being in a horrible accident that killed his wife. His Korean mother-in-law is nursing him back to health, but in doing so also uncovers a “devastating truth” of her dead daughter’s marriage (and something about Owen himself), which in turn threatens Owen’s recovery. The film adaptation appears to differ from the book in at least one major way: James’ character in the novel is a Korean cartographer named Oghi, not a white American named Owen. Whether this whitewashing leads to other changes in the story is unclear. The Hole is directed by Kim Jee-woon (I Saw The Devil) with a script from Christopher Chen. Production is set to start in the first half of 2025 and will be shot in Korea and the U.S. The project is still in its early days, so no news yet on when we’ll see The Hole at a theater (or television, depending on where its distributed) near you. [end-mark] The post Film Adaptation of Hye-young Pyun’s <i>The Hole</i> Casts Theo James as Lead appeared first on Reactor.

Without permission, two Microsoft employees held a vigil for “victims of the Palestinian genocide” at the company’s headquarters in Washington state last Thursday. Later that same day, both of the event’s organizers were fired. “Due to privacy and confidentiality considerations, we cannot provide specific details,” Microsoft shared in a statement the following day. It did clarify that it “ended the employment of some individuals”—Abdo Mohamed and Hossam Nasr—“in accordance with internal policy,” and that it remains “dedicated to maintaining a professional and respectful work environment.” According to The Jerusalem Post, Mohamed and Nasr “were part of a coalition of Microsoft employees who called themselves ‘No Azure for Apartheid,’ in alleged protest against the sale of the Microsoft cloud-computing technology to Israel’s government.” The former Microsoft employees told The Associated Press that Microsoft has “many community members … who have lost family, friends or loved ones.” Mohamed felt that “Microsoft really failed to have the space for us where we can come together and share our grief and honor the memories of people who can no longer speak for themselves.” However, some outlets have highlighted the fact that of the two, “Nasr was previously subject to internal investigations by Microsoft on more than one occasion, including for posting antisemitic memes online, according to his social media.” He was also exposed for calling Microsoft “an evil Zionist corporation facilitating and empowering a genocide” in a post on Instagram. “Nasr cofounded Harvard Alumni for Palestine,” The Post Millennial reported, “and was copresident of the university’s Palestine Solidarity Committee, an alternative name for Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), which is linked to terrorism and the antisemitic Boycott, Divest, Sanction movement against the Jewish state.” Mohammad, the outlet added, shared on LinkedIn that “he needs to find new employment in the next 60 days or face deportation.” Ever since Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, there have been numerous and consistent protests across the globe. Within the last year, largely due to left-wing activism, cases of antisemitism have “surged by 200% when compared to the same period the year before.” Several universities faced anti-Israel protests that caused chaos on campuses. In many instances, Jewish students were blocked from getting to class as Hamas supporters set up encampments and barriers. In July, antisemitic activists took to Union Station in Washington, D.C., tearing down and burning American flags and assaulting police officers. Many of these protests went largely without consequence. It now appears that an increasing number of universities and companies are choosing to clamp down on destructive and disruptive behavior. Microsoft’s decision to fire Mohamed and Nasr is not a unique occurrence. In April, Google fired up to 50 employees in connection with the actions of the “No Tech for Apartheid” group that protested against “the company’s cloud-computing contract with the Israeli government.” Earlier this month, the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) group at Brown University was suspended due to “alleged threats and intimidating actions during a campus event” such as “banging on cars, screaming obscene language, and making racial comments toward others.” The Daily Caller explained how “the demonstrators were protesting the university’s decision to not divest from 10 companies linked to Israel, following an Oct. 9 divestment vote.” Asked whether companies at large are starting to adopt stricter rules around protests, Chris Gacek, senior fellow for regulatory affairs at the Family Research Council, replied, “Every company has its own culture.” “It strikes me that there may be sort of a recognition that, in order to run a company like Microsoft,” there has to be “some sort of free range of ideas and expression,” he told The Washington Stand, adding, “You can’t really have this kind of thing going on,” where employees are putting their opinions front and center without company approval. Additionally, Gacek addressed the likelihood that some companies, such as Microsoft, may at least recognize that “Oct. 7 was a big deal.” It can be “a daunting recognition,” he emphasized, and it’s to the benefit of organizations to be sensitive to how they react to it. However, Gacek ultimately came to the conclusion that what’s unfolding may be something “we just have to let play out.” Only Microsoft can give its exact reasons for why it fired Mohammed and Nasr, and it has chosen not to do so. “We’re not in the company,” Gacek noted. “It’s one thing to sort of read it from a story from the outside,” but from the inside, many of these organizations that are starting to shut down protests could simply be in “a position [where] they’re just sick of it” and “don’t want to turn their company into … [an] environment that’s politicized and nasty.” Microsoft and others are reacting to “a lot of things in the culture” right now, Gacek added. “Reasonable people [can see] the coercive nature of the treatment of Israel.” “Maybe the tide is turning,” he speculated. Originally published at WashingtonStand.com The post Are Businesses, Universities Starting to Crack Down on Anti-Israel Protests? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Vice President Kamala Harris and the 16th-century British monarch Henry VIII share at least one trait in common: The belief that the government can force an individual to act against his conscience and in violation of his faith. Henry VIII demonstrated this in his treatment of St. Thomas More. More, a brilliant lawyer, experienced a meteoric rise in Henry VIII’s England. “More formally entered royal service in 1518 when he was sworn as a royal councillor and thereafter he rapidly rose in Henry VIII’s esteem and was the king’s principal secretary from 1519,” says an essay by Neil Johnston posted on the website of the British National Archives. “Mixing legal, diplomatic and secretarial work, More’s career continued to blossom and he was promoted to the highest legal position in England when appointed to the lord chancellorship in October 1529, becoming one of the few laymen to hold this office,” says this essay. More resigned his office, however, after the pope declined to annul Henry VIII’s marriage to Queen Katherine and the king nullified the marriage anyway. Then, Henry VIII made himself head of the church. “In November 1534, Parliament reconvened and passed the Act of Supremacy that declared Henry and his lawful heirs as the head of the Church in England,” says the essay on the British National Archives website. More stood silent on this act. “Silence, in this instance, was seen as overtly denying the king his title of supreme head of the Church of England. And that was treasonous,” says the essay on the British National Archives website. “More was brought to trial on 1 July 1535 and the outcome was never seriously in doubt.” Five days later, he was beheaded at the Tower of London. A statement published by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops notes: “In the moments just before his execution, More is said to have stated, ‘I die the King’s good servant, but God’s first.'” Now, move forward five centuries. On Oct. 22, 2024, Harris did an interview with Hallie Jackson of NBC News. Jackson asked Harris: “If you win, Congress may be controlled by Republicans. So, what specific concessions would you be willing to make in order to get something done on abortion access as soon as possible?” When Harris did not cite a specific concession she would make on this issue, Jackson followed up: “So [it] is a question of pragmatism then: What concessions would be on the table? Religious exemptions, for example, is that something that you would consider with a Republican-controlled Congress?” Apparently not. “I don’t think we should be making concessions when we’re talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions about your own body,” Harris responded. What would Harris force someone to do—without allowing a religious exemption—when it comes to the right to life? She answered that question in the 2014 Supreme Court case of Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby. The issue then was whether the federal government could force a family-owned business to act against the moral and religious beliefs of its owners by requiring them to cover abortifacients in their health insurance plan. “Respondents are a family and their closely held businesses [Hobby Lobby and Mardel], which they operate according to their religious beliefs,” said a brief the family’s lawyers submitted to the Supreme Court in this case. “A regulation under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires Respondents to provide insurance coverage for all FDA-approved ‘contraceptive methods [and] sterilization procedures.'” “Respondents’ sincere religious beliefs prohibit them from covering four out of twenty FDA-approved contraceptives in their self-funded health plan,” said the brief. “The Greens [who own the businesses] believe that human beings deserve protection from the moment of conception, and that providing insurance coverage for items that risk killing an embryo makes them complicit in the practice of abortion,” said the brief. “Hobby Lobby’s health plan therefore excludes drugs that can terminate a pregnancy, such as RU-486.” “If Respondents do not cover these contraceptive methods, however, they face severe fines,” said the brief. Which side did then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris take in this case? She led a group that included 10 other states’ attorneys general in submitting their own brief to the Supreme Court. It essentially argued that individuals may not practice their religion in the way they run their businesses. “Allowing a commercial corporation to escape the costs of neutral regulation based on the religious beliefs of its owners would harm market competition by providing unfair competitive advantages to businesses asserting religious objections to a rule,” said her brief. “The Tenth Circuit’s determination that for-profit corporations may exercise religion could ‘profoundly affect the relationship between the government and potentially millions of business entities in our society in ways we can only begin to anticipate,'” said her brief. Just as Henry VIII would have compelled St. Thomas More to act against his conscience in recognizing the king’s supremacy over the church, Attorney General Harris would have compelled family business owners to act against their consciences by purchasing insurance plans that cover abortifacients. 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 What Kamala Harris and Henry VIII Have in Common appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Life in the Chicagoland area has changed drastically over the past few years. Inflation has ruined Portillo’s Italian Beef Sandwiches, ketchupless hotdogs, and mom-and-pop restaurants. Maya Sanchez, a senior at Elmhurst University and Chicagoland native, is just one of many struggling with inflation. Growing up in the area, Sanchez has very fond memories of going to Simon’s Restaurant and Baker Hill with her family. But local prices for groceries and restaurants have increased by 20.2% over the past four years. New college graduates, the working class, and small business owners are the backbone of Chicago and of America, yet they are the ones bearing the brunt of inflation. These underdogs are fighting to make their way in the world. Inflation is starting to ramp up because of exponential increases in government spending. Our national debt has increased by trillions in the past four years and our underdogs in Illinois, hard-working everyday Americans, are the ones hurt the most. Sanchez has worked hard to get where she is now, and she is ready to go out into the world. But unfortunately, it is not that simple. Sanchez has expressed her concerns about life after school, saying, “It shouldn’t be so difficult to be able to afford basic living necessities and getting entry-level jobs … we are stuck barely making it by to pay our bills.” Sanchez’s commute to Elmhurst has gone up 35.7% since January 2021. Tuition and student loans are one thing, but she also worries about the rising cost of rent, utilities, and other expenses which may very well double after she graduates and goes to live on her own. Since January 2021, a Chicago family of four now pays 19.3% more on groceries and 20.9% more on rent. Many of these families own local businesses. Families work and run these businesses that give us amazing local goods, yet how does the government support them? By tripling the money supply, causing inflation and racking up our national debt. The Heritage Foundation has created a Personal Inflation Calculator so the everyday American can see just how high prices have gotten. The young workers of Chicago have seen inflation of 20.7% in just four years. A $436 grocery bill from 2021 is now $520. Average housing expenses used to be about $1,650, now, it’s crept over $2,000. Sanchez says that she is “starting to understand the stress and struggle of college graduates and young families. We can’t find jobs, afford groceries, or even get housing.” Unfortunately, that is not the only thing she has to worry about. There has been a $266 increase in monthly car expenses, with car insurance increasing by 54.9% and gasoline prices increasing by 57.7%. The cost of living has increased an abhorrent amount in only a few short years. Inflation is on the rise. Everyday essentials are suddenly breaking the bank and Americans are reeling. “It’s a never-ending cycle. Americans are struggling to live, and it’s time for a change,” Sanchez says. Don’t let people like Sanchez suffer because of the government’s overspending. While we all claim to love the underdog and support the little guy, the way our country is going, it seems the little guy may just fall through the cracks. Inflation is hurting our everyday lives, so it is up to the everyday American to make it known. The post Inflation Has Neutered the Underdogs appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Bill Clinton's Closing Pitch in Michigan: Hamas Is Awful and the Israelis Were There First

On Thursday, ABC News program The View spent much of their first segment kvetching about the Trump campaign continuing to make President Biden’s candid belief that Trump supporters were “garbage” an issue in the final days of the election. They ultimately blamed former President Trump for what Biden said and decried “white men” and “the blue-collar working man” for “falling for this.” After playing some soundbites of Trump in a garbage truck and one stage in a Hi-Viz vest, moderator Whoopi Goldberg and co-host Sunny Hostin blamed him for the word “garbage” ever being injected into the election at all: GOLDBERG: Let's just start with the fact that he's been -- he brought up America being a garbage can. I assume that meant that those of us who live in America were garbage. And I guess everybody's freaked out now because we're all in the can together. Some people thought they were out of the can. But when he says the country is a can and says it over -- well, I'll let you do it. HOSTIN: Well, yeah, I was saying, you know, this morning, he owns that language. He owns that rhetoric because he is the one that introduced it. He's the one that at his rally had a comedian talking about Puerto Rico being an island of garbage. “So, he owns it. I mean, stop trying to sort of co-opt the argument that he is now the victim. It's gaslighting to the tenth degree. It’s just – I hope that Americans recognize what's happening,” Hostin chided.     Faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin chimed in – falsely calling herself a “political strategist” – to suggest Trump turning Biden’s attack on his supporters into empowerment was somehow “political malpractice.” She went on to claim that Biden’s “garbage” smear was his way of giving Trump “a tiny bit of a life line to leave this [Madison Square Garden] news cycle behind him.” “The geniuses of the Trump campaign are, like, ‘let's remind everyone about your worse news cycle by putting you in a garbage can and remind everyone what you said about America and what you said about Puerto Ricans. This is the dumbest campaign thing I've ever seen!” she proclaimed. That attempt to downplay Trump in the garbage truck was followed up by pretend moderate Sara Haines, who decried “the blue-collar working man [who] is the one falling for this. Mainly white men.” “I think it's really sad that he's appealing to the working man, like, the blue-collar worker,” she whined. “With the garbage truck, I know that was about garbage but it was also he wants to look like he can rub elbows at a McDonald's and he does all these things. The people that will be hurt the most.” Despite the fact that Trump was proposing no tax on tips and no tax on overtime pay, Haines proclaimed he was against blue-collar workers specifically. “The reason Elon Musk is with him, is someone like Elon Musk benefits from him. It is the working people that are falling for this,” she huffed. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View October 31, 2024 11:07:25 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Let's just start with the fact that he's been -- he brought up America being a garbage can. I assume that meant that those of us who live in America were garbage. And I guess everybody's freaked out now because we're all in the can together. Some people thought they were out of the can. But when he says the country is a can and says it over -- well, I'll let you do it. SUNNY HOSTIN: Well, yeah, I was saying, you know, this morning, he owns that language. He owns that rhetoric because he is the one that introduced it. He's the one that at his rally had a comedian talking about Puerto Rico being an island of garbage. (…) HOSTIN: So, he owns it. I mean, stop trying to sort of co-opt the argument that he is now the victim. It's gaslighting to the tenth degree. It’s just – I hope that Americans recognize what's happening. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: I've got to say. I got an absolute laugh out of this. I thought it was hysterical because it is absolute political malpractice. So, as a political strategist, Trump hosts this rally where his campaign platforms this guy who calls Puerto Rico garbage. And of course, celebrities come out. J. Lo, everyone is coming to denounce it. Republicans are denouncing it because they know they ticked off an important voting bloc. And so, this is a huge news cycle. Trump even goes on Sean Hannity to try to walk it back. And then Joe Biden actually offers him a tiny bit of a life line to leave this news cycle behind him by slipping up and saying supporters are garbage. He did walk it back. And then no. The geniuses of the Trump campaign are, like, ‘let's remind everyone about your worse news cycle by putting you in a garbage can and remind everyone what you said about America and what you said about Puerto Ricans. This is the dumbest campaign thing I've ever seen! (…) SARA HAINES: I think it's really sad that he's appealing to the working man, like, the blue-collar worker. With the garbage truck, I know that was about garbage but it was also he wants to look like he can rub elbows at a McDonald's and he does all these things. The people that will be hurt the most. While he was president he cut -- he reduced by millions the number of workers – and this is most – blue-collar workers who would become eligible for overtime pay. In 2025, it goes even further. And he wants to take away what 40 hours – after 40 hours would normally earn you time and a half. He wants to take that away from workers. The reason Elon Musk is with him, is someone like Elon Musk benefits from him. It is the working people that are falling for this – not all, but the blue-collar working man is the one falling for this. Mainly white men. (…)

This week, I had the pleasure of sitting down for a cordial debate with Sam Harris, host of the “Making Sense” podcast, to discuss the question of the hour: Trump vs. Harris. The conversation was moderated by Bari Weiss of The Free Press. Sam is, of course, an incredibly intelligent person; he’s also a person with a core set of values. He freely acknowledged his own discomfort with many of Kamala Harris’ positions in the campaign. But in the end, he said that he would vote for Harris because of one dispositive argument: Donald Trump could not be president thanks to his antics surrounding Election 2020. I took the opposing view. While freely acknowledging that Trump’s behavior between Nov. 4, 2020, and Jan. 6, 2021, was wrong, I argued that the Constitutional checks and balances had held and would continue to do so. What is more, I argued, Donald Trump should be elected because his presidency was far more successful for America than her vice presidency.     Under Trump, the economy boomed, inflation remained low, job growth was robust; under Trump, the border remained relatively calm and became increasingly so over time; under Trump, the Middle East was beginning to flower into actual peace thanks to the Abraham Accords and a contained Iran. Under Harris, the economy had experienced the highest inflation rates in four decades; the border had been purposefully left wide-open, with at least 6.5 million illegal immigrants entering the country; Afghanistan had been handed over to the Taliban in the most cowardly and ignominious fashion possible, resulting in billions in lost military technology and 13 murdered American servicepeople; Iran had unleashed its proxies against Israel, beginning on Oct. 7, continuing through a wave of rocket fire from Lebanon via Hezbollah, and culminating in multiple Iranian attacks directly against Israel; the social fabric had been rent by intersectional wokeness, dividing Americans along racial and sexual lines; the federal government had been weaponized against political opposition and militarized on behalf of friends of the Democratic Party. So, in short, Sam argued against Trump; I argued for Trump and against Harris. You may notice an argument missing in this formulation: the argument for Kamala Harris. That’s because the argument doesn’t exist. You can argue against Trump; you can argue for him. But nobody can credibly argue in favor of Kamala Harris. Not even Kamala Harris. That’s been the story of her campaign: what she’s not. She’s not Donald Trump. Fair enough. She’s not Joe Biden. Fair enough. But she can’t answer how she would be different from Biden, other than not physically being Joe Biden. She can’t answer what she would do to improve the country; every time she’s asked, she resembles a 10th-grader informed there’s a pop quiz on a book she hasn’t read. And it is absolutely unclear whether Americans are willing to make Kamala Harris president just because they dislike Donald Trump. They tried that formula in 2020, and it resulted in the single worst presidency since Jimmy Carter’s. It turns out that this time, the American people might want to hear a convincing affirmative case in favor of the Democratic candidate for president -- a candidate who, unlike Biden, did not win a single vote in the primaries, and who was shoehorned in at the last minute to prevent Biden’s impending collapse in the polls. Will Kamala Harris become president? If she does, it won’t be because of Kamala Harris. She’s a nothing, an empty vessel, a fresh coat of paint slapped on the beat-up jalopy of the Biden administration. And with the choice starkly before them, Americans might be able to answer the question between Trump and Harris quite simply: Were you better off in 2019 than in 2024?