Category: blaze media

President Donald Trump laid out new ground rules for college-level sports and athletes in a new executive order being praised by some of the biggest names in collegiate sports.

However, some of the president’s proposed limitations are sure to bother some, especially top-earning college athletes.

‘I urge Congress to pass bipartisan legislation and SAVE COLLEGE SPORTS!’

Following a college sports roundtable at the White House in March, the president signed an executive order on Friday to implement “Urgent National Action to Save College Sports.”

The order puts a theoretical cap on student-athlete pay, sets a five-year window for athlete eligibility, and even limits transfers to one per student-athlete in a five-year period.

At the same time, the order — and subsequent fact sheet — make clear and repeated mention of the president’s intention to boost women’s and Olympic sports at the college level. This includes “implementing revenue-sharing in a manner that protects and expands opportunities in women’s and Olympic sports.”

In response, legendary college football coach Nick Saban said the directives allow universities to “preserve opportunities for all sports, including women’s and Olympic sports, not just football and basketball.”

Saban, who coached Alabama from 2007 to 2023, told Fox News that he wanted to “thank the president” for helping “manage and fund all sports.”

RELATED: ‘We want to be inclusive’: After Christian player posts Bible verses, Patriots coach says team needs to be ‘educated’

Brandon Sumrall/Getty Images

Similarly, Arkansas men’s basketball coach John Calipari came out in defense of the president against any criticisms surrounding the limitation on student-athlete revenue.

“I’ve spent my entire life focusing on the success and well being of student athletes,” Calipari wrote on X Saturday. “Their success in both sports and academics is paramount. I have no problem with Athletes making money and I have had that stance for many years. But what we have been dealing with the last few years is harmful not only to their total success but also the longevity of College Sports as we know it.”

Calipari added: “Yesterday, President Trump took bold action to preserve and protect Collegiate Athletics. I urge Congress to pass bipartisan legislation and SAVE COLLEGE SPORTS!”

Trump’s executive order made specific mention of an alleged “fraudulent name, image, likeness (NIL) scheme” where student-athletes were being paid above “actual fair market value” to play for certain programs.

The idea behind the regulation is to prevent “pay-for-play or player eligibility” in which large schools would essentially pay student-athletes large sums of money through collectives or sponsorships to entice them to their program.

Otherwise, the order states, “fair competition cannot occur.”

RELATED: Female ex-referee accuses NFL of sexism, sues after she was allegedly made to perform ‘an utterly humiliating’ act

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Trump’s executive order defines the fair market value compensation cap around how much a student-athlete can be paid by a third party that is not affiliated with a school’s athletic department.

Henceforth, the student-athlete would have to be paid at rates commensurate with that of non-student-athletes of similar notoriety or fame.

Trump has called on Congress to pass the SCORE Act, which, aside from the above, would prevent schools from restricting students from entering NIL agreements and require schools that generate more than $20 million annually to provide medical benefits to student-athletes, while maintaining at least 16 varsity sports teams.

Trump’s executive order is currently set to take effect August 1.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Fearless, Trump, Ncaa, D1, Student athletes, College athletes, Executive order, Women’s sports, Sports 

Instead of celebrating America’s 250th birthday this summer, we may end up engraving its tombstone if we don’t alter our current course.

The chaos is winning, both because of the persistent evil of the Democrats and the growing confusion in defining the Trump administration’s balance between foreign and domestic concerns.

While I agree that Iran is a legitimate security issue for us as Americans, the fundamental and systemic breakdowns in our own cultural back yard are far more dangerous right now.

We must be plain about the true nature of the enemy. If Democrats were made an offer to secure nationalized health care at the cost of permanently excluding illegal aliens, they wouldn’t take the deal. A Republican Party not run by the likes of John Thune — which increasingly seems like an impossibility — should be forcing votes to expose this reality on the regular instead of going on vacation.

Here is the key to understanding Democrats and exposing them to the average American voter: They simply want to destroy the foundations of this country, no matter the current policy argument. Therefore, the last thing they will ever allow to exist is a country primarily for Americans and by Americans.

After President Trump’s State of the Union speech in February, I talked about what a great job he did highlighting this ugly reality. Remember how he asked members of Congress to stand up if they thought the lives of Americans should be prioritized over illegal aliens, and not a single Democrat stood up? I walked away from that thinking the right was back on message and unity was locked in for the midterm elections ahead.

No one was talking about invading Iran and how many more weeks it is going to take — unlike this week’s presidential address to the nation. And no one was talking about it because the majority of Trump’s base — including the Joe Rogan bros and the MAHA world that pushed Trump to victory in 2024 — had a war with Iran anywhere near the top of their Trump 2.0 priority list.

None of which means this proud child of the ’80s doesn’t hope we kill every single member of the Iranian high command and every single member of the Iranian revolutionary guard. I think the world will be a better place and that God is glorified if they all die per the biblical dictates of Romans 13. They made their choice.

But that’s a separate issue from the one that is really bothering potential Republican voters: Why did we run away from a domestic communist like Tim Walz on the streets of Minneapolis only to run to the possibility of boots on the ground in Iran?

I’m looking at polling from Scott Rasmussen showing that support for the war in Iran is plummeting. That’s because we simply can’t be seen fighting for other countries harder than we are willing to fight for our own. It’s not 1987. The American voter is a different animal now with a different set of concerns and problems.

RELATED: The SAVE America Act won’t be enough to save the GOP from a midterm bloodbath

Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

I was in North Dakota to address that state’s GOP convention just a week ago, and I cannot tell you how many people I heard from who lamented that they can’t find a good husband for their daughter or a good wife for their son. Not in Oregon or Massachusetts. In North Dakota, a state Trump won by 36 points in 2024. No one was enthusiastically cheering on the war in Iran.

While I agree that Iran is a legitimate security issue for us as Americans, the fundamental and systemic breakdowns in our own cultural back yard are far more dangerous right now.

While I support Israel and call myself a Zionist without reservation, I also don’t live there. I’m an American. It’s a little bit like when your favorite cousin wins the lottery, but your wife is gravely ill and you’re not sure when she’s going to get better. You’d love the luxury of celebrating your cousin’s success — like Iran’s threat to Israel being greatly diminished — but you have a very serious concern in your own house.

When you’re on an airplane, the flight attendants always instruct you that if there’s a problem and the cabin loses air pressure, the safety masks will drop down, and your priority must be to make sure that yours is secure before you help the person next to you. Because if you’re not safe, how can you effectively help anyone else? See where I’m going with this?

We are seeing this argument play out right now in the Supreme Court birthright citizenship case. Chief Justice John Roberts is clearly already signaling that he thinks it’s totally fine if a billion foreigners come here.

Meanwhile, average Americans are still fighting to make sure their kids and grandkids are at least as secure from drag queen story hour as Israel is from Iran. The center of that situation simply cannot hold. We are running off an existential cliff.

Thankfully, before that time comes, we now have Easter. We, with our Lord as our strength and our salvation, can rise again. Pray it be so.

​Midterms, 2026 midterms, Trump, 2024 election, Iran war, Operation epic fury, Democrats, American voters, State of the union, Israel, Birthright citizenship, Opinion & analysis 

Yesterday, Christians across the globe celebrated the resurrection of Jesus Christ on Easter Sunday.

Nonbelievers and skeptics reject this central claim, believing the bodily resurrection to be impossible or made up.

But the evidence for Christ’s supernatural arising from the dead goes well beyond the millions of people who celebrate it as the cornerstone of their faith. Historical evidence paints a compelling picture.

On this episode of “Relatable,” Allie Beth Stuckey speaks with Christian apologist Wes Huff about the strongest reasons to believe Jesus really rose from the dead.

Huff begins with the reliability of the Gospel accounts.

“It seems that the gospel authors get the details right — the small details, things like geography and name correlation and even plant life in some instances,” he notes, “and so if they get the small details right, I don’t think it’s that big of a leap to say that they get the big details right.”

He argues that the Gospels rest on early eyewitness testimony. The disciples were either “deceived,” “deceivers,” or “telling the truth.” Given the evidence, Huff believes they were telling the truth because what they experienced radically transformed them.

“When you start to stack up the evidence of what’s going on, I don’t think they were deceivers. I don’t think they were deceived. And I do think that everything points to their life radically changing in a powerful way because they encountered their rabbi getting murdered and then rising from the dead,” he tells Allie.

The disciples were so profoundly transformed by what they had experienced, in fact, that they returned boldly to Jerusalem — the very city where Jesus was crucified — to proclaim the gospel, fully aware of the deadly risks they faced. Even after the martyrdom of Stephen served as a “warning shot,” they went back to “ground zero” and kept preaching.

“Jesus truly died. That’s a historical fact. … And then he appears to his disciples alive again. That’s a historical question: Dead, buried … seen alive. What do we do with that? How do we answer that historically? And I think there needs to be given an account for the disciples’ actions afterwards. They saw something, and it completely, radically changed their world,” says Huff.

He then addresses the “swoon theory” skeptics, who argue that Jesus was placed in the tomb badly wounded but not actually dead.

“If there’s one thing that the Romans were really good at. It was crucifixion — and making sure that people suffer and die,” Allie says.

“Every Roman guard, centurion, soldier who was responsible for Jesus’ death would have been on the hook if he did not die, and their lives would have been forfeit,” Huff agrees.

To hear more, watch the video above.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Relatable, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Allie beth stuckey, Blazetv, Blaze media, Christian apologetics, Wes huff, Gospels, Christ resurrection, Jesus, Jesus resurrection, Easter, Easter sunday 

CNN polling analyst Harry Enten says new polling data shows that Democrats are likely to fail to regain control of the U.S. Senate if trends don’t reverse.

Enten showed Monday that although Democrats are still slightly favored in the generic congressional ballot, it is not enough to retake the Senate from Republican control.

‘You’d make the argument Democrats should be way ahead, and they’re just only sort of slightly ahead.’

While polling shows Democrats with a five-point net favorability rating for the 2026 election, that is well below their net rating in the 2018 midterms, which was eight points, and 2006 midterms, which was 11 points. Those were the last two midterms with a Republican president for comparison.

“Democrats are, just simply put, running behind their previous benchmark, and they need to be running well ahead of them if they want to take back the United States Senate, given that map,” Enten said.

He added that although President Donald Trump’s favorability rating has taken a beating recently, Democrats appear to be unable to take advantage of it enough to take both chambers of Congress.

“Democrats are ahead, but they’re only ahead by five with a president whose net approval rating is bordering on minus 20 to minus 30, depending on what polls you look at,” Enten said. “You’d make the argument Democrats should be way ahead, and they’re just only sort of slightly ahead.”

CNN anchor John Berman pointed out that they may take the U.S. House of Representatives despite the low rating because the gap is so close.

“I think five points is enough to take back the House, but in the Senate, five points is almost certainly not enough if you apply it to the Senate map,” Enten responded.

“Why do I say that? Because let’s just take a look. GOP would win the Senate with this map. Let’s say Republicans only hold on to the states that Trump won by greater than 10 points. That would, in fact, give them the Senate, 51 to 49,” he explained.

RELATED: CNN analyst has really bad news for liberals hoping for MAGA collapse: ‘Ain’t going nowhere’

Under those conditions, Democrats would take seats in North Carolina and Maine, but Republicans would hold on to seats in Ohio, Texas, and Alaska, according to his analysis.

NBC News analyst Steve Kornacki had nearly the same conclusion for Democrats about their chances to retake control of Congress.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Dems hope to retake senate, Trump vs democrats, Midterm elections 2026, Harry enten analysis, Politics 

Elon Musk has virtually mastered the space race. SpaceX regularly sends up Falcon 9 rockets, autonomously lands boosters, and embarked on the most ambitious space exploration program ever dreamed up by mankind with Starship. Now Musk wants to launch a whole new kind of object into orbit — a data center meant to power xAI’s growing portfolio of products and services.

And it all starts with a momentous new lunar mission.

To the moon

In early February, two of Elon Musk’s most ambitious companies — space pioneering venture SpaceX and generative AI startup xAI — merged into one organization. With a unified brand, Musk claims that the move will “improve speed of execution” of the monumental new off-world undertaking.

We’ll finally be rid of the resource-hogging data centers that hamper our infrastructure here on Earth.

The goal? Establish Moonbase Alpha, a permanent lunar city planted on the surface of the moon. The base will serve as a manufacturing hub and a launch site for spacefaring data centers that will power Musk’s growing AI endeavors, including xAI, Grok, Imagine, Optimus robots, and more.

It sounds like something out of a science-fiction novel, but if Musk has his way, Moonbase Alpha will be up and running by approximately 2030.

While this project would mark the first time any human has set up residence on the moon, this isn’t the first time SpaceX has launched permanent objects into orbit. The company currently manages a fleet of 9,600 Starlink satellites that circle the earth daily, beaming wireless internet to regions all around the globe. Presumably, the new space data centers would fall in line along the same or similar paths.

A data center, however, is a little more complicated than a wireless internet router in space. Data centers consist of thousands of GPUs, TPUs, cooling systems, and other networking components. They must have the bandwidth to process, store, and utilize large stores of data. For LLMs in particular, data centers also have to be able to train and maintain new models as AI evolves.

Clearly, there are some pros and cons to running an AI data center in space. Let’s get into them.

Pros of space-based data centers

Space: Data centers take up a lot of acreage. The largest data center on earth is 800,000 square feet, or approximately 13.9 football fields. That’s massive! Space, however, has more space. There’s plenty of room for expansion without invoking eminent domain, chopping down forests, or snatching up vacant plots of land. AI is free to grow without encroaching on the general public.Power: Data centers also require a ton of energy. Collectively, the nation’s data centers consume up to 8,190 MW per year on a 70 MW-per-center estimate. In comparison, your home uses 10.8 MW of power per year. While this need is a big strain on Earth’s power grid, orbital data centers have a direct line of solar power straight from the sun, free from cloud cover, pollution, or severe weather events. It’s just straight solar power all the time, a perfect renewable resource without the limitations of a living planet.Maintenance: Data centers have plenty of moving parts and energy demands that all generate a lot of friction and heat. While it takes specialized water cooling systems to mitigate high temperatures on earth, space is a whole different story. Above the atmosphere, it’s much colder, there’s almost no friction, and zero gravity makes it easier for parts to work without additional drag. Together, these unique qualities of space may reduce wear and tear on data centers and allow them to run longer with fewer repairs.

RELATED: NASA astronaut gives very American response to DEI questioning

Manuel Mazzanti/NurPhoto/Getty Images

Cons of space-based data centers

Maintenance: While orbital space centers will likely require less maintenance, when something does break, it could be harder to send a repairman — either from Moonbase Alpha or Earth itself — for a quick fix. Alternatively, perhaps Elon will have a team live on the data center itself, but even then, having a specialized crew on board at all times would be costly.Rapid unscheduled disassembly: More than a few times, a Starlink satellite has veered off course enough to tumble toward Earth and burn up in the atmosphere. Now imagine a multibillion-dollar data center the size of Rhode Island careening into the Atlantic Ocean. Not only could unpredictable flight path failures cause an orbital data center to burn up in the sky, such an event could also turn one of those centers into a meteor that strikes Earth on the scale of “Deep Impact.”Space junk: Space is so big and vast that it’s hard to believe it’s getting crowded, but that’s exactly what’s going on above the atmosphere. Low-orbit space is filling up so fast with satellites and space junk that it has created collision risks for future rocket launches. Adding massive data centers to the mix would only make space missions more complicated and dangerous.

A moon-shot mission for a new age

Despite weighing the risks against the benefits, Elon Musk believes that space is an essential piece of AI development: “Current advances in AI are dependent on large terrestrial data centers, which require immense amounts of power and cooling,” he explained in a recent post at the SpaceX website announcing the merger. “Global electricity demand for AI simply cannot be met with terrestrial solutions, even in the near term, without imposing hardship on communities and the environment. In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. To harness even a millionth of our Sun’s energy would require over a million times more energy than our civilization currently uses!”

He’s right. The only way to sustain AI in modern society is to move it to a place where it can’t siphon away our vital resources, namely power, water, and land. It needs to operate in its own sustainable vacuum. What could be better than space?

Musk isn’t alone, either. Google is also putting data centers into orbit. According to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, “We are taking our first step in ’27. We’ll send tiny, tiny racks of machines, and have them in satellites, test them out, and then start scaling from there.”

And just like that, the AI age of the space race has begun. As for who will win, mankind is the biggest benefactor — not because renewable AI will magically make everything better, but because we’ll finally be rid of the resource-hogging data centers that hamper our infrastructure here on Earth while Big Tech sets its sights on moon-shot missions in the stars.

​Tech 

As more people become aware of the way the H-1B visa program is transforming Texas, many are turning to see what their leaders have to say about it.

Unfortunately, in the case of Texas, the answer is not what Americans might expect from a red state.

‘We will continue to celebrate Diwali here in the great state of Texas.’

In a resurfaced video clip, Governor Greg Abbott (R) can be heard giving a message to the “Indian community,” apparently around the time of Diwali.

“As long as I’m governor of this great state, Texas will be a land for the Indian community,” Abbott says in the clip.

RELATED: ‘Massive scheme’: Federal visa fraud indictment in Dallas intensifies pressure on Abbott over H-1B visas

ARUN SANKAR/AFP/Getty Images

“We will continue to celebrate Diwali here in the great state of Texas. Happy Diwali, everybody!”

The clip, which went viral on Monday, appears to originally be from a November 3, 2024, Diwali celebration at the governor’s mansion.

A video of his remarks was uploaded on TikTok two days after the event, on November 5, 2024.

Diwali is a major Hindu holiday, celebrated in the lunar months of Ashvina and Karttika, that marks the victory of light over darkness, according to Britannica. A notable feature of this pagan holiday is the “row of lights” that is associated with the celebrations.

Abbott’s office has previously denied to Blaze News any involvement in facilitating the H-1B program in Texas, noting that it is a federal program. His office has also touted the governor’s pause of H-1B visas at state-sponsored institutions.

A Blaze News analysis of Department of Labor data from the first quarter of fiscal year 2026 found that Texas companies sponsored and certified over 11,200 H-1B visa applications, second only to California, which brought in over 13,700 H-1B visas, according to available data.

Blaze News reached out to Abbott’s office for comment about the resurfaced video but did not receive a response.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Politics, H-1b visas, H-1b, Governor greg abbott, Greg abbott, Indian, Indian invasion, Diwali, Texas, Department of labor 

The special election to replace former Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia could have a lot more to do with foreign policy than candidates initially anticipated.

Greene’s falling out with President Donald Trump marked a major fracture within the GOP, prompting a special election to fill her seat on Tuesday. Apart from the typical party distinctions, foreign policy could be the deciding factor between the Democrat and Republican nominees vying to represent Georgia’s 14th congressional district.

‘He has gone insane, and all of you are complicit.’

Democratic nominee Shawn Harris has taken a harsh stance against the ongoing war in Iran, which has become increasingly unpopular with voters, while Republican nominee Clay Fuller has remained a supporter of the conflict.

The horseshoe theory about the political spectrum seems to be in full swing as Greene’s increasingly critical remarks about the war and the Trump administration more broadly seem to echo Harris’ positions far more than Fuller’s.

RELATED: This scandal-ridden Democrat just got one step closer to being expelled from Congress

ELIJAH NOUVELAGE/AFP/Getty Images

Days before the special election, Greene doubled down on her criticism of the war, condemning Trump’s Easter ultimatum to Iran.

“Everyone in his administration that claims to be a Christian needs to fall on their knees and beg forgiveness from God and stop worshipping the President and intervene in Trump’s madness,” Greene said in a response to Trump’s post threatening to attack civilian infrastructure like power plants and bridges. “I know all of you and him and he has gone insane, and all of you are complicit.”

“Trump threatening to bomb power plants and bridges hurts the Iranian people, the very people Trump claimed he was freeing,” Greene added. “On Easter, of all days, we as Christians should be reminded that the son of God died and rose from the grave so that we can be forgiven once and for all of our sins. Jesus commanded us to love one another and forgive one another. Even our enemies.”

RELATED: Veterans slam Democrat candidate for allegedly fudging military record

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Greene has refrained from endorsing either candidate, although Fuller has secured support from Trump. While an endorsement from Trump would typically all but guarantee the candidate’s success, especially in a rural, red district in Georgia, Harris narrowly outperformed his Republican challenger in March.

In a crowded 17-candidate race, Harris brought in 37% while Fuller finished with 35%. The candidates’ respective numbers were likely affected by the many candidates who no longer qualify for Tuesday’s election. It should also be noted that a Trump-endorsed Greene beat Harris by nearly 30% back in 2024.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Donald trump, Marjorie taylor greene, Special election, Georgia, Iran war, Mtg, Clay fuller, Shawn harris, Iran, Politics 

Artemis II is preparing to make history as it faces a very important milestone in the voyage’s 10-day journey to the moon and back.

The lunar mission, launched on the evening of April 1, is preparing to fly by the dark side of the moon on Monday.

‘The Artemis II crew is preparing for today’s lunar flyby, when they will see the Moon’s far side.’

Artemis II is preparing to set a new distance record from Earth, which was last set by the manned Apollo 13 mission in April 1970, according to NASA.

NASA said that Artemis II will surpass the previous record of 248,655 miles by about 4,105 miles. The astronauts are expected to travel a maximum distance of 252,760 miles from Earth.

RELATED: NASA astronaut gives very American response to DEI questioning

NASA

Live coverage of the flyby event will begin at 1 p.m. ET Monday and continue through 9:45 p.m. ET.

The seven-hour lunar observation period will begin around 2:45 p.m. ET, and the astronauts are expected to reach their closest approach to the lunar surface around 7 p.m. At their closest distance, NASA said, the moon will appear to the astronauts about the size of a basketball held at arm’s length.

On Monday morning, NASA posted two photos of the inside of the spaceship with the caption: “Morning routine: Wake up, shave, make the bed, witness something that’s never before been seen by human eyes.”

“The Artemis II crew is preparing for today’s lunar flyby, when they will see the Moon’s far side,” the caption continued.

NASA reported that the crew received a message from the late Apollo 8 and Apollo 13 astronaut Jim Lovell as they prepared for this historic day. The message, recorded before Lovell’s passing last year, said:

Hello, Artemis II! This is Apollo astronaut Jim Lovell. Welcome to my old neighborhood! When Frank Borman, Bill Anders, and I orbited the moon on Apollo 8, we got humanity’s first up-close look at the moon and got a view of the home planet that inspired and united people around the world. I’m proud to pass that torch on to you — as you swing around the moon and lay the groundwork for missions to Mars … for the benefit of all. It’s a historic day, and I know how busy you’ll be. But don’t forget to enjoy the view. So, Reid, Victor, Christina, and Jeremy, and all the great teams supporting you — good luck and Godspeed from all of us here on the good Earth.

The Orion spacecraft is expected to depart the Moon’s sphere of influence on Tuesday afternoon at a distance of 41,072 miles.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Politics, Artemis ii, Nasa, Orion, Moon, Lunar observation, Space travel, Jim lovell 

Just days after announcing it would be shutting down its artificial intelligence video generation platform, OpenAI put the brakes on another project.

While the terminology remains vague, it seems Sam Altman’s company could be drawing a line as to what it deems “adult” content.

‘We still believe in the principle of treating adults like adults.’

Those familiar with the adult-themed project at OpenAI have “indefinitely” shelved their plans to release an erotic chatbot, per the Financial Times. OpenAI confirmed that before moving forward with such a product, the company wanted to be able to fall back on long-term research about the effects AI sex chats have on users and any emotional attachments that might be created.

OpenAI said there is no “empirical evidence” available at this time.

RELATED: Sam Altman tells BlackRock he wants AI on a meter ‘like electricity or water’

CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP/Getty Images

Last year, Altman announced that ChatGPT would start including more content, including erotica, to “treat adult users like adults.”

But in early March, OpenAI made its first announcement that “adult mode” was being delayed. That decision was made in part to focus on more pertinent tasks. “We’re pushing out the launch of adult mode so we can focus on work that is a higher priority for more users right now,” a spokesperson told reporter Alex Heath, “including gains in intelligence, personality improvements, personalization, and making the experience more proactive.”

“We still believe in the principle of treating adults like adults, but getting the experience right will take more time,” the company stated.

Inside sources since told the Financial Times that the company will refocus on core products after staff and investors expressed concern about the sexualized AI content. The upside to this endeavor was allegedly too small for OpenAI.

RELATED: Sam Altman says NSA can’t use OpenAI — then tells staff they don’t have a say in military actions

Jaap Arriens/NurPhoto/Getty Images

The revelations follow hot on the heels of other strategy-shifting announcements. The tech giant has recently tightened up its offerings, shuttering generative AI service Sora.

“What you made with Sora mattered, and we know this news is disappointing,” the company wrote on X. “We’ll share more soon, including timelines for the app and API and details on preserving your work.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Return, Ai, Openai, Chatbot, Sex chat, Sam altman, Chatgpt, Tech 

A gun-toting North Carolina homeowner said he “didn’t have any hesitation” after spotting an intruder in his Charlotte residence last week and “just let it fire,” WSOC-TV reported.

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police told the station the scene unfolded along Glen Brook Road off West Sugar Creek Road early Wednesday morning.

‘He saved my life, saved my dog’s life.’

A man and woman who didn’t want to be identified told WSOC they woke up to loud banging.

“You don’t know what their intentions are; you don’t know anything,” the man recounted to the station. “All you can do at that moment is protect yourself.”

The man added to WSOC the intruder was in the home for about 10 seconds — and he soon saw the intruder in the hallway and immediately began shooting.

“I didn’t have any hesitation,” the man added to the station. “As soon as I knew someone was coming in, I just let it fire, let it go.”

The homeowner also told WSOC he’s not sure if he hit the suspect, who ran away. Afterward, the couple hid in the bathroom until police arrived, the station said.

RELATED: Machete-wielding females beat up homeowner in robbery try, cops say. But victim ends attack with single shotgun blast.

“He saved my life, saved my dog’s life,” the woman told WSOC. “I mean, I couldn’t ask for a better significant other in this situation.”

The station said the victims are now wondering what may happen next.

“Now it’s just a matter of, ‘Will they come back, what will happen?'” the woman noted to WSOC.

The station said it reached out to police to inquire if they have any leads on the intruder.

Under North Carolina’s Castle Doctrine, homeowners are allowed to use deadly force against intruders, WSOC said, adding that there is no duty to retreat, and the law protects residents from legal liability.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Crime thwarted, North carolina, Charlotte, Home invasion, 2nd amend., Self-defense, Guns, Gun rights, Shots fired, Crime 

The Department of Homeland Security confirmed over the weekend that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers arrested two relatives of an Iranian terrorist whom President Donald Trump had whacked at the end of his first term.

In January 2020, President Donald Trump ordered the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian major general who commanded the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force.

‘They are now in ICE custody.’

“Soleimani made the death of innocent people his sick passion, contributing to terrorist plots as far away as New Delhi and London,” Trump said in the wake of the lethal drone strike on Soleimani near Baghdad International Airport in Iraq. “Today we remember and honor the victims of Soleimani’s many atrocities, and we take comfort in knowing that his reign of terror is over.”

Despite her uncle’s role in supporting the Iraqi insurgency against American forces, Hamideh Soleimani Afshar managed to enter the U.S. on a tourist visa in June 2015, said the DHS. Afshar’s daughter, Sarinasadat Hosseiny, entered the following month on a student visa.

Both women were granted asylum in 2019. The niece became a green card holder in 2021, and Soleimani’s grand-niece became a green card holder in 2023, both under the Biden administration.

The DHS noted that Afshar’s numerous trips back to Iran — she disclosed in her naturalization application that she had returned at least four times since her receipt of a green card — “illustrate her asylum claims were fraudulent.”

RELATED: Iranian regimists throw a fit after Trump threatens to send their country back to the ‘Stone Ages’

Mandel NGAN/AFP/Getty

Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on Saturday, “I terminated both Afshar and her daughter’s legal status and they are now in ICE custody, pending removal from the United States.”

ICE arrested both women in Los Angeles on Friday.

Rubio added that “the Trump Administration will not allow our country to become a home for foreign nationals who support anti-American terrorist regimes.”

The State Department accused Afshar of promoting Iranian regime propaganda, celebrating attacks against American soldiers and military facilities, denouncing America as the “Great Satan,” and expressing support for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a foreign terrorist organization, all while residing in the U.S.

“Afshar Soleimani pushed this propaganda for Iran’s terrorist regime while enjoying a lavish lifestyle in Los Angeles, as attested to by her frequent posting on her recently deleted Instagram account,” said the State Department.

In addition to the pending deportation of mother and daughter, Afshar’s husband has also been barred from entering the United States.

Narjes Soleimani, Soleimani’s daughter, said in a statement obtained by the BBC, “The individuals arrested in the U.S. have no connection whatsoever to Martyr Soleimani and the claims made by the U.S. State Department are false.”

The terrorist’s daughter claimed further that the U.S. was “fabricating lies against a great figure.”

Trump said in his Wednesday address to the nation that Soleimani “was an evil genius, brilliant person, a horrible human being.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Soleimani, Iran, Iranian, Assassination, Department of homeland security, Ice, Marco rubio, Great satan, Deportation, Donald trump, Hamideh soleimani afshar, Politics 

With California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) nearing the end of his term, numerous candidates have stepped up to replace him in the upcoming gubernatorial primary race on June 2.

Sixty-one individuals appear on the official certified list of candidates competing for California’s top office. While there is currently no clear front-runner, several notable candidates have emerged. These include former Rep. Katie Porter (D), Rep. Eric Swalwell (D), climate advocate and businessman Tom Steyer (D), Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco (R), and Fox News host and small-business owner Steve Hilton (R).

‘With President Trump’s full backing and federal support, we are going to take California back and make it better than ever before!’

President Donald Trump released a post on social media on Sunday attempting to tip the scales in favor of his preferred candidate in the crowded race.

“I have known and respected Steve Hilton, who is running for Governor of California, for many years,” Trump wrote. “He is a truly fine man, one who has watched as this once great State has gone to Hell.”

Trump gave the current governor the nickname “Newscum” and criticized him and other Democrats for doing “an absolutely horrendous job.”

“People are fleeing, crime is increasing, and Taxes are the highest of any State in the Country, maybe the World,” Trump continued. “Steve can turn it around, before it is too late, and, as President, I will help him to do so! With Federal help, and a Great Governor, like Steve Hilton, California can be better than ever before!”

RELATED: Republicans are leading the field in the California governor race

Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images

Trump declared that Hilton has his “COMPLETE & TOTAL ENDORSEMENT” in the upcoming primary.

“He will be a GREAT Governor and, importantly, WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!!!” Trump added.

Hilton’s campaign thanked the president for his endorsement.

“With President Trump’s full backing and federal support, we are going to take California back and make it better than ever before!” the campaign wrote. “This is the moment California has been waiting for!”

RELATED: USC accused of racism after minority candidates don’t qualify for gubernatorial debate — so USC makes drastic decision

Steve Hilton. Ronaldo Bolaños/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images

Newsom has previously stated that he has “some concern” about how crowded the race has become. He told CBS News in early March that he was not yet ready to endorse any of the candidates.

“I don’t have an endorsement,” he stated. “There might be a moment [for that] in the next few months.”

Several recent polls show Hilton with a narrow lead, while other surveys favor Bianco, Swalwell, or Porter. The top two finishers in the primary, regardless of party affiliation, will appear on the ballot in November.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​News, Gavin newsom, Newsom, California, Donald trump, Trump, Steve hilton, Chad bianco, Katie porter, Eric swalwell, Tom steyer, California gubernatorial race, California governor race, California governor, Politics 

Catholic churches across the U.S. and other parts of the Western world welcomed historic numbers of new members over the weekend. Although popularly characterized as a “surge,” some analysts have suggested the flood of new and often young converts is actually a rebound.

Prior to welcoming 20 people fully into the faith during the crowded Easter Vigil at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels in Los Angeles, Archbishop José Gomez said, “Tonight your story will be joined to His story, to the beautiful history of salvation, the great story of God’s love for His people.”

‘This generation just seems open to the call of the Lord.’

Altogether, 8,598 catechumens and candidates were received into the Catholic Church in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles this Easter, reported Angelus News.

On Saturday, Archbishop Ronald Hicks welcomed some of the over 3,600 new catechumens who reportedly joined the Catholic Church in the Archdiocese of New York this Easter season, telling a packed house at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, “It does feel good when you belong, and we belong to Jesus and we belong to our church.”

Father Andy Matijevic of Holy Name Cathedral in the Archdiocese of Chicago told WBBM-TV, “We had six Masses so far, last night and a few this morning, and all of them have been packed inside.”

Holy Name, which held overflow Masses on Sunday, reportedly saw 18 people baptized and another 23 confirmed, contributing to the archdiocese’s total of over 600 catechumens who received the sacraments of initiation at the Easter Vigil.

Chicago Catholic noted last month that the archdiocese was also set to welcome 445 individuals from other Christian traditions this past weekend, representing a 78% increase in members over last year.

RELATED: Catholic church sees huge surge in conversions — due to inclusivity?

Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels. Ronaldo Bolaños/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images

Father Burke Masters, whose St. Isaac Jogues Catholic Parish in the Chicago suburb of Hinsdale reported a 124% year-over-year increase in new members, told WLS-TV that the average age of those being received into the church is 28 years old.

St. Mary’s Church near Texas A&M’s campus in College Station, Texas, also managed to roughly double its 2025 Easter baptism numbers, welcoming 61 catechumens into the Catholic Church. Again, most of the newcomers were apparently young adults.

“Most of the [new members] are students, most of them are invited by other students, most of them also maybe heard a call or were drawn to the church,” Rev. Will Straten told KBTX-TV. “So it’s great to see more students desiring to be baptized and to live the faith.”

Boston Archbishop Richard Henning, who saw the churches under his purview similarly packed over the weekend and expected over 680 catechumens to join the Church at Easter, told CBS News, “I think this generation just seems open to the call of the Lord in a way that we’ve not seen in a while.”

Numerous other American dioceses — such as the Archdiocese of Newark — similarly reportedly years-high numbers of new Catholics converts, as did dioceses elsewhere in the Western world.

In Canada, for example, the Archdiocese of Toronto counted a total of 2,050 adult catechumens baptized at its Easter Vigil celebrations — a 12.4% increase over last year. Other Canadian dioceses, including those covering the cities of Montreal, Ottawa, and Vancouver, were also reportedly set for significant growth over the weekend.

In France, over 13,000 adults were set to be baptized into the Catholic Church over the weekend, including more than 700 catechumens in Paris, reported the National Catholic Register.

The numbers appear especially high in large part because conversion numbers in recent decades had fallen so low.

According to U.S. diocesan statistics compiled by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University and analyzed by the Pillar, there was a precipitous decline in the number of people becoming Catholic from 2000 to 2020.

Whereas, for instance, there were 173,674 adults baptized or received into full communion in 2000, that number reportedly had plummeted to 70,796 in 2020.

The Pillar noted that while there has been a significant increase in the number of new adult Catholics following the pandemic, the number of babies baptized every year has dropped by over 50% since 2000.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Religion, Catholic, Catholic church, Church, Conversion, Baptism, Religiosity, Faith, Catechumen 

When BlazeTV host Rick Burgess first read the story of Jesus casting out a demon from a young boy after the disciples had been unsuccessful, he was confused.

“I remember the first time that I heard it … I didn’t understand it. I thought, well, are they different kinds of demons you’re supposed to do different things to? And why didn’t the disciples know this?” he reflected on a recent episode of “Strange Encounters.”

While many interpret this story to mean that there are different ranks or strengths of demons, with more powerful ones requiring specific disciplines, Rick says this misses the main point.

The disciples’ issue was never tactics or strategy; it was self-reliance.

According to the three gospel accounts in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus stumbled upon his disciples arguing with the religious elite after they had been unsuccessful at casting out a demon from a young, mute boy, who would convulse, foam at the mouth, and self-harm as a result of being possessed.

After speaking with the boy’s father, who uttered the famous words “I believe, help my unbelief” (Mark 9:24), Jesus cast out the demon and restored the boy to health. Afterwards He privately addressed His disciples, who were upset that they were not able to do it themselves, as they had previously been casting demons out successfully.

Jesus told them that “this kind can only come out by prayer” (Mark 9:29 — with some manuscripts adding “and fasting”).

But contrary to popular belief, this isn’t Jesus saying there are different strategies for different demons, says Rick.

He argues that the disciples “let their power go to their head” and had stopped “consecrating themselves under the authority of Jesus.”

“These disciples started thinking they were casting out demons. They’ve never cast out a demon. Jesus cast out demons,” says Rick.

“Even when a human being casts out a demon, the human being brings the demon to Jesus. You and I have no ability to cast a demon out of anyone — not by our own strength. The only thing that gives the redeemed power against demons is Jesus,” he continues.

Even the highest ranking angels rely on the authority of Jesus to rebuke the demonic.

Rick references the story from Jude where the archangel Michael is disputing Satan over the body of Moses. Rather than attacking Satan with harsh accusations or trying to condemn him on his own authority, Michael simply said: “The Lord rebuke you!”

“He rebuked Satan by bringing in Jesus,” says Rick.

The disciples, he argues, should have done the same thing when they were attempting to rid the boy of the unclean spirit.

“The disciples have no ability to cast out demons unless they access the power of Jesus, and they had stopped doing that. They started thinking they had the power,” Rick explains, “and Jesus is saying, ‘Y’all better get back to prayer. You better get back to fasting. And you better get back to concentrating on me.’”

To hear more of Rick’s spiritual analysis, watch the episode above.

Want more from Rick and Bubba?

To enjoy more legendary comedy, political arguments, and lessons in common sense, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Strange encounters, Strange encounters with rick burgess, Rick burgess, Blazetv, Blaze media, Christianity, Spiritual warfare, Demonic possession, Jesus’ disciples 

For the past few years, a familiar narrative has taken hold in American automotive media: Chinese electric vehicles are about to reshape the global car market.

Reviewers highlight low prices, sleek interiors, and giant screens. Commentators talk about a coming wave of imports that could challenge American, European, and Japanese automakers. Some even point to BYD surpassing Tesla in global EV sales as proof the shift is already happening.

Some reports suggest a large number of brands could disappear, merge, or restructure in the coming years.

That all sounds compelling — until you ask a simple question: What does this actually mean for a buyer?

Because right now, most of these vehicles aren’t even for sale in the United States.

Tariffs and regulations keep them out. So a lot of this hype is based on overseas test drives and showroom impressions — not real ownership in North America.

And where these vehicles are being used, the story isn’t nearly as clean.

What happens in real-world driving

Cold weather is one of the first reality checks.

Like all EVs, Chinese EVs lose range in low temperatures — sometimes up to 30% to 40% of their range.

That’s not a small difference. That’s the difference between getting home comfortably and watching your battery percentage like a hawk.

Shorter range means more charging. Charging takes longer in the cold. And more energy goes to heating the battery and cabin instead of driving the car.

If you live somewhere with real winters, this isn’t theoretical. It’s your daily routine.

The problem with ‘cool’ features

A lot of the appeal here is design — flush door handles, fully electronic entry, big minimalist interiors.

It looks great in photos; a different story in real life.

Electronic door handles and latches depend on power and sensors. Lose power after a crash, or deal with freezing conditions, and those systems can fail or become harder to use. There have already been reports of handles sticking or not working properly in cold weather.

That’s the trade-off with adding complexity to basic functions.

And when something breaks, it’s not a simple fix. It’s usually more expensive, more specialized, and more time-consuming.

Here’s the bigger issue

The structure of China’s EV industry may matter more than any individual feature.

Over the past decade, government incentives fueled a wave of EV startups. Dozens of companies jumped in. A lot of them are now competing on price, trying to survive.

And not all of them will.

Analysts at firms like Deutsche Bank and JPMorgan Chase expect consolidation. Some reports suggest a large number of brands could disappear, merge, or restructure in the coming years.

That’s not just industry chatter. That’s a real risk for buyers.

Because if the company behind your car disappears, what happens next?

Who provides software updates? Who supplies parts? Who services the vehicle?

That “great deal” doesn’t look so great if you can’t get support — or if resale value drops because buyers don’t trust the brand will still be around.

We’ve seen this before with failed automakers. The difference now is how dependent vehicles are on software.

RELATED: How government and Big Tech can wreck your new car’s resale value

Denver Post/Getty Images

Price isn’t the whole story

There’s no question Chinese automakers have pushed prices down in some markets.

But price is only part of the equation.

Many of these companies are operating on thin margins while spending heavily to stay competitive. That creates pressure — and in some cases, instability.

Some brands will make it. Companies like BYD and Geely have the scale.

Others won’t.

And you don’t get to choose which one you bought after the shakeout happens.

What American buyers actually care about

Even if these vehicles eventually reach the U.S., they’ll be competing on more than price.

American buyers care about reliability, service access, resale value, and long-term support.

That’s not something you figure out in a quick test drive or a YouTube review.

That’s built over time — through dealer networks, parts availability, and how a company stands behind its product.

And that’s where newer players still have something to prove.

Don’t buy the hype

Chinese EVs are real. Some are competitive. Some are impressive.

But the idea that they’re about to flood the U.S. market and take over leaves out a lot.

They face trade barriers, infrastructure challenges, and a major shakeout at home.

For buyers, the takeaway is simple: Don’t buy the hype — buy what actually works for your life.

Look at how the vehicle performs in real conditions. Look at who’s going to support it. Look at what it’s likely to be worth in a few years.

Because in the end, the question isn’t how a car looks in a headline, but how it holds up when you’re the one paying for it.

​China, Auto industry, Ev, Tesla, Byd, Lifestyle, Align cars 

Trial lawyers are poised to accomplish in courtrooms nationwide what politicians have thus far failed to write into statute. The effects of this effort — undertaken without the deliberation of the nation’s representative bodies — are likely to rival those of even the most sweeping laws.

The product of social media platforms is not loaves of bread or pianos or widgets, it is speech, protected by the First Amendment.

A jury in Los Angeles is determining whether Meta and YouTube are liable for design features alleged to have substantially aggravated a young woman’s psychological disorders.

As thousands of similar lawsuits are ongoing — with more likely to follow — the determination of the Los Angeles jury will echo loudly in the deliberations of other juries across America.

These echoes will prove dissonant with Americans’ love for, and dedication to, free speech. Meta’s Instagram and YouTube were said to have disseminated speech too well, working too successfully to configure their products to maintain users’ interest.

This is supposed to constitute “addicting” their users. In fact, it is the aim of every business — from media organizations to retail stores to restaurants to attract and retain customers, to earn profits by marketing a product that consumers value.

In short, it is the business of entrepreneurs to give the people what they want. The product of social media platforms is not loaves of bread or pianos or widgets, it is speech, protected by the First Amendment.

Meta and YouTube are charged with having designed their products to include features — such as “infinite scroll” and individualized algorithmic recommendations — which allow and incentivize their users to view too much speech for too long.

As National Review’s Andrew McCarthy put it, “the plaintiff’s lawyers argued … a theory that the case was not about the content but about the processes by which the platforms present the content.” Despite titanic efforts to harden this distinction, it melts under the heat of elementary scrutiny. Platforms’ design features are impotent absent content that intrigues users.

Mike Masnick, editor of Techdirt, put it this way:

Here’s a thought experiment: Imagine Instagram, but every single post is a video of paint drying. Same infinite scroll. Same autoplay. Same algorithmic recommendations. Same notification systems. Is anyone addicted? Is anyone harmed? Is anyone suing?

Social media algorithms sort and distribute speech — a function without which individuals could neither access speech online nor effectively find an audience for their own speech.

RELATED: The new censorship doesn’t say ‘no’ — it says ‘no one can see it’

Delihayat/Getty Images

Whatever the plaintiff’s attorneys contend, the liability imposed upon Meta and YouTube cannot be severed from the content they host and disseminate. Without the latter, the former would never be imagined, much less found by a jury.

The plaintiff in the case, a young woman known as Kaley or “KGM,” was brought up in anguishing conditions, the daughter of a mother who physically and emotionally abused her. She “was self-harming around when she was in the 6th grade,” reads the Associated Press account of the trial.

It is unsurprising that she, as a young girl, withdrew to social media to find something like peace, fulfillment, and satisfaction. It is equally unsurprising that she used social media to excess and leveraged her every chance to obtain engagement.

More generally, it is anything but certain that users’ affinity for social media is rightly termed an “addiction.” Likewise, research purporting to prove that social media has caused an epidemic of psychological disorders among children — the research of Jonathan Haidt, for example — has proven to be faulty, rife with faulty methodology and confirmation bias.

It is obvious that some misuse social media and their lives are, consequently, diminished. But this no more indicates that the platforms are “defective” in some legally cognizable sense than the mere existence of obesity in America indicates that McDonald’s or Taco Bell’s offerings are “defective” — or that fast-food restaurants ought to be held liable for occurrences of diabetes.

RELATED: Predatory gambling apps are using loopholes to avoid state laws

Gabby Jones/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Humans are a diverse bunch. That a minority, suffering from particular difficulties or vulnerabilities, cannot engage with this product or that in a healthy fashion should not, in a courtroom or the public square, constitute the basis of a totalizing rebuke.

Should the Los Angeles verdict stand, social media companies, confronted with the prospect of liability, are bound to remake their products to prevent any allegation — credible or otherwise — that their platforms cause or worsen whatever psychological distress from which users might suffer.

“If media companies must worry about liability whenever their expressive outputs are thought to be ‘harmful,’ the universe of available content would be reduced to the safest, blandest, and least engaging stuff imaginable,” warns Ari Cohn, the lead counsel for tech policy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.

The operations of Instagram and YouTube broke no law enacted by Congress or a state legislature to regulate the workings of social media. Even so, this litigation, if successful, will be regulatory in its effect, resulting in the contracting of the free and open internet.

​Free speech, Social media, Social media ban, Internet, Trial lawyers, Social media lawsuit, Meta, Youtube, Social media addiction, Opinion & analysis 

It’s a running joke in the Beltway that defense contractors put up billboards advertising, say F-35s, at the Pentagon City metro station. Your everyday commuter, even in Washington, isn’t picking up fighter jets off the shelf at Costco on Sundays. But a chunk of the people who work on defense contracts will pass through the Pentagon’s metro stop, and Lockheed Martin knows this.

In practice, Beltway newsletters are funded to the hilt by the businesses they cover.

In theory, the same logic fuels D.C.’s media business. In the last two decades, the capital city has become dominated by a constellation of powerful media outlets that deliver niche, social-media-based coverage of the federal government. Think Politico, Semafor, Punchbowl News, and Axios.

These publications produce insider email newsletters that cover the daily pulse of Capitol Hill, foreign affairs, and the White House and are written specifically for staffers, journalists, and lobbyists. Web 2.0 made this business model possible, and it’s only grown as mass media flails.

Typically a reader will see at the top of each day’s newsletter some version of “Sponsored by” or “Brought to you by” followed by the name of a major corporation or interest group. Sponsor ads will be inserted sparingly, with political motivations ranging from explicit to subtle. Examples of corporate sponsors include Meta, BlackRock, Microsoft, and many, many more.

Anthropic, for example, sponsored Politico’s Playbook newsletter immediately after its high-level negotiations with the Pentagon fizzled in March. The ads didn’t have much to do with defense, focusing mostly on children, learning, and Claude’s efficiency.

The goal instead was to buy goodwill — to make powerful people think nice thoughts about Claude as they read the news.

This is all supposed to be aboveboard because, as ever, advertising departments insist they maintain a strong firewall that keeps journalists unaware of business decisions. Some news outlets, for what it’s worth, are very disciplined about this, but many aren’t.

And nothing prevents the latent affection that can bloom between journalists and their frequent sponsors, who also regularly work with their sources and subjects.

During COVID, one reporter friend of mine shared warm feelings about a major tech company precisely because that company kept its employees working during hard times. Imagine the hypothetical dilemma of a local paper forced to choose whether to blow the whistle on a family-owned landscaping business that also happens to be one of the publication’s most faithful advertisers.

Then scale that up to the international level.

In practice, Beltway newsletters are funded to the hilt by the businesses they cover. The system is not comparable to D.C.’s metro system — getting some advertiser cash from RTX for a few square feet of a dirty wall. The D.C. newsletter model is thoroughly corrupting.

RELATED: America has a spending problem Congress refuses to fix

DNY59/Getty Images

This is because news outlets are becoming increasingly brazen about corporate partnerships. It was somewhat amusing to see DataRepublican recently pick up on a report my colleagues at “Breaking Points” produced last year about Punchbowl News.

DataRepublican, a relentless investigator of political money trails, noticed the outlet had been flamboyantly defensive of Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.). Many of Thune’s donors also happen to sponsor Punchbowl.

Last year, a source leaked one of Punchbowl’s latest pitch decks for corporate advertisers to “Breaking Points.” The document offered editorial influence for cash. Granted, Punchbowl dressed the offer up in corporate language, but its invitation was unmistakable. Corporations can pay them to cover a “mutually agreed upon topic” in podcast series, “editorial deep dives,” and events.

The pitch deck even included a sample of Punchbowl’s work with Google on “custom content.”

This is undeniably a breach of basic journalistic ethics. But nobody in D.C. bats an eye. Jake Sherman and Anna Palmer, the founders of Punchbowl, are beloved in Washington. They are called upon for sober analysis, win awards, and lecture others on journalism.

What’s funny is that D.C. reporters honestly do not believe these dishonorable financial relationships influence their coverage. This is a common — and entirely reasonable — misconception about how Washington works.

The wall between Washington and the world grows taller. An insular city becomes more insular, and the citizens it serves become more distant.

Corporations and their lobbyists do not approach journalists and say, “Here’s $20,000, write something nice about the F-35 Lightning.”

A famous 1996 BBC interview sheds light on what’s really going on. Journalist Andrew Marr asked Noam Chomsky, “How can you know that I’m self-censoring?” “I don’t say you’re self-censoring,” Chomsky replied. “I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believed something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.”

This is the way the system actually functions. Sherman, Palmer, and their peers in the business see themselves as genuine shoe-leather reporters, covering politics without fear or favor.

The perception of the “facts” and of right and wrong just happens to fall within the same range of beliefs shared by their subjects and sponsors.

Why might John Thune, the leader of the Senate GOP, share donors with a center-left Beltway rag? Thune and Punchbowl are cogs in the same machine, and the corporate cash is the grease on its wheels. Some of those wheels get a bit squeaky at times, but the machine never stops.

Meta can pay a newsletter to host a breakfast on internet safety where journalists will exchange cards and conversation with executives and lobbyists. They won’t meet the parents who say Meta failed to protect their child from sex predators. Those stakeholders are typically not organized or wealthy enough to pay for face time with executives.

RELATED: Tax-exempt hospitals are not putting their patients first

David M. Levitt/Bloomberg/Getty Images

As a consequence, the wall between Washington and the world grows taller. An insular city becomes more insular, and the citizens it serves become more distant.

One reporter who spent years working at one of the Beltway rags put it this way:

It’s important to understand that corporate sponsorships are central to the business model. Honestly, the newsroom at Politico is only about half of the actual company. They have an entire floor in their Rosslyn office for business operations. When you have that level of financial interdependence, it inevitably spills into the newsroom. Even if there’s not an explicit bias in reporter stories or Playbook it still creates an institutional alignment with corporate interests and priorities that runs afoul of what we expect from a truly adversarial or accountability-driven press.

This story isn’t as sexy as cash being exchanged for coverage in some back-alley deal. The problem is much worse than that. It’s the final form of the American media’s shared worldview with its powerful subjects. They’re in control, and the rabble must be tempered.

The interests of politicians and journalists used to look like a Venn diagram: divergent with small overlap. Now that picture is just a circle.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published in the American Mind.

​Media, Dc, Opinion & analysis 

You see it constantly, some version of this claim: “The cost of child care is the single biggest obstacle to working women and families.”

From there come the familiar conclusions: “The state needs to subsidize child care.” “We need affordable day care for working moms.”

No, we don’t.

While claiming to elevate women, feminism has steadily lowered the status of motherhood and homemaking.

What we need is to recognize that it’s not normal — nor healthy — for children to be farmed out to strangers during their earliest years so that Mom can be “more than just a mom” with her career.

Yes, there are millions of families in which both parents must work to keep a roof over their heads. But there are millions more who don’t need two incomes. What gets called “need” is often just lifestyle expectation. What children actually need rarely enters the calculation.

Luxury expectations

Modern expectations in 2026 America look less like necessity and more like luxury — something closer to the “hands-off” child-rearing of aristocratic households than to ordinary family life.

People talk about “affordable day care” as if it were self-evidently necessary. It isn’t. It only sounds that way because repetition has made it seem normal.

Behind it sits an unspoken belief: “It is right and proper — even ideal — to leave our children with hired strangers for most of the day.”

Even 40 years ago, that would not have sounded normal. Most people still believed that all else being equal, children were best raised by their mothers (and with a father in the home). Day care might be necessary — but it was understood as a regrettable second-best option.

Today, even many conservatives won’t question it. To do so invites accusations of harming mothers or failing to support “hardworking single moms.”

But prolonged parental absence is not neutral. Children need their mothers, especially in their early years. We can cite studies, but we don’t need them to see what’s plainly in front of us.

Strikingly, the people who claim to “need” day care are often those who don’t. What they want is a standard of living that would have been considered extravagant a generation or two ago.

RELATED: Socialist Mamdani rolls out costly ‘free’ child care program to NYC workers — after crying financial crisis

Alexi J. Rosenfeld/Getty Images

Maxed-out minimums

Take Democrat Rep. Brittany Pettersen of Colorado. She has cultivated an image as a sainted working mother, bringing her small child onto the House floor while lamenting the lack of day care for “working moms.”

There’s just one problem: Congress has had full-time day care on Capitol Hill since 1987.

What’s happening here isn’t necessity — it’s performance. The question she avoids is whether her child’s needs might outweigh the demands of a camera-facing career.

And it’s not just politicians. Middle-class Americans have adopted a set of “minimum” expectations that earlier generations would have recognized as indulgent:

Two cars (preferably full-size SUVs). Separate bedrooms for each child. A full slate of extracurriculars. No trade-offs between career ambition and motherhood. Children’s needs subordinated to adult preferences. Government support for single parenthood without fathers in the home.

Modern-day Tudors

In the feudal world, there was a distinction between a woman and a lady. A woman belonged to the working class; a lady to the aristocracy.

Women raised their children directly — feeding them, caring for them, folding them into the rhythms of daily life. Ladies did not.

In the Tudor royal court, for example, a noblewoman did not breastfeed. A wet nurse was hired in advance and took over immediately. Children were raised by nurses, governesses, and tutors, with parents appearing only intermittently.

The result was distance — emotional, developmental, and often moral.

For all our technological differences, the psychology isn’t so different today. The aristocratic habits of detachment have been democratized. What was once a marker of nobility is now treated as a baseline expectation.

There are better models to follow.

An old-fashioned approach

I have a friend, Tasha, a Catholic mother of nine. Her husband works full-time; she manages the home.

They don’t have two SUVs. They don’t have a large house. But they have what they need: a home, a van that fits everyone, good food, clean clothes, and a stable, loving family life.

How does she do it? The way families did for generations — before the late-20th-century promise that women could “have it all” and should expect it immediately.

She shops carefully. Buys in bulk. Reuses what she can. She hasn’t outfitted each child with personal screens to keep them isolated. Her household is structured around shared life, not individual consumption.

Degraded status

While claiming to elevate women, feminism has steadily lowered the status of motherhood and homemaking. For decades, we’ve heard that women are “more than just mothers,” that raising children prevents them from “being someone.”

Consider what that sounds like to a child.

The desire for status is natural — for men and women alike. Motherhood once carried that status. As it has been stripped away, many women seek it elsewhere.

But the substitute — career-first identity combined with outsourced child-rearing — is narcissistic, materialistic, and ultimately unsatisfying. It can be hard on families and hard on children.

It’s also hard on mothers themselves. I’ve known many women who report that their contentment increased when they let go of “girlboss” career-woman expectations to concentrate on raising their children and making the home a nurturing place for their families.

Where now?

How do we fix this? I don’t know. Many Western families can’t get by on a single income. Men who want to be good providers can work hard and it’s still not enough. Some mothers need to work.

But we can acknowledge that economic reality without accepting how it has distorted us. We can stop demanding a government solution to what is fundamentally a problem of values. We need to reacquaint ourselves with what we really are as men and women and what we really need. I can’t give a road map for how to achieve this. But it has to start by hauling our aristocratic assumptions into the sunlight and seeing them for what they are.

​Lifestyle, Culture, Motherhood, Day care, Babies, Childcare, Intervention 

Watching the reports out of Old Dominion University following the terrorist attack last month, the details came in the way they always do. Confusion. Fear. Families waiting for answers that arrive agonizingly slow.

There are no clever observations for moments like this. Only grief, a sober anger at what has been done, and a quiet respect for those who move toward danger despite the risks.

In the hours that followed, law enforcement stood before the microphones and said something familiar about the terrorist.

Past behavior predicts future performance.

The gospel does not offer a refined version of our past. It replaces it.

It was not delivered with edge or indignation. It sounded more like a sigh, the kind that comes from seeing the same pattern unfold one too many times.

We all understand what that means.

As Americans stood in grief, that phrase was repeated as the events were recounted. Members of the media, pundits, and political officials picked it up as well, and it echoed for days. And it lingered. You know how some phrases land hard and stay with you?

Past behavior predicts future performance.

I couldn’t shake it. It followed me for several weeks. As Easter approached, that phrase pressed further.

While the pattern is clearly seen in terrorists and career criminals, the harder question is whether that diagnosis is limited to them. Or does that diagnosis reach further — into the human condition itself?

The apostle Paul describes the same struggle with unsettling honesty, doing what he does not want to do and returning to what he knows he should leave behind. The issue is not merely what we do, but what we are by nature.

That uncomfortable truth points to something we recognize much closer to home — not in acts of terror or even criminal behavior, but in patterns we cannot seem to break. We see that uncomfortable truth in the anger that resurfaces, the grudges we carry, the actions we excuse and quietly return to.

Our actions are different in degree, certainly. They are not the same in consequence — but not unrelated.

Scripture does not blur those distinctions, but it does press deeper than behavior. And that is where the discomfort settles in.

RELATED: Scripture or slogans — you have to choose

Godong/Universal Images Group/Getty Images

Because if this is not just “out there,” then we are not merely observers of the pattern. It’s one thing to recognize the pattern in others. It’s another to consider whether it touches us as well. And that raises a question most of us would rather not sit with for long.

Are we simply watching something broken in the world, or are we looking at something that runs through us as well?

Because if it is the latter, then the problem is not occasional, but continual.

It is not just in headlines, it is in our hearts. And that is a harder place to stay.

Because if the future depends on us, then the trajectory is not uncertain. It is already set.

Our culture often insists that we are basically good people.

If so, then why would we need a savior? If not, then what are the implications?

The men who framed this country wrestled with that thought. They did not build a system on the assumption that people would consistently do what is right or that they are basically good. They built a government filled with oversight that restrains what is wrong, because they knew what resides in the human heart eventually shows up in government.

Which raises a harder question than any press conference can answer.

What breaks the pattern?

Because history suggests we do not. We adjust, we regulate, we respond, and all of that has its place. But none of it reaches far enough to change what drives the pattern in the first place.

And this is precisely where Easter speaks.

RELATED: Where Easter really comes from

Bernard Jaubert/UCG/Universal Images Group/Getty Images

It’s not that people try harder or gradually become better versions of themselves. Left to ourselves, we cannot change. We must be changed.

The gospel does not offer a refined version of our past. It replaces it. Not my record, but His. Not a cleaned-up life, but a different standing altogether.

What Scripture calls sin is not managed at the cross. It is judged. And what we could not produce is given.

That is why the Resurrection matters.

Because death has always been the final confirmation that the pattern holds. It is where every life, left to itself, arrives. But if death itself is overturned, then the pattern it confirms is no longer absolute.

Something has interrupted it.

The apostle Paul captured it in a single phrase:

“And such were some of you” (1 Corinthians 6:11).

Were.

Left to ourselves, the pattern holds. It always has. But Easter declares that we are not left to ourselves.

Past behavior may predict future performance. It often does. But it is no longer the final authority.

Because the One who stepped into history, took our past upon Himself, and walked out of the grave now defines the future of all who belong to Him.

Not a second chance or a fresh start, but a new standing.

Not my record, but His. And that changes everything.

​Easter, Old dominion university attack, Jesus, Christians, Gospel, Sacrifice, Apostle paul, Savior, Christ, Opinion & analysis, Resurrection 

On April 1, NASA launched the Orion spacecraft from Kennedy Space Center in the first crewed lunar journey in over 50 years.

While some celebrated the news as a historic feat, others condemned it as a waste of resources and an overstepping of natural limits.

“I had a lot of people push back and say, ‘Glenn, space is a waste of money, and it’s our Tower of Babel trying to make ourselves look so great,”’ Glenn Beck says.

But he disagrees. “I don’t look at it that way. I look at it from the view of an explorer, and I believe God wants us to explore.”

On this episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” Glenn speaks with Christian astrophysicist Hugh Ross about the ethics of space travel from a biblical perspective and the conspiracy theory that the first moon landing was fake.

Ross agrees with Glenn that space exploration does not overstep godly boundaries.

“He made us curious. … I think God gave us a curiosity for a reason. He really does want us to explore, but I think He also wants us to do it in the most efficient and effective way possible,” he says.

Glenn then pivots to the conspiracy theorists who hold that the 1969 moon landing — when Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were live-broadcasted walking on the moon — was a hoax.

“A lot of people say we never even went to the moon the first time. … Did we go to the moon, and does it matter?” he asks Ross.

“I actually got to watch the moon landing live on television when I was much younger,” Ross says, “and what really thrilled me was watching Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong putting up a laser reflector.”

“There’s now three laser reflectors on the moon. Physicists beam laser beams off them every single day, and it’s because of those laser reflectors that the Apollo astronauts put on the moon that we’re able to test theories of gravity to a degree we’ve never been able to do before,” he adds.

But these laser reflectors aren’t the only proof.

“The vehicles left behind by the astronauts are still there, and they’re being photographed on a regular basis,” he explains.

Glenn then likens moon landing deniers to the people who contend there’s no evidence that the Great Flood documented in Genesis actually happened.

But Ross has spent years gathering scientific and biblical evidence to argue the contrary. His new book, “Noah’s Flood Revisited,” is a deep dive into his theory that the flood indeed happened — just not the way many have traditionally interpreted it.

To hear Ross explain his fascinating theory, watch the video above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, Blazetv, Blaze media, Ross hughes, Christianity, Space exploration, Race to the moon, Artemis ii