Category: blaze media

Last December we tackled the ModRetro Chromatic, a handheld gaming system that plays Game Boy and Game Boy Color games.

The brainchild of tech billionaire and founder of Anduril Industries Palmer Luckey, the Chromatic offered enhanced display and functionality, with the ability to pop in Pokemon games of the past. It came only with Tetris as a bundled launch title, with other games available for separate purchase.

Now, a full rerelease of the ModRetro is finally here, and it is beautiful.

‘We have a generation growing up having never had any need to touch physical media.’

Apart from the original sapphire screen cover, purposefully clicky buttons, and enhanced lighting one typically gets from a modified Game Boy, the Chromatic now comes with even more games and a slew of accessories, which are very exciting.

Let’s say the leaf-green Chromatic is your go-to ($199.99). You’re going to want to pick up the matching Koss Porta Pro headphones ($49) because they absolutely stole the show.

Yes, stole. Originally released in 1984, these retro-style headphones will shock you with their quality. They feel natively louder, especially when compared to different types of headphones. Tested with the new game Self Simulated ($39.99) — a platformer starring a R.O.B.-esque robot — the Porta Pros outshined a 2020 pair of JBL Live 400BT on-ear wireless headphones, Sony WF-C700N wireless ear buds from 2023, and Sony’s 2025 MDREX15AP/B, which are newer but old-school wired headphones.

Be warned: Sliding these retro headphones on will certainly induce flashbacks to the back of your family’s station wagon.

RELATED: Back to the future? Palmer Luckey’s Chromatic does nostalgia right

Photo by Blaze News

Gamers will be surprised by the rerelease of Sabrina: Zapped! ($39.99), which originally came out for the Game Boy Color in 2000. Why? Because it shows ModRetro is indeed interested in reviving old feelings for different demographics.

The Mod Kit ($14.99) is also available for budding engineers (a nice nod from Luckey that I couldn’t get my hands on). It offers replacement parts and buttons to style to a user’s liking but does not require any complex maneuvering — just a pointy device and desire for change.

Replace the directional pad, A, B, or start and select buttons, among others.

What the Chromatic offers that no other old handheld can do is streaming. The device can now stream gameplay natively to Discord, Mac, and PC, with no extra hardware required.

Return asked Torin Herndon, CEO at ModRetro, why this was such an important feature to include this time around.

“So many devices require an intermediate dock for streaming video, which drastically reduces the possible convenient use cases,” Herndon explained. “We felt that it was essential to open up streaming Game Boy games, simply while using a handheld console with proper button layout.”

What Herndon and ModRetro did not know, though, is that Return had a secret weapon up its sleeve: a Game Boy Camera.

Not only does the Game Boy Camera work on the Chromatic for taking offensively bad pictures that range in color from light green to black, but by simply connecting the Chromatic to a PC via USB-C, gamers worldwide can livestream in sparkling low-res quality through the device.

Not many will take up this offer, but this crossover of retro tech was an incredibly satisfying discovery.

RELATED: Palmer Luckey-led crypto bank promises startups a capital hoard safe from scheming feds

Photo taken by Blaze News via Game Boy Camera on the Chromatic

Gamers can also marry a Chromatic to an old Game Boy Color through the Link Cable ($14.99). This can revive decades-old Pokemon trades and rivalries or provide head-to-head match-ups on Mario Golf, for example. (The link will not work with the original Game Boy, alas.)

The rechargeable battery pack ($29.99) that 90s babies wished they had as a kid provides about 16 hours of gameplay after charging by USB-C for a few hours. This means you can save those official ModRetro-branded batteries if you are insane about your collecting, which is totally normal.

Photo by Blaze News

According to Herndon, Return was far from being the only group of gamers excited about the product. The success of the Chromatic is what sparked a second release, with the new games, kit, and even a firmware updater tool.

“Last year, we had no idea if we would strike a chord with a wider audience or if this device would only appeal to a handful of weirdos like us at ModRetro,” Herndon joked. “Since it ended up having broader interest, we wanted to make the experience available to as many people as possible.”

Why is retro gaming coming back, and how did the company come to realize that not everything has to be frontier-level tech to be desired and important?

Herndon replied reflectively. “A lot of frontier tech never stops to ask itself ‘why?’ At the most basic level, people oscillate between being productive and being entertained. Increased technology can sometimes be correlated with increased entertainment, but generally it is not,” he went on. “This is why there are probably games with tens of millions of dollars of development that have fewer play hours than Chromatic Tetris in 160×144 pixels. At ModRetro, we like to think about distilling entertainment into simple forms.”

The CEO added that if physical media is going to make a comeback, it is going to be through a new generation yearning for it.

“We have a generation growing up having never had any need to touch physical media. I think it was inevitable that they would become curious about the romance of the physical form of various media formats from their parents’ generation.”

After plugging in that Game Boy Camera, we totally agree.

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

​Retro tech, Return, Game boy, Game boy color, Palmer luckey, Gaming, Video games, Chromatic, Mod retro, Tech 

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky once again bucked his party, this time taking aim at Vice President JD Vance.

The Trump administration claimed to have successfully struck a Venezuelan drug boat on Tuesday, killing 11 traffickers identified as members of the Tren de Aragua gang. Vance and other high-profile Republicans championed the strike, calling it the “highest and best use of our military.”

‘Did he ever read To Kill a Mockingbird?’

Vance experienced pushback from the usual suspects like Brian Krassenstein, who called the strike a “war crime.” Vance promptly responded by saying, “I don’t give a s**t what you call it.”

While the left raged on about Vance’s comments, Paul joined the chorus.

RELATED: Horrific video sparks outrage after young Ukrainian woman is fatally stabbed, allegedly by repeat offender

Photo by Alex Wroblewski-Pool/Getty Images

Paul criticized the military action for not providing the Venezuelan alleged drug traffickers due process before being killed.

“JD ‘I don’t give a s**t’ Vance says killing people he accuses of a crime is the ‘highest and best use of the military,'” Paul said in a post on X. “Did he ever read To Kill a Mockingbird? Did he ever wonder what might happen if the accused were immediately executed without trial or representation??

“What a despicable and thoughtless sentiment it is to glorify killing someone without a trial.”

Paul’s criticism was met with backlash from some of his Republican colleagues who accused Paul of “defending foreign terrorist drug traffickers.”

RELATED: Jasmine Crockett’s jaw-dropping defense of criminals: ‘They literally are trying to survive’

Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

“What’s really despicable is defending foreign terrorist drug traffickers who are *directly* responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans in Kentucky and Ohio,” Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio said in a post on X. “JD understands that our first responsibility is to protect the life and liberty of American citizens.”

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

​Jd vance, Donald trump, Trump administration, Rand paul, Senate republicans, Bernie moreno, Venezuela, Tren de aragua, Drug trafficking, Due process, To kill a mockingbird, Politics 

Andrew Beck has written a useful and provocative essay about a subject that has been simmering in American politics for decades. The dual accelerants of events and ideology brought that simmer to a boil in 2020.

The disputed question remains open: What is an American? It’s impossible to answer that question without its predicate: What is America? If we answer those questions, we are led to the primordial question of politics, which concerns justice: Are America and her institutions good?

If America is to endure, we must rehabilitate the creed after a century of distortion and neglect.

These are the fundamental queries at the heart of the assimilation debate. What are we assimilating new Americans to — and why? The right remains divided on these issues, as it has in different and shifting ways in the postwar era.

Until the left moderates on the topics of citizenship, assimilation, and civilizational stability, it will be up to the American right (and its fellow travelers across the Atlantic) to have a rational argument about the preservation of American and Western civilization.

Creedal mutations

Beck writes about assimilation in terms of America’s “historic way of life,” “American culture,” “language,” “mores,” “Christianity,” and “civic ideals.” America’s “principled assertiveness” of a “unifying identity,” which is made up of these components, “transformed a continent of European colonists and later immigrants into a single people.” He is correct that “Christianity shaped our institutions, our conception of law and liberty, our ethos of charity, and our traditions of self-rule.”

But we must remember that after decades of self-government and increasing conflict, the American people decided to break with a mother country that shared these common cultural touchstones. Any consideration of a “unifying identity” that has driven assimilation for most of American history after that break must reckon with a new American political culture, forged in the principles and experiences of the American Revolution.

It is fashionable, especially on the young right, to disparage the place of America’s creed in the American way of life. Abstractions about all men being created equal and natural rights are waved away or denied. Even worse, the American creed — that is, the political thought of the Declaration of Independence — is thought to be a source of the ills of modernity.

However, sober interlocutors in this debate should acknowledge that many on the right have come by this passion honestly as an overcorrection for intellectual laziness and moral confusion about America being only an idea. Add to that the decades of irresponsible and utopian foreign adventurism in pursuit of “spreading democracy.”

Finally, throw in 65 years of heedless immigration policy lacking any due consideration of the cultural distance between the American people and those the ruling class would admit as new Americans. The natural reaction to such a misguided and perverted elevation of the modern so-called “creed” to the exclusion of all else inevitably led to a snap back to a culture-first, or even culture-only, reflex.

But to understand America properly and fully requires an appreciation of the crucial importance of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, in addition to the dominant Anglo-Protestantism present at America’s founding. Both creed and culture matter in America, and after 250 years, they have fused our habits and self-understanding.

Picking creed over culture, or vice versa, is utopian because it neglects public opinion and political reality.

In addition to understanding the original blend of American creed and culture at the founding, it is also vital to understand the ways in which America’s creed and constitutional culture have been warped and appropriated over the last century by the left, whether under the evolving banners of progressivism, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s liberalism, post-1960s leftism, or wokeism.

If America is to endure, we must rehabilitate the creed after a century of distortion and neglect, while also ensuring our immigration policy doesn’t further erode America’s constitutional culture and way of life.

The OG creed and its culture

America’s leading thinker on the relationship between creed and culture in the American founding is my colleague, Claremont Review of Books editor Charles Kesler. He has been writing about the problem for at least 20 years, sometimes using the great Samuel Huntington as a foil.

Huntington was no enemy of America’s creed, but in his book “Who Are We?,” he put primary emphasis on the Anglo-Protestant culture of America’s founding. In 2019, Kesler gave an underappreciated speech at the first National Conservatism conference, pointing out the difficulties with Huntington’s culture-first approach:

Huntington is left awkwardly to face the fact that his beloved country began, almost with its first breath, by renouncing and abominating certain salient features of English politics and English Protestantism — namely, king, lords, commons, parliamentary supremacy, primogeniture and entail … and the established national church. There were, of course, many cultural continuities — Americans continued to speak English, to drink tea, to hold jury trials before rogue judges, and to read the King James Bible. But there has to be something wrong with an analysis of our national culture that literally leaves out the word “American.” “Anglo-Protestantism” — what’s American about that, exactly? The term would seem to embrace many things that our country tried and gave up and that have never been American at all, much less distinctively so. Huntington tries to get around this difficulty by admitting that the creed has modified Anglo-Protestantism, but if that is so, how can the creed be derived from [the culture] of Anglo-Protestantism? When, where, how, and why does that crucial term “American” creep onto the stage and into our souls?

Thomas Jefferson called the Declaration an “expression of the American mind.” I need not rehearse in full America’s creed here. Most readers of Blaze News and the American Mind know it well.

In a speech at the Claremont Institute’s 2025 Statesmanship Award dinner in July, Vice President JD Vance gave voice to a view on the right that is gaining momentum:

Identifying America just with agreeing with the principles … of the Declaration of Independence — that’s a definition that is way over-inclusive and under-inclusive at the same time. What do I mean by that? Well, first of all, it would include hundreds of millions, maybe billions, of foreign citizens who agree with the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Must we admit all of them tomorrow? If you follow that logic of America as a purely creedal nation, American purely as an idea, that is where it would lead you.

Within the principles of the American creed itself, however, this is a problem that is easily handled. If all men are created equal — that is, they have equal claims to the natural right to liberty — then they cannot justly be ruled without their consent.

The American people also announced their right and duty in the Declaration “to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

The question of admitting new members of the political community was incorporated into the U.S. Constitution, ratified 12 years after the Declaration. Acting through their representatives in Congress, the American people would control the rules for naturalization. They were thus amply empowered to be the guardians of the velocity and nature of expanding the political community as new immigrants arrived in America.

The question of what kinds of arriving peoples and cultures would be most likely to assimilate to this new American culture, shaped by this new creed, can be found throughout public and private discussions and writings in the early republic. American officials acting on behalf of public opinion would have to guard the understanding of Americanness as America inevitably grew.

Kesler calls this “the statesman’s point of view,” encompassing “both the proper role of creed and culture” in the formation of “a national identity and a common good”:

In the 1760s and early 1770s, American citizens and statesmen tried out different arguments in criticism of the mother country’s policies. Essentially, they appealed to one part of their political tradition to criticize another, invoking a version of the ancient constitution to criticize the new constitution of parliamentary supremacy — in effect, appealing not only to Lord Coke against John Locke but to John Locke against John Locke. In the Declaration of Independence, Americans appealed both to natural law and rights on the one hand, and to British constitutionalism on the other, but to the latter only insofar as it didn’t contradict the former. Thus, the American creed emerged from within, but also against, the predominant culture. The revolution justified itself ultimately by an appeal to human nature, not to culture, and in the name of human nature … the American people, and God — as supreme creator, lawgiver, judge, and executive — the revolutionaries set out to form an American union with its own culture. Everyone recognized in the founding that certain qualities of mind and heart would be required of American citizens. If so, politics … had to help shape a favoring culture. Most of the direct character formation, of course, would take place at the level of families, churches, state and local governments — and eventually public and private schools.

This question of the “certain qualities of mind and heart” necessary for a durable and responsible republican citizenry applies with equal force to the presence, or lack thereof, of those qualities in the future citizens we admit as immigrants. As Pavlos Papadopoulos reminded us recently at American Reformer, George Washington worried even about how a group of moderate European academics, imported all at once into one place, would assimilate to American life in 1794.

This throws into stark relief Beck’s worries about the message being conveyed by the statue of the Hindu deity Hanuman that was erected in Sugar Land, Texas. His worries are Washington’s, updated for our current circumstances and recent immigrant flows in America. By importing enclaves of immigrants while neglecting crucial questions of hearts, minds, and assimilation, Beck fears we are exacerbating the conditions that have been diluting our common national identity for decades.

Immigration and assimilation — right and left

To embellish Beck’s argument in Kesler’s terms, we have neglected the crucial questions of “character formation” that are the rightful and primary province of “families, churches, state and local governments,” and public and private education. If all these institutions were more robust and assertively American, Beck would have had much less reason to raise the questions he did.

The average reader, I suspect, will object that I’m being much too coy. America’s dominant public ruling philosophy has done far worse than just “neglect” the character formation necessary for the perpetuation of our republican institutions.

At least 60 years of liberal public policy, NGO legal activism, and cultural warfare have done much to dismantle, disrupt, and corrupt the family; infiltrate American churches, undermining their core tenets; homogenize and defang state and local governments’ superintendence of health, safety, and morals; and transform public and private education into enemies of any confident American identity.

The old creed and culture have their champions, and might still live in the hearts and minds of perhaps even a majority of the American people, however latent. But the prospect of revived momentum and increasing success on various fronts in the right’s project to revive the older American way of life has radicalized the left, revealing the depths of its hostility to America as it once was. Our divisions are increasingly over the very ends themselves, not simply just the means.

The two rival creeds mean we have two immigration and assimilation paths in front of us.

The critics of Vance’s Claremont speech indignantly invoke the principles of the Declaration and Abraham Lincoln’s praise of them to vilify his caution about a creed-only approach to immigration and assimilation. But a careful reading of the leading documents and public arguments of modern liberalism over the last century shows something concerning: an intellectual and political movement dedicated to the fundamental transformation of America’s founding creed and constitutional culture rather than the application of the old creed’s principles to changing times.

The modern left not only rejects, in Lincoln’s words, “the standard maxims of a free society” laid out in the Declaration of Independence, but also the entire anthropology and cosmology of America’s founding creed.

As Kesler put it in the conclusion of his 2019 NatCon speech, Samuel Huntington’s uncritical acceptance of this modern story liberals tell about themselves and their project led him to misdiagnose our current ills and their civilizational remedy:

He persisted in thinking of liberals … as devotees of the old American creed who pushed its universal principles too far. Who rely on reason to the exclusion of a strong national culture. But when liberals, or progressives, renounced individualism and natural right decades ago, they broke with the American creed and did so proudly. When they abandoned nature as the ground of right, progressives broke as well with reason, understood as a natural capacity for seeking truth, in favor of reason as a servant of will, or of culture, or history, fate, and finally nothingness. In short, Huntington failed to grasp that our liberals attack American culture because they reject the American creed around which that culture has formed and developed from the very beginning. The American creed is the capstone of American national identity, but it requires a culture to sustain it. And our task … is to recognize the indispensability of the creed but also the absolute necessity of a hospitable culture, which, combined with political wisdom, can help to shape a people who can live up to its own principles.

Those principles and their sustaining culture are at issue in our current debates about immigration and assimilation.

We have two rival creeds and accompanying constitutional cultures vying for public acceptance and legitimization. The founders’ creed and its limited-government republicanism — however beleaguered and weakened — continue to endure, stubbornly. The left’s rival creed of lifestyle identity politics and unlimited bureaucratic government has been slowed by reality, internal contradictions, and a revived sense of purpose and political momentum on the right.

RELATED: National conservatism is the revolt forgotten Americans need

Photo by FilippoBacci via Getty Images

The two rival creeds mean we have two immigration and assimilation paths in front of us. The continued revival, reinvigoration, and assertion of America’s founding creed, constitutionalism, and civilizational confidence can make possible a coherent approach to immigration and assimilation that will preserve American republicanism through our 250th birthday and beyond.

However, if we continue down the path of modern liberalism and its insistence that any cultural or creedal assertion by Americans is xenophobic, colonialist, or racist, then assimilation will transform into bureaucratic and despotic balkanization — and we will lose the cultural and creedal touchstones that could continue to shape and preserve one American people.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at the American Mind.

​Opinion & analysis, Opinion, Assimilation, Immigration, Immigration crisis, Citizenship, American mind, American founding 

On August 28, 23-year-old Robin (formerly Robert) Westman, a transgender-identifying biological male, fired through the windows of Annunciation Catholic Church in Minneapolis, killing two children and injuring numerous others. Westman, who died by suicide, left behind a disturbing manifesto in video and written format, revealing his fixation on mass violence and his severe mental health disturbances.

Everyone is talking about his morbid obsession with mass shooters, his racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-Christian statements, and his self-loathing reflected in his manifesto. But are they missing the bigger picture?

What’s clear to Rick Burgess, BlazeTV host of “Strange Encounters,” is that Westman was plagued by demons – not the secular, metaphorical kind synonymous with mental illness and personal struggles. Real demons.

“It’s just so obvious that this is demonic possession,” he says.

For starters, Westman killed himself, as many mass shooters do. Rick draws a comparison between this desire to inflict self harm and biblical stories of demons terrorizing and torturing their hosts.

He then plays a short clip from one of Westman’s videos capturing him stabbing a hand-drawn diagram of the church he targeted, whispering “kill myself” repeatedly. Add to that his use of strange symbols, violent sayings, and sinister diagrams and drawings — like the one of him staring at his horned demon reflection in the mirror or a shooting target with a graphic of Jesus’ face on it — and it’s easy to see Westman was not merely afflicted by demons but full-on possessed.

“I don’t think anybody could convince me that this is just mental illness,” says Rick. “It’s of the spiritual realm so clearly.”

While secular society, especially on the left, is going to tell us our prayers are fruitless and push for legislative action for gun control, Rick says prayer is what we need more than ever.

“The prayer that we should pray is not just for protection; we need to pray a prayer of repentance,” he says.

“We are embracing things that blaspheme God. We are opening invitations to darkness throughout our society, throughout our government. We are telling God that we don’t want Him … and when that vacuum is created, it will be replaced with demonic activity,” he warns.

Even the strictest gun laws won’t do a thing to mitigate the forces of evil, he says. When we create a culture that confuses good and evil, promoting things God hates and spitting on His commands, we are inviting evil through the front door.

To hear more of Rick’s analysis and more about the reality of spiritual warfare, watch the episode above.

Want more from Rick Burgess?

To enjoy more bold talk and big laughs, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Strange encounters, Rick burgess, Demonic possession, Demonic oppression, Spiritual warfare, Blazetv, Blaze media, Robert westman, Robin westman, Minneapolis shooting, Mass shooting 

After a transgender shooter murdered children at Annunciation Catholic School last month, liberals demanded no more “thoughts and prayers.”

For once, they’re right — but not for the reasons they think.

Ritual scorn

Before the facts were fully known, liberals seized on the moment to lecture Americans about why prayer is an insufficient response to the tragedy.

Former White House press secretary Jen Psaki declared that “prayer is not freaking enough.” Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) went a step further. He used a press conference to browbeat Christians. “Don’t just say that this is about thoughts and prayers right now,” he declared.

The reaction was as predictable as it was tone-deaf.

Evil had just entered the sanctuary of God, and two innocent children were murdered. Yet progressives like Psaki and Frey believe that was the time to denounce believers who offer their sympathy to the victims and call out to God in a time of dire need?

It’s a familiar ritual: Politicians and pundits use tragedy to score easy points against Christians.

Are they right?

Yes — partially. While Scripture recounts miraculous answers to prayer, most Christians don’t experience immediate “results” from prayer (as if results are the goal; they’re not). Prayers don’t restore broken stained-glass windows and (typically) don’t resurrect life.

But in a way, these ghoulish critics are right: America needs something more than words.

America lacks the courage to name evil for what it is and to confront the anti-God and demonic ideologies that deform human souls.

It’s not that prayer is weak, ineffective, or insufficient. Calling on God is not a wholesale abdication of duty. Quite the opposite. Prayer is a powerful act precisely because it’s meant to lead us to repentance, action, and moral renewal. Christian tradition does not sever prayer from action. They are inherently intertwined.

So, I agree: Our country needs more action. But what kind?

Rotten roots

As liberals sneer at prayer — the one practice that consistently births moral courage in the face of evil — they offer to sacrifice the Second Amendment on the altar of progressivism. Endless laws, strict regulations, all in the name of “safety,” are pushed as the “real action” America needs. Ironically, they can’t name a single law that would have prevented the tragedy, short of repealing the Second Amendment entirely.

But gun control is not the cure. The real solution is moral action.

Right now, America lacks the courage to name evil for what it is and to confront the anti-God and demonic ideologies that deform human souls. At the core, the Annunciation Catholic School tragedy is the fruit of moral disorder, the result of a culture that catechizes people into anti-God, anti-truth ideologies.

When a society teaches young people to reject God, meaning, and moral reality — everything that is true and good — we should not be surprised when their brokenness turns monstrous.

RELATED: The idols and lies behind the Minneapolis Catholic school shooting

The cure begins with addressing the spiritual rot at the root of these tragedies: racial individualism, nihilism, the denial of objective truth, and the rejection of God. In the simplest terms, it means rejecting the worldview of progressive liberalism. And prayer, rightly understood, fuels this moral reckoning. It reminds us that righteous action is not merely a policy outcome but a divine imperative.

We have a duty to love God and to love our neighbor as ourselves. That means it’s time for courageous Americans to stand up and recover a moral vision that forms strong men and women who fear the Lord and walk in His ways.

No law will save us. Only righteous action from God-fearing men and women will prevent the next Annunciation tragedy.

Prayer’s demand

When Jesus hung on the cross and bore the weight of humanity’s sin, mockers looked upon the living God and declared, “He saved others, but he cannot save himself” (Matthew 27:42).

That is exactly what the prayer-mockers do. They think prayer doesn’t work or it has failed. Worse yet, they believe that God has failed.

But the eyes of man are easily led astray. The mockers on that day failed to discern that what they saw as a failure was anything but a failure. Jesus, after all, left the tomb alive.

So, yes: “Thoughts and prayers” aren’t enough. Not because prayer is insufficient but because prayer calls us to more than words; it demands moral seriousness and righteous action.

If “thoughts and prayers” are to mean anything, they must be joined to action — the hard, uncompromising, and courageous work of confronting evil, calling out false ideologies, and shaping a culture that values truth, virtue, human life, and the God that created us. And what is beautiful about prayer is that it prompts righteous but flawed people to step up and do what is right. It fuels our courage to act.

We must pray — because it’s vital — but we must also act. Prayer sets the compass, and moral action steers the ship. It’s high time we took the wheel.

​Thoughts and prayers, Prayer, Christianity, God, Jesus christ, Jesus, Annunciation catholic school, Anti-god ideologies, Faith 

Movies and television programs reportedly have significantly more sexual content, nudity, and immodesty now than those shown just a few decades ago. The so-called “adult entertainment” industry has, meanwhile, exploded, with one projection suggesting that it will grow from an estimated global market size of $58.8 billion in 2023 to $74.7 billion by 2030.

While depictions of sex are ubiquitous in the media, a new study suggests that the real thing is disappearing from the lives of everyday Americans.

The delay and avoidance of marriage appear to be another major factor.

Citing General Social Survey data, the Institute for Family Studies recently indicated that “Americans are having a record-low amount of sex.”

Whereas in 1990, 55% of adults ages 18 to 64 reportedly were having sex at least once a week, that number reportedly dropped to less than 50% by the turn of the century. As of last year, the percentage of adults ages 18-64 having sex weekly had fallen all the way down to 37%.

RELATED: Heritage Foundation’s Kevin Roberts: Conservatives must get ‘uncomfortably honest about our present crisis’

Photo by Toronto Star Archives/Toronto Star via Getty Images

When it comes to individuals ages 18-29 who reported not having sex in the last year, the number held steady at around 15% of respondents until 2010. However, between 2010 and 2024, that number skyrocketed to 24% in the General Social Survey.

There appear to be numerous factors at play, including shifting social norms; libido-killing prescription drugs; the pandemic; decreasing alcohol consumption; the interpersonal impact of social media, gaming, and the smartphone; and pornography. The delay and avoidance of marriage appear to be another major factor.

Dr. Brad Wilcox, professor of sociology at the University of Virginia and director of the National Marriage Project, and Lyman Stone, director of the Pronatalism Initiative at the IFS, noted in a 2019 article in the Atlantic that married people have sex more often but that the share of adults who are married was falling to record lows.

Whereas 46% of married men and women ages 18-64 reported having weekly sex, only 34% of their unmarried peers reported the same, said the new IFS study. However, married couples are also facing a so-called “sex recession,” as 59% of married adults ages 18-64 reportedly had sex once a week in the period between 1996 and 2008.

RELATED: American fertility rate hits all-time low as Dems clamor for foreign replacements

Photo by Heritage Art/Heritage Images via Getty Images

The new IFS study noted that younger generations are having less sex than their predecessors did in part because of a “decline in steady partnering, especially in marriage, and a decline in sexual frequency within couples.”

This “sex recession” has some obvious implications besides youngsters’ joylessness.

Data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in July revealed that U.S. fertility rates dropped to an all-time low in last year, with 1.599 children being born per woman. For comparison, the latest reported fertility rates in Australia, England and Wales, Canada, and China are 1.5, 1.44, 1.26, and 1.01, respectively.

The fertility rate necessary for a population to maintain stability and replenish itself without requiring replacement by foreign nationals is 2.1.

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

​Science, Health, Sex, Sexuality, Marriage, Fertility, Social media, Pornography, Psychology, Satisfaction, Replacement, Politics 

California has been facing a homeless crisis for a long time, and Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is of the mind that in order to solve it, the homeless need less rules and regulations and more freedom to appease their addictions.

“Clean and sober is one of the biggest damn mistakes this country’s ever made,” Newsom said once in a statement about the homeless crisis, noting that he has been known to “self medicate” with a glass of wine as well.

Founder of the Dream Center in Los Angeles, Matthew Barnett, calls it “one of the most discouraging statements ever made by our governor.”

“When I heard that comment I’m like, we’ve given up. We have no belief that people can change. We have no belief that people can escape darkness. And when I heard that, my jaw dropped. It was almost like something that was said that came from the spirit of darkness,” Barnett tells BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey on “Relatable.”

“It really was. Kind of like a really creepy, defeatist mentality,” he continues.

“The great accuser,” Stuckey agrees. “You’ll never get better. You’ll never defeat drunkenness or whatever.”

Barnett’s foundation helps those struggling with homelessness and addiction, and Barnett tells Stuckey that he has seen people with fentanyl addictions successfully get clean.

“They’re getting free and getting clean, and they’re excited. They’re praising and worshiping the Lord,” he explains.

Barnett believes Newsom’s attitude is a “total slap in the face” to those who are actively trying to change.

“That comment was simply kind of like the cultural feeling over the last five years. We can’t overcome stuff. We can’t win. We can’t fight poverty. We can’t achieve on our own,” he says, adding, “And so we just kind of have to rebuke that message every day by the way that we live.”

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.

​Video, Camera phone, Sharing, Upload, Video phone, Free, Youtube.com, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Relatable, The blaze, Allie beth stuckey, Blaze media, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Gavin newsom, Blaze online, Blaze originals, California homelessness crisis, Homelessness crisis, Los angeles, The dream center, Matthew barnett 

A video of a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee went viral after the footage captures an assailant senselessly and brutally murdering the young woman on a train.

The woman was later identified as Iryna Zarutska, a Ukrainian refugee who was stabbed multiple times in a random attack on a train in North Carolina on August 22. Zarutska had recently come to America “seeking safety” from the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, “hoping for a new beginning,” according to a GoFundMe for her loved ones.

‘Violent criminals commit crimes with impunity, while families live in fear.’

“This is an irreparable loss for her family,” the GoFundMe reads. “We have created this fundraiser to support … her loved ones during this heartbreaking time and to help them with the unexpected expenses.”

As details emerged surrounding the shocking tragedy, online outrage quickly followed.

RELATED: Jasmine Crockett’s jaw-dropping defense of criminals: ‘They literally are trying to survive’

– YouTube

The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department identified the alleged stabber as 34-year-old Decarlos Brown, a repeat offender. The CMPD arrested and charged Brown with first-degree murder for allegedly stabbing Zarutska multiple times, including once in the throat.

The suspect was also seen walking to another part of the train after the stabbing, blood on the knife dripping all over the ground. He quickly removed his red hoodie once passengers began to take notice.

Brown has been convicted of several offenses, including armed robbery and felony larceny.

“The tragedy of Iryna Zarutska’s death in Charlotte is the result of decades of Democrat DAs and Sheriffs putting their woke agendas above public safety,” Republican state Rep. Brenden Jones of North Carolina said in a post on X. “Violent criminals commit crimes with impunity, while families live in fear.”

RELATED: Radical college lecturer charged after allegedly throwing projectile at Border Patrol in California pot farm clash

shaunl/Getty Images

“She came here seeking safety from the war in Ukraine and was murdered in cold blood, no provocation,” Christina Pushaw, an alum of Gov. Ron DeSantis’ presidential campaign, said in a post on X.

“All the ‘progressive’ officials who release psychotic habitual violent offenders into our cities instead of institutionalizing them, are complicit in random murders like this.”

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

​North carolina, Ukraine, Russia, Russia ukraine war, Donald trump, Trump administration, Iryna zarutska, Brenden jones, House republicans, Ron desantis, Repeat offendor, Christina pushaw, North carolina stabbing, Ukrainian refugee, Charlotte, Charlotte stabbing, Politics 

Hannah Arendt famously said that the most effective method to subvert authority is to laugh. Political cartoonists have weaponized wit for centuries. As the influence of print media declined, meme-makers took up the challenge, waging ideological war far more swiftly and efficiently than any politician’s speech.

The downside is that the elite frequently lack a sense of humor.

‘It’s the world that’s vulgar. It’s a dark, yucky world that has to be made fun of. But that’s not our fault.’

During medieval and Tudor England, only the court jester was allowed to mock and insult the king; everyone else was imprisoned, branded, and mutilated, or worse, hung, drawn, and quartered. People in power have eliminated those who make fun of them for millennia, driven by narcissism and non-tolerance of criticism. Since the days of Aristotle and Aristophanes, attempts have been made to silence artists by arrest, torture, and death.

In our own time, the hangman, oubliette, and rack have given way to the digital horrors of deplatforming and cancellation. As effective as these have proven, there’s a growing sense that “wokeness” is on the verge of extinction.

The linguistic straightjacket of political correctness is beginning to loosen, and artists are emerging from the shadows, taking a well-deserved breath of fresh air, and finally pushing back against what has become one of the most censorious periods in modern history. After being held down for so long, there’s a lot of work to be done. It’s time to Make America Laugh Again.™️

Flip City Magazine has been reporting for duty since its 2020 founding. And while memes may still reign supreme, the Southern California-based crew aims to skewer pretensions the old-fashioned way — with an honest-to-God paper-and-ink periodical “delivered begrudgingly to your door by your woke mailman.”

Align recently corresponded via email with Flip City co-founders and editors Scott and Christy McKenzie, who submitted their replies jointly.

ALIGN: Could you tell us a little about yourself with everyone? Who you are, where you’re located, and what you do? How many people do you have working for you?

Scott and Christy McKenzie: We are Scott and Christy McKenzie, editors of Flip City Magazine, an independent quarterly comics and satire print magazine (described by comics luminary Mike Baron as “funnier than MAD or Cracked”), which we have published out of our remote home office in the Southern California mountains since 2020.

Every issue is packed with TV and movie parodies, comics, stories, interviews that don’t insult your intelligence. We’ve hosted and published over 40 writers and illustrators to date. While we bill ourselves as “America’s Last Laugh,” we have contributors from Sydney to Scotland to SAF.

Flip City Magazine

A: What inspired the creation of the magazine?

S&C: We were coming off a D-list movie project that went sideways. I needed a project into which I could dump every nugget of gold (or, alternately, flaming turd) idea that passed through my head, and this was the best format.

Smart satire magazines had phased out by the early ’90s in favor of men’s lifestyle mags, leaving a void that nobody thought was worth filling. I don’t think anybody has known what to do, with no reason to revive a passé format just to compete for crumbs with the remnants of MAD, publishing more lifeless corporate comedy and Trump hate.

But to resurrect it as a tool of counterculture, that has value. A free America has to have a satire magazine that’s independent and essentially populist.

And it’s only going to happen here from the looks of things. We are now, as Cracked editor Mort Todd put it, “the world’s only satire magazine,” for all “in tents and porpoises.”

A: What were your influences?

S&C: Early on, Saturday morning cartoons and color Sunday funnies. Which if you missed out on those days, that was some good times, with your bowl of cereal. Later, Cracked Magazine and MAD, “The Dr. Demento Show” for the funniest songs, and in the 1990s, alternative comics publishers like Fantagraphics. “The Book of the Subgenius” might have radicalized me.

A: Can you explain a little bit about the ideas process? How long does it take to go from pen to page?

S&C: It might take a couple of days to write the better part of a feature or a parody once I’ve got an angle. “Joker 2” (Vol. 23) was a musical parody with five songs, and I took my time to get it right. Readers who expect to hate musicals said they were pleasantly surprised. A musical parody is a delicate thing that can go wrong in so many ways, much like “Joker 2.” I’ll pass it on to one of our tremendous illustrator talents like Ben Sullivan or Dangerous Dave MacDowell, and they’ll reliably send back something that kills.

A: It’s pretty safe to say a more progressive element of the left has had something resembling ideological dominance over the entertainment industry for the last 10 years or so. Did you find it hard to find an audience?

S&C: We were fortunate enough to have a couple of YouTube advocates early on to get us going.

We initially offered Vol. 1 in digital format or in a short print run, and subscribers overwhelmingly chose print. So there is still plenty of demand for physical media.

However, there are plenty of platforms and influencers on the right who wouldn’t touch us. And the reason is that they can’t control our message, and many don’t want to take any chances at upsetting their viewers or advertisers.

Flip City Magazine

Most notably at the beginning was the Babylon Bee, who dubbed us “too edgy and vulgar” to advertise with them, which is entirely their prerogative. Although at the time, we were fairly clean. It’s the world that’s vulgar. It’s a dark, yucky world that has to be made fun of. But that’s not our fault.

People love to complain about the lack of alternative culture but Flip City is actually a solution. It heaps ridicule on people who deserve it, without being preachy. It’s the kind of cultural thing that people are literally asking for all the time. And it can be a huge thing and sway hearts and minds if people get behind it, support it, and subscribe. It’s just a good old-fashioned, all-American, funny mag, y’all.

A: As a Brit, I envy your First Amendment. My home country is awash with laws and regulations regarding the online regulation of speech. A recent investigation revealed that an average of 12,000 people are arrested each year for sending “grossly offensive” messages on the internet. Have you run into any problems or faced backlash over any controversial issues? Does the threat of cancel culture worry you guys?

S&C: Only subscription cancellations. They seem to peak when we poke the wrong sacred cow. I think our heritage subscribers have been conditioned by now to expect anything and trust us.

New readers aren’t sure what they’re going to get. They see a slick magazine and assume it must lean left because they’ve never seen anything else. And I think many are hesitant to believe it could be genuinely funny, despite praise from luminaries like Quite Frankly and James Corbett, because of the right’s track record on comedy. So you can’t blame them.

A: Do you consider yourself to be an equal-opportunity offender? Are there any targets on the right that you would think would be perfect to send up?

S&C: We’ve done bits about Dennis Prager and Charlie Kirk, and recently a Conservative Blowhard mini-magazine with columns by Tim Poolboy and Jack Poachposobiec. It’s clearly a goof on establishment gatekeepers and “Conservative, Incorporated,” as many call it. But it probably cost us some readers.

Sometimes, people don’t get the joke and think you’re the enemy. Everybody’s looking for a tell that you don’t agree with them about everything. We don’t mind shedding readers, to a point. We want the best and the brightest readers.

RELATED: Welcome to the new American Frontier

George Caleb Bingham: The Jolly Flatboatmen (1846) | National Gallery of Art

A: I’ve read a bunch of your spoof pieces, and I have to say, your parodies special edition had me laughing so much — it was hilarious! With all the endless political pandering and progressive messages crowbarred into mainstream culture, would you say Hollywood has become a parody of itself?

S&C: Thanks! Ben Sullivan is a parody illustrator on par with the greats and really deserves to be recognized. Hopefully, our upcoming print edition of the Parodies will get him more attention.

The industry may be a self-parody, but that doesn’t make it beyond parody. As long as it sucks, there will be a way to goof on it. A satire-proof utopia is unlikely in our lifetimes.

A: It’s been 10 years since the 2015 Charlie Hebdo massacre in France, when Islamic terrorists shot and killed 12 people for publishing a cartoon depicting the prophet Muhammed. Is there any subject matter off limits?

S&C: We’re not looking for that kind of action, though we do make fun of Antifa quite a bit, so we shouldn’t let our guard down.

Nobody wants to hear this, but the limits are determined by what people are willing to pay to read. There is no monolithic block of free-speech absolutists. People will weaponize their dollars against you if your hot takes start to annoy them, and they’ll go spend that money on Sydney Sweeney jeans just to show you. You could even make the argument that Flip City is being held hostage by the very readers we sought to entertain! For which the only remedy is more subscribers, to loosen the chokehold of these elitists over our content. And now you see how a print subscription is basically a win for democracy.

A: Comedy is a powerful medium with which to challenge elite power. The ruling class doesn’t like to be mocked. It is claimed that Stalin sent 200,000 people in the USSR to the Gulag for making jokes about him and the communist regime. In a recent episode, “South Park” turned its attention to Republican Kristi Noem. How do you think leading politicians should react?

S&C: I think a zero-tolerance policy would yield the best results. We’re talking FBI raids, enhanced interrogation methods. Find out who they are really working for. Possible ballistic missile strikes on their Culver City studio. Matt and Trey go to CECOT.

Also Stephen Colbert, he should be crushed under our regime’s iron fist and his bones ground into powder to fertilize our crops.

A: What can we expect to see for the rest of 2025?

S&C: Our Best of the Parodies 80-page special edition goes on pre-sale starting September 1 on our website, featuring the brilliant work of Ben Sullivan and our send-ups of “The Walking Dead,” “Stranger Things,” “Star Trek: Picard,” “The Mandalorian,” “Guardians of the Galaxy,” and more! We’re also working on new animated cartoons based on our parodies for 2026.

​Lifestyle, Comedy, Print, Magazines, Satire, Culture, Provisions, Interview, Media, Flip city magazine, Funny pages 

Doomsday date-setting is nothing new. People throughout the ages have perpetually speculated about when they believe the end times will come to fruition.

Since Jesus’ death and resurrection, his promise that he will one day return has left believers waiting in anxious anticipation. Along the way, the concept of the “rapture” became a key piece in this complex, prophetic puzzle. It’s a topic I detailed in my book “The Armageddon Code.”

End-times divide

Merriam-Webster defines the rapture as the “final assumption of Christians into heaven during the end time according to Christian theology.” And while this definition is fine in a general sense, rapture theology has splintered into many forms and fashions.

We certainly see many signs today that point to important reverberations as chaos swirls around the globe.

The concept centers on various biblical teachings, though 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 is a central text. “For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.”

Among Christians, there are a slew of beliefs about when — or even if — the rapture will unfold. Those who believe in a pre-tribulation rapture say Christians will be taken up to heaven by Jesus and protected before a seven-year tribulation period on Earth.

Others take a mid-tribulation stance, believing Christians will be brought up to glory halfway through the seven-year tribulation period. Then there’s the post-tribulation view, which sees the rapture and second coming of Jesus as one event.

There are some other perspectives as well, but the point is: The church is divided over the timing and even the existence of the rapture.

September 23, 2025?

Like many other theological constructs, it has become a lightning rod for debate. Yet there’s one area where there should be absolutely no controversy, debate — or even discussion: Date-setting.

Sadly, over the past two millennia, many people have attempted to set specific predictions about when they believe Jesus will rapture the church.

The latest madness centers on September 23, a date circulating on social media as the time when Christ will purportedly come back to take Christians to heaven.

“Rumors have recently gone viral online that the rapture will take place on September 23,” Charisma explains. “Videos across TikTok and YouTube claim dreams, visions, and even mathematical formulas confirm the return of Christ during this year’s Feast of Trumpets. Some are so convinced that they are selling possessions and preparing for that day as the final moment.”

While it’s hard to tell how widespread these proclamations have become, it’s simply another day, another rapture conspiracy theory.

No dates allowed

But there’s a major biblical problem with date-setting when it comes to the end times: We’re never told in scripture to do it.

Both Matthew 24:36 and Mark 13:32 proclaim that no one knows when the end will unfold. The former reads, “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

In the preceding verses, Jesus does offer powerful words after his disciples asked for the “sign of [Christ’s] coming and of the end of the age.” He encourages followers not to be deceived by fake messiahs and tells them there will be “wars and rumors of wars” and even famines and earthquakes all over the globe.

Jesus explains that these events will be the “birth pains,” and persecution will follow. He also notes that the gospel will be preached around the world before the end comes. There is, of course, debate about how to place these events in the context of future events, as some believe Christ’s warnings in these scriptures pertain — at least in part — to Rome’s destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70; some see his words as being both immediate and long-ranging prophecies.

RELATED: How to survive the end of the world in 6 easy steps

OlgaPtashko/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Regardless, Jesus makes it clear that we won’t know when the end of days will arrive. This elusive nature would, thus, apply to both a rapture event and Jesus’ second coming. In fact, Christ goes on to say that the conditions surrounding his return will be as in the days of Noah.

People around Noah were living their lives without a care until the flood shockingly took them away. He said his own re-emergence will follow a similar pattern.

“Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left,” Jesus proclaims in Matthew 24:40, with verse 41 continuing: “Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.”

Now, he does add the following in verse 42: “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come.” So there’s certainly a call to be alert, but never to date-set.

Faith, not forecasts

We certainly see many signs today that point to important reverberations as chaos swirls around the globe — much of it focused on Israel and the Middle East. People are lovers of themselves, and morality is fleeting.

But to claim the rapture is happening on a specific date like Sept. 23 isn’t only biblically incorrect and spiritually illiterate; it’s also dangerous.

Over a decade ago, other viral claims surrounded a man named Harold Camping.

Camping purportedly unsuccessfully predicted the rapture numerous times, with people who believed his proclamations reportedly giving up their money and possessions in anticipation; one man spent his entire life savings.

It was a tragic dynamic that would have been avoidable if people simply stuck to the biblical text.

Ultimately, if we’re concerned that the rapture or second coming (or both simultaneously, depending on your theological proclivities) is upon us, our best action is to reach the lost around us with God’s eternal truth.

Rather than waste time date-setting, we should be spreading the gospel to a watching world, because that’s a calling the Bible actually gives us.

​Rapture, End times, Christianity, Christians, Jesus, Bible, God, Jesus christ, Faith 

Electric or gas? The battle over the future of the automobile is far from over. Trump may have killed the federal EV mandate, but California’s still pushing hard for zero-emission vehicles, with a plan to phase out new gas-powered car sales by 2035.

While most of the industry is taking a wait-and-see approach, six major automakers — Ford, Honda, Volkswagen, BMW, Aston Martin, and Volvo — are firmly on Team California, whether they like it or not. That’s thanks to contracts they signed in 2019 locking them into the state’s strict emissions rules through 2026.

Are Ford, Honda, and the others at a disadvantage, stuck with more costly standards? Or are they ahead of the curve, ready for a future where emissions rules only get tougher?

Bad bet?

California muscle

To be fair, the odds may have looked a little better six years ago. California isn’t just the land of beaches and Hollywood — it’s a regulatory powerhouse in the auto world. Thanks to Section 209 of the Clean Air Act, the Golden State has a unique privilege: It can set tougher vehicle emissions standards than the federal government as long as the Environmental Protection Agency gives it a thumbs-up.

Why? Decades ago, California started battling smog in cities like Los Angeles, and it’s been a trailblazer in clean air policy ever since. More than a dozen states — New York, Massachusetts, and Oregon among them — follow California’s emissions standards, impacting about a third of the U.S. auto market.

Back in 2019, things got messy. The Trump administration pulled California’s EPA waiver, aiming to enforce one federal standard for fuel economy and emissions under the Corporate Average Fuel Economy program. This move was like throwing a wrench into the auto industry’s engine. California pushed back hard, and automakers were caught in the crossfire, facing a patchwork of rules. Enter the California Framework Agreements — a deal that would tie six automakers to California’s standards, no matter what happened in Washington.

Locked in

In July 2019, Ford, Honda, Volkswagen, and BMW stepped up to the plate, signing voluntary but ironclad agreements with the California Air Resources Board. Aston Martin and Volvo later jumped on board. These Framework Agreements committed the automakers to boosting fuel efficiency by roughly 3.7% annually and slashing greenhouse gas emissions for vehicles sold in California and its allied states, all the way through the 2026 model year.

Why sign on to such a deal? For these companies, it was a calculated move. The 2019 revocation of California’s waiver created a regulatory nightmare — automakers faced the prospect of designing cars for two different sets of rules. By aligning with California, these six sidestepped potential lawsuits, gained a clear roadmap for compliance, and scored some eco-friendly street cred.

It was a bet that California’s influence would outlast federal flip-flops. But here’s the thing: These contracts are binding, no matter what the feds do. Even when the Biden administration restored California’s waiver in 2022, these automakers were still on the hook for the 2019 terms.

Federal trumps state

Not every company was ready to tie itself to California’s control. Big players like General Motors, Toyota, and Stellantis leaned toward the Trump administration’s push for a single federal standard, hoping to simplify their lives. This split has created a fascinating divide in the industry as well as some potential nightmares.

Imagine the auto market as a chessboard. The six signatories are playing a long game, betting on California’s standards becoming the industry benchmark. Meanwhile, their rivals have more flexibility, aligning with federal rules that might be looser or stricter depending on the political winds.

This raises a big question: Are Ford, Honda, and the others at a disadvantage, stuck with more costly standards? Or are they ahead of the curve, ready for a future where emissions rules only get tougher?

RELATED: GM’s electric gamble is failing — but Barra won’t hit the brakes

Photo by Bill Pugliano / Stringer via Getty Images

Consumer retorts

So what does this mean for the cars you drive? Meeting California’s standards is no small feat. It demands serious cash for research and development for hybrid systems, electric vehicles, and cutting-edge engines that sip fuel. For Ford, Honda, Volkswagen, BMW, Aston Martin, and Volvo, these costs are locked in through 2026. That could mean pricier vehicles for buyers in California and its partner states, as automakers pass on the expense of compliance to customers.

For you, the consumer, it’s a mixed bag. Cars meeting California’s standards might save you money at the pump with better fuel economy or lower emissions. But upfront costs could sting, especially for budget-conscious buyers. If you live in a state following California’s rules, your car options might differ from those in, say, Texas or Ohio, where federal standards apply. It’s a patchwork market, and these six automakers are navigating it under stricter rules than their rivals.

Read ’em and weep?

California’s ability to set its own standards has sparked heated debates. Supporters say it’s a vital check on federal inaction, pushing automakers to innovate and clean up the air. Critics argue it’s a bureaucratic headache, forcing companies to juggle conflicting rules and driving up costs. The Framework Agreements tilt the scales toward California, proving its influence even when federal policy wavers.

It’s not such a great deal for the six automakers who signed those agreements. If federal standards get tougher, they might face overlapping rules. If they loosen, their competitors could gain an edge. The outcome will shape the industry for years to come.

In the meantime, the six are already gearing up, pouring billions into EVs and hybrids even with lower sales and losses. Ford’s betting on electric vehicles with its new manufacturing processes, Honda’s refining its hybrid tech and continuing its partnership with GM, and BMW, Volvo, Volkswagen, and Aston Martin are trying to figure out how to balance electric cars with what car people want. It’s a tough situation.

If you want an electric vehicle, I suggest you move quickly and buy one before the end of September 2025, where the tax credit for new and used EVs disappears.

​California, Emissions standards, Ev mandate, Corporate average fuel economy, Gavin newsom, Donald trump, Lifestyle, Ford, Honda, Volkswagen, Aston martin, Align cars 

Picture the scene: a mother straightening her child’s collar before drop-off; a father whispering, “Be good, I’ll see you after school”; children filing into the sanctuary where an inscription proclaims it as “the House of God and the gate of Heaven.”

Then, horror. On August 27, an 8-year-old and 10-year-old were shot and killed when 23-year-old “Robin” Westman opened fire through the stained glass windows of Annunciation Catholic Church while children attended Mass. The shooting began just before 8:30 a.m. during a worship service to mark the first week of school.

We’ve discipled a generation to crave applause — even if it comes through destruction.

What should have been the safest place became a scene of carnage.

The suspect — armed with a rifle, a shotgun, and a pistol — fired dozens of rounds into the sanctuary as children sat in pews, praying. Westman was later found dead in the back of the church from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

FBI Director Kash Patel said the FBI is investigating the shooting as an “act of domestic terrorism and hate crime targeting Catholics” — words that should make every Christian in America sit up and pay attention.

The facts reveal a pattern

Suspect Robin Westman graduated from Annunciation Catholic’s grade school in 2017, and a woman with the same name as Westman’s mother previously worked at the church where the shooting took place.

Westman identified as transgender, and in 2020, when he was 17 years old, his mother signed a consent form for him to legally change his name from Robert to Robin because he “identifies as a female and wants her name to reflect that identification.”

The attack was premeditated. Police say the shooter placed wooden two-by-fours through the door handles of two separate exits of the church, which police say required prior planning. The suspect also posted a manifesto on YouTube (since taken down) filled with angry rantings about, among many other things, a dream to “kill innocent children.”

This wasn’t random violence — it was a calculated assault on a Christian institution during worship.

And it’s eerily similar to a 2023 attack on the Covenant School in Nashville by a transgender killer who was also a former student and who wrote a manifesto revealing a vendetta against white Christian children.

The futility of identity without Christ

Our culture promises freedom in self-expression, but the writings of these shooters tell the truth: Self-made identities don’t set anyone free; they enslave.

When identity becomes idolatry, it demands worship. And when the idol disappoints — when the new name, the new gender, the new pronouns can’t deliver peace — the result is despair, rage, and destruction.

RELATED: Trans-identifying man with a ‘twisted mind’ said, ‘I want to die,’ before opening fire on Catholic Mass in Minneapolis

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Paul warned us in Romans 1: Exchange the truth of God for a lie, and futility follows. Darkened hearts, disordered passions, and ultimately death — that is exactly what we see in these stories. Young men and women convinced they could reinvent themselves apart from the God who made them, only to discover that the god of self is a cruel master.

The Covenant shooter’s journals revealed a heart consumed by confusion, obsession, and suicidal ideation. The Minneapolis shooter’s life echoed the same pattern — an identity unmoored from truth, a soul collapsing inward. These are not outliers. They are the predictable fruit of a culture that preaches, “You are whoever you say you are.”

The idol of infamy

The Covenant shooter’s journals revealed another obsession — not just with killing but with being known for it. The Minneapolis shooter also fantasized about being made famous in museum exhibits and imagined documentaries, and he dreamed of leaving a mark through blood. That’s not just violence. That’s worship.

This is the modern Tower of Babel: “Let us make a name for ourselves” (Genesis 11:4). But the bricks aren’t stacked stones, they’re stacked bodies. The altar isn’t on a desert plain, it’s in a classroom. When identity fails to satisfy, the idol of infamy steps in to whisper, “At least they’ll remember your name.”

Our culture feeds that idol daily. TikTok fame. Instagram clout. The myth that 15 minutes of recognition is worth a lifetime of obscurity. We’ve discipled a generation to crave applause — even if it comes through destruction.

But Scripture reminds us: The only legacy that matters is one hidden with Christ. “For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God” (Colossians 3:3). The names that endure are not the names carved into headlines but the names written in the Book of Life.

Minnesota’s gun laws couldn’t stop evil

In knee-jerk fashion, almost immediately after the news of the shooting broke, Minnesota’s local, state, and federal politicians began calling for more gun control. But here’s what they won’t tell you: Minnesota maintains some of the nation’s strictest gun control measures. The state requires universal background checks, enforces “red flag” laws, mandates waiting periods for handgun purchases, and prohibits certain firearm accessories. All three weapons used by Westman were purchased legally and recently.

Romans 1 isn’t just theology; it’s predictive sociology.

Yet, two children are dead and 17 were wounded by gun violence in Minnesota’s largest city.

Every law the gun control lobby demands was already in place. Every “common sense” restriction leftists claim will stop mass shootings was on the books. Yet, evil found a way — because evil always does when hearts are darkened and truth is rejected.

The problem isn’t access to firearms — it’s the spiritual disease eating away at young hearts in a culture that worships lies and delusions. When identity becomes idolatry, when self-invention replaces submission to God’s design, when we tell children they can be whoever they want to be apart from their Creator, when truth is exchanged for lies, the result is predictably destructive and death follows. Romans 1 isn’t just theology; it’s predictive sociology.

The church in the crosshairs

Wednesday’s tragedy in Minneapolis marks another targeted attack on a Christian institution, and the pattern is impossible to ignore:

Nashville, 2023: the Covenant School massacre that targeted Presbyterian children and teachers.Minneapolis, 2025: Annunciation Catholic School is attacked during Mass.Nationwide since 2022: Dozens of pregnancy centers have been firebombed and hundreds of churches have been vandalized — Christian institutions are under relentless assault across America.

While schools of various affiliations have been targets of violence, since Roe v. Wade was overturned, Family Research Council statistics show a marked increase in attacks specifically targeting Christian institutions. FRC documented 57 pro-abortion acts of hostility against churches in 2022 alone, compared to only five such incidents combined from 2019 to 2021.

The pattern reveals directed hostility that goes beyond random violence.

Notice what we don’t see: Shooters storming mosques, gunmen targeting secular private academies, or attacks on progressive gatherings. The hostility is directed, deliberate, and spiritual in nature.

The massacre at Annunciation Catholic Church wasn’t just another tragedy; it was a revelation of where our culture now stands.

Jesus told us plainly: “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you … because you are not of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:18-19).

This isn’t random violence; it’s targeted hostility against the cross. The spirit of this age is not neutral. It is anti-Christ. And Satan doesn’t waste bullets on secular idols; he wages war against the Bride of Christ.

The response that matters

Not surprisingly, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) used the tragedy as an opportunity for political posturing. He slammed those who offered their “thoughts and prayers” and tried to shift the conversation about the “real” victims of this tragedy, stating, “Anybody who is using this as an opportunity to villainize our trans community, or any other community out there, has lost their sense of common humanity.”

But asking hard questions about the spiritual and psychological state of mass shooters isn’t “villainizing” — it’s seeking truth about the cultural forces producing these tragedies. The mayor’s deflection reveals how our leaders refuse to confront the deeper issues.

Meanwhile, “within seconds” of the gunfire, Annunciation’s “heroic staff moved students under the pews.” Adults protected children. Older children shielded younger ones. Even in a time of panic and horror, the church demonstrated the sacrificial love of Christ.

The call forward: No more games

The massacre at Annunciation Catholic Church wasn’t just another tragedy; it was a revelation of where our culture now stands. Even in a city with some of the strictest gun laws in America, children died because we’ve created a society that worships lies about identity, celebrates self-invention, and rejects the God who defines us.

The world tells us to “find ourselves.” Jesus tells us to “lose ourselves.” One path ends in headlines of blood. The other ends in eternal life.

Two children went to school on August 27 and never came home. Their blood cries out, not only for our prayers, but for us to confront the spiritual crisis producing such evil, to reject the lies that fuel it, and to stand firm on the truth that transforms hearts.

This article is adapted from an essay originally published at Liberty University’s Standing for Freedom Center.

​Church attacks, Christianity, Christians, Evil, Demonic, Annunciation catholic school, Minnesota, Minneapolis, God, Jesus christ, Faith 

Riley Barnes appeared this week before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations for his nomination as assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Normally, such a hearing would barely make the news. But then Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) spoke up.

You might remember the junior U.S. senator from Virginia as Hillary Clinton’s failed running mate in 2016. On Wednesday, he revealed he wouldn’t make a very good U.S. history professor either.

If rights come from God, then no politician — not Trump, not Kaine, not anyone — can take them away.

Barnes made a simple and obvious point — one that any elementary school student in a classroom still reading the Declaration of Independence (a rarity these days in public schools) would recognize. He said:

In his first remarks to State Department employees, Secretary [Marco] Rubio emphasized that we are a nation founded on a powerful principle: All men are created equal, because our rights come from God our creator — not from our laws, not from our governments.

That’s almost word-for-word from the Declaration of Independence.

Barnes continued:

We are a nation of individuals, each made in the image of God and possessing an inherent dignity. This is a truth our founders understood as essential to American self-government.

That second point, while not a direct quote from the Declaration, clearly flows from it. We have dignity because we are made by God, not by blind chance. And we have dignity above the rest of creation because we are made in His image, with rational souls and moral responsibility.

Most importantly, Barnes emphasized: “Natural rights are a blessing and an immutable reality.”

Governments change. Officials come and go. But America’s founders wanted human rights grounded in something unchanging. Rights granted by a government can be taken away by a government. Rights given by God cannot. That’s why the Declaration calls them “unalienable.”

The Kaine mutiny

Kaine’s response to Barnes was revealing. He worried that if we say rights come from God, we are on the brink of turning into theocratic Iran after 250 years of freedom from God. He insisted that governments — not God — give us our rights.

This is the logic behind much of the modern left. It explains why leftists defend ending a human life in elective abortion, treat children as property of the state that parents only borrow, and impose endless mandates on citizens — from useless masks to DEI speech codes. If rights come from the government, then the government can take them away whenever it wants.

This moment recalled then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) grilling Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas decades ago about his belief in natural law. “Which natural law?” Biden asked smugly, as if he had just delivered the ultimate gotcha. Like Kaine, Biden only managed to display his ignorance.

Can we know God?

Kaine claims that appealing to God makes America no different from Iran. But this ignores two things:

Christianity and Islam are not the same. Islam teaches that forgiveness comes through obedience to its five pillars. Christianity teaches that justification is by faith in Christ alone; even perfect law-keeping from this day forward cannot erase past sin.The real issue is knowledge, not theocracy. Can we know the true and living God? Or are we trapped in skepticism, left to rely on politicians’ shifting opinions?

Kaine assumes appeals to God are just private religious opinions with no claim to truth. He insists we must build our laws only on government authority rather than a religious leader. But this skepticism undermines knowing everything else — including government itself.

RELATED: Self-evident truths aren’t so self-evident any more

Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

If there is no unchanging standard, how does any ruler know what is just or unjust, good or evil? Personal feelings? Evolutionary accidents? Political popularity? That is an incoherent theory of law. And it tells us why Democrats rely so heavily on appeals to emotion rather than sound arguments.

Why this matters

What Kaine and others like him call us to do — unwittingly — is rise to the challenge. We must show that God is real, that His existence is clear, and that rights grounded in Him are unchangeable because they rest on divine reality, not shifting political power.

It’s helpful when Democrats like Kaine stumble so publicly. They expose the intellectual vacuum at the heart of modern secularism. The question for us is whether we will rise to the moment and defend the truths in the Declaration of Independence — truths that remain self-evident because they come from God, not government.

The American project anchors freedom not in government permission slips but in the God who created us. That is what Kaine and the left cannot admit. Because if rights come from God, then no politician — not Trump, not Kaine, not anyone — can take them away. And that truth, still self-evident after nearly 250 years, remains the foundation of American liberty.

​Opinion & analysis, Tim kaine, God, Government overreach, Rights, Natural rights, Declaration of independence, Iran, Riley barnes, Freedom, American founding, Thomas jefferson 

We all remember the famous Food Guide Pyramid developed in the 1990s that supposedly captures what a healthy diet looks like. The base of the model is made up of grains, followed by vegetables, fruits, dairy, proteins, and topped by a small section for fats and sweets.

It was a helpful tool that guided Americans in cultivating a healthy lifestyle for themselves and their families.

Except it wasn’t, because the model is fundamentally flawed.

On a recent episode of “Blaze News: The Mandate,” Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson sat down with Claremont Institute Salvatori Research Fellow Glenn Ellmers to dive into the lies behind the government’s “health” advice.

“Around the middle of the 20th century, we started to see what were called diseases of civilization. … We started seeing obesity and diabetes and coronary heart disease and all the things that go with the modern lifestyle,” Ellmers says. “The problem was, our scientific experts identified the wrong culprit. They thought that the problem was the foods that people had been eating for thousands of years.”

This led to foods like eggs, butter, and meat being vilified, hence their small category on the food pyramid. Instead, “experts” pushed for making carbohydrates — especially highly processed ones like breads, pastas, and cereals — the largest staple in people’s diets.

The idea that foods refined by man are superior to foods from the earth is rooted in the prideful assumption that science supersedes, and even controls, nature, Ellmers explains.

Even though the USDA has abandoned the food pyramid for a new graphic called MyPlate, which emphasizes balanced meals with roughly equal portions of vegetables, fruits, grains, and proteins, plus a small dairy portion, “it still hasn’t fixed the problem,” Ellmers says.

Sadly, this obsession with science over nature impacts more than just what food is elevated. It also heavily influences other lifestyle factors.

Instead of sunshine, exercise, and whole foods, “experts” push medications to “fix” people’s problems.

“I have friends on the right who try to eat healthy, get out, exercise, work out, get sunshine, run around on the grass barefoot. Then, I know a lot of friends who are deeply unhappy, on all kinds of prescribed medication, not physically fit, and they think that science can solve their problems,” Ellmers says.

“Has modern society really made people happy? … We have loneliness. We have drug addiction. We have people taking all kinds of medications to solve their problems. People are still too sedentary. People are in their homes ordering fast food, addicted to video games and internet porn,” he adds.

“In my experience, the people who can unplug, detach themselves from the screen, go out and run on the beach, eat a steak and an orange are actually a lot happier. So I’m not at all persuaded that the promise of science, that the conquest of nature, will lead to our happiness and our liberation.”

To hear more, watch the full interview above.

Want more from ‘Blaze News: The Mandate’?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Blaze news | the mandate, Blazetv, Blaze media, Matthew peterson, Claremont institute, Glenn ellmers, Food pyramid, Flawed science, Diet, Obesity epidemic, Maha, Blaze news the mandate 

New York City’s Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani has soared to stardom within his party, championing socialist policies and promising affordability. Now, President Donald Trump may be attempting to tip the scales.

Trump has reportedly tried to trim down the playing field to weaken Mamdani’s chances of winning the general election. Although Mamdani has enjoyed a comfortable lead over the star-studded cast of candidates, consolidating the race would toughen the chances for the 33-year-old socialist.

‘Are we a party that rallies behind our nominee or not?’

Mamdani’s main challengers include current NYC Mayor Eric Adams and former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, both of whom boast lengthy political careers. Despite this, Adams has trailed significantly behind both Cuomo and Mamdani, sometimes polling in single digits.

Notably, polls show that Cuomo’s odds improve against Mamdani if Adams is taken out of the equation.

RELATED: Jasmine Crockett’s jaw-dropping defense of criminals: ‘They literally are trying to survive’

Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

In light of this disparity, some reports claimed the White House was weighing offering Adams a position in the administration if he stepped out of the race. One such position included nominating Adams to be ambassador to Saudi Arabia, according to the New York Post.

Despite the cushy offer, Adams doubled down on staying in the race and running as an independent.

“Andrew Cuomo is a snake and a liar, I am in this race, and I am the only one that can beat Mamdani,” Adams said Friday.

RELATED: Exclusive: Tom Emmer torches Tim Walz’s ‘failed’ leadership, says he should ‘have his head examined’

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Even with the probability of Adams as a spoiler, high-ranking Democrats have refrained from making any formal endorsements in the race. As of this writing, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries have all withheld from endorsing the Democratic nominee.

“We have a Democratic nominee,” Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York told reporters. “Are we a party that rallies behind our nominee or not?”

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

​Zoran mamadani, Donald trump, Andrew cuomo, White house, Eric adams, New york mayoral race, New york city, Kathy hochul, Chuck schumer, Hakeem jeffries, Aoc, Alexandria ocasio-cortez, Socialists, Politics 

It isn’t enough for conservatives to push back against the liberal-spawned transgender movement that’s urging vulnerable children to take artificial hormones and undergo irreversible surgeries that mutilate their healthy bodies. We need people who have experienced the horrors of trans mania firsthand to speak out.

Thankfully, some detransitioners are doing just that. One of them is Chloe Cole, an activist in California who’s sharing her experience “transitioning” genders starting when she was just 12 years old to warn gender-confused minors against the pitfalls of the trans movement.

On an episode of “Back to the People,” BlazeTV host Nicole Shanahan sat down with Chloe to hear her heartbreaking yet hopeful story.

Chloe was 12 years old when she was introduced to the transgender community on social media. She started following the accounts of many young trans people because she felt a connection to them.

“They reminded me so much of myself in so many different ways. A lot of these people were artistic; they were creative; they had a unique fashion sense; they were very individual; they wanted to set themselves apart from the other people,” she says.

Their struggle with being bullied for being tomboys or effeminate boys resonated deeply with Chloe, who was also being bullied in school. On social media, she witnessed their “sense of happiness and wholeness” as they created new identities by cutting their hair short, wearing clothes of the opposite gender, and adopting new names and pronouns.

Tragically, many of these kids found that their new identity was more accepted than their genuine one. This often led them to pursue surgeries and hormonal therapy.

And Chloe was no exception. She was put on the drug Lupron, which was originally used for reproductive cancers, hormonal disorders, and chemical castration for sex offenders.

However, “a lot of facilities have stopped using this drug to castrate those sex offenders because it’s been deemed too cruel for use in that population,” says Chloe, pointing out the irony that it’s now marketed toward “perfectly healthy children.”

Convinced that she was truly a male, Chloe was put on testosterone and eventually had an elective double mastectomy at age 15. Her breasts weren’t just removed; they were intentionally reshaped to appear more masculine. All of this, she explains, was covered by insurance because California mandates that insurers cover all “gender-affirming care.”

Just a year later, though, when Chloe was 16, she began her detransitioning journey when she realized that she wanted to be a mother someday. She remains grateful that she didn’t pursue further surgeries that would have stolen that opportunity from her.

Today, Chloe is using her story and her voice to speak out about the dangers of transgenderism, offering hope to confused minors who feel stuck in the wrong body.

To hear Chloe and Nicole dive into the darkest parts of the transgender movement, including the horrendous grooming and predation trans-identifying kids are subjected to, watch the interview above.

Want more from Nicole Shanahan?

To enjoy more of Nicole’s compelling blend of empathy, curiosity, and enlightenment, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Back to the people, Nicole shanahan, Back to the people with nicole shanahan, Chloe cole, Transgenderism, Trans movement, Trans agenda, Blazetv, Blaze media, Detransitioner 

Team Late Night had weeks to prepare their best shots against Orange Man Bad over summer vacation. The results? Suffice it to say there’s a reason the late-night format is heading for the dustbin of history.

To be fair, ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel managed an entire monologue without crying in his return from summer break. Otherwise, it was business as usual. Yawn.

The most depressing part? The not-remotely-biased media now treats ‘South Park’ like the Holy Grail, reciting every aspect of each new episode to maximize its cultural impact.

“Oh, you delicate, chubby little teacup. … You want us to be canceled because we make jokes about you? I thought you were against cancel culture. Unfortunately for Frosty the Snowflake, the only place we are going is to New York.”

Stop it … you’re killing us.

Comedy kingpin Stephen Colbert struck next, and suddenly the walls were closing in on the 47th president. The far-left propagandist had to remind his audience that rumors of President Donald Trump’s demise weren’t true and that wishing for a leader’s death wasn’t the decent thing to do.

Maybe spending a decade telling fans Trump is the veritable Antichrist has repercussions.

Then, Colbert turned his comic firepower on Vice President JD Vance, who endured a soupçon of hecklers at the suddenly crime-free Union Station in D.C.

“He’s in a train station; he’s going to bang a bench,” Colbert cracked about Vance. At least we know where “The Late Show’s” $100 million-a -ear budget goes. Comic gold like that does not come cheap …

RELATED: Libs are outraged at Jay Leno’s comments about politics in comedy amid cancellation of Stephen Colbert

Photo (left): Gary Miller/Getty Images; Photo (right): Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images

Goin’ ‘South’

Nor does access to all things “South Park.” Trey Parker and Matt Stone cozied up to Paramount to the tune of $1.5 billion a few weeks ago. The TV pranksters earned that cash with a show that never pulls its punches.

Left. Right. Up. Down. Pick a target, and “South Park” has smashed it over the years. And, along the way, earned the right’s respect for being an equal-opportunity offender.

Now? Each new “South Park” episode features another dreary bit where President Trump beds Satan. Literally. The show’s first four installments all featured the already stale bit, along with other smart bombs against GOP-adjacent targets.

Meanwhile, a Democratic Party that defends gang members, rising crime rates, and men claiming to be trans brutalizing women in sports gets off without a warning.

The most depressing part? The not-remotely-biased media now treats “South Park” like the Holy Grail, reciting every aspect of each new episode to maximize its cultural impact.

Weird that reporters did no such thing over the show’s 28-year-run …

Hope after ‘Nope’?

It’s been three years since Jordan Peele deposited his cinematic stink bomb “Nope” on an unsuspecting public. That 2022 dud marked a massive letdown from Peele’s masterful 2017 debut, “Get Out,” and solid 2019 follow-up, “Us.”

We’ve been waiting to see if Peele can return to his former glory. Now, we’ll have to wait a bit longer. He had originally staked out October 2026 as the date for his next, untitled project. That’s no longer in the cards.

Quentin Tarantino is currently stuck on his 10th and presumably final film. He can’t commit to a project or a release date. Peele, who seemed bound for greatness after “Get Out,” has reached a Tarantino-style impasse in less than 10 years. Impressive …

Wright and wrong

Some things in pop culture are inevitable. Whenever Hollywood gets creative with its casting decisions, a small but vocal segment of Comic-Con Nation howls in protest. Remember when Sony cast four comic actresses to take over the “Ghostbusters” franchise in 2016? Or when Disney cast black actress Halle Bailey to play the formerly white Ariel in 2023’s “Little Mermaid” update?

Some fans are simply purists, and that’s understandable. A much smaller contingent operate from a whiff of misogyny and/or racism. Not remotely cool.

And once in a while, this kind of creative casting generates a collective shrug. No outrage. No hashtag complaints. That happened when actor Jeffrey Wright took over as Commissioner Gordon in 2022’s “The Batman.” Wright is a fine actor, and his addition to the cast was greeted as warmly as the rest of the geek-friendly film.

Zero controversy.

Tell that to Wright.

“I really find it fascinating, the ways in which there’s such a conversation, and I think even more of a conversation now, about black characters in these roles,” Wright said. “It’s just so f**king racist and stupid. It’s just so blind in a way that I find revealing to not recognize that the evolution of these films reflects the evolution of society, that somehow it’s defiling this franchise not to keep it grounded in the cultural reality of 1939 when the comic books were first published. It’s just the dumbest thing. It’s absent all logic.”

He’s a terrific actor and even better faux victim.

​Entertainment, Hollywood, Donald trump, Late night, Jimmy kimmel, Stephen colbert, Jordan peele, Nope, Movies, Toto recall 

Andrew Beck has articulated a thick version of the assimilation of immigrants (rightly so, in my view), which harks back to the spirit of Americanization prevalent from America’s founding to roughly the 1960s. Louis Brandeis, a liberal and political ally of the detestable Woodrow Wilson, expressed this common idea of assimilation in his July 5, 1915, “Americanization Day Speech”:

What is Americanization? It manifests itself, in a superficial way, when the immigrant adopts the clothes, the manners, and the customs generally prevailing here. Far more important is the manifestation presented when he substitutes for his mother tongue the English language as the common medium of speech. But the adoption of our language, manners, and customs is only a small part of the process. To become Americanized, the change wrought must be fundamental. However great his outward conformity, the immigrant is not Americanized unless his interests and affections have become deeply rooted here. And we properly demand of the immigrants even more than this. He must be brought into complete harmony with our ideals and aspirations and cooperate with us for their attainment. Only when this has been done will he possess the national consciousness of an American.

We could characterize Americanization as the highest form of assimilation: patriotic assimilation. When an immigrant and his first-generation children leave their previous people and join the American people, it means they have an emotional attachment to our country and instinctively identify with historic America — our principles, history, and culture.

Patriotic assimilation happens when our nation’s story has become part of their inheritance as Americans.

Even though the newcomers and their children may come from China, India, Guatemala, or Norway, they embrace Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Hamilton as their ancestors. When reading about the history of the War of 1812, they identify with historic America and think, “We fought the British in 1812,” as opposed to thinking that they (white males) fought other white males 200 years ago.

Patriotic assimilation happens when our nation’s story becomes part of their inheritance as Americans.

An emblem of assimilation

In the late 19th century, Rep. Richard Guenther (R-Wis.) epitomized patriotic assimilation. Born and educated in Prussia, Guenther didn’t emigrate to America until his early 20s. He was involved in the German-American community and Republican politics in Wisconsin before being elected to Congress in 1880.

Guenther came from an ethnic subculture, but Andrew Beck would be pleased that he recognized the primacy of America’s Leitkultur.

From 1887 to 1889, America was on the verge of a war with Bismarck’s Germany over a geopolitical crisis in the Samoan Islands. Understandably, other congressmen wanted to know where Guenther and his fellow German-Americans stood. Guenther responded in this way:

We will work for our country in time of peace and fight for it in time of war. When I say our country, I mean, of course, our adopted country. I mean the United States of America. After passing through the crucible of naturalization, we are no longer Germans; we are Americans. We will fight for America whenever necessary. America, first, last, and all the time. America against Germany, America against the world; America right or wrong; always America. We are Americans.

Principled pluralism?

Andrew Beck argues that building a “giant statue depicting the monkey-faced Hindu deity Hanuman” in Sugar Land, Texas, signals a failure of Indian immigrants to assimilate into America’s culturally Christian civilization. Mark Tooley counters that Beck need not worry, since religious freedom for minorities is part of the “principled pluralism” built into the American order.

How should we address this clash between Beck’s concern over assimilation and Tooley’s defense of pluralism?

Examining the issue through the lens of patriotic assimilation, the critical question is where the ultimate political loyalty of the architects and adherents of the Hanuman statue lies. If there were a war or a lesser conflict between the United States and India, where would the Hanuman advocates stand?

Would they echo Rep. Guenther and back the United States through thick and thin? Would they resoundingly say, “Always America. We are Americans”? Or would they share the sentiments of Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), who unabashedly stated that she’s “a proud Guatemalan before I’m an American”?

In the past, Americans from minority ethnic groups have chosen the path of patriotic assimilation affirmed by Guenther. One thinks of the German-Americans who fought Germans at the Argonne Forest in 1918, the Italian-Americans who killed Italians in Sicily in 1943, and the Japanese-Americans who fought Japan’s ally Germany throughout Europe in World War II.

Americanism: Idea or culture?

I agree with Andrew Beck, Mark Krikorian, Paul Gottfried, and James Hankins that our assimilation problem is self-imposed. The fault is with us, not with immigrants. More specifically, the “us” refers to our woke, progressive elite, which has successfully carried out a cultural revolution against historic America.

The lack of patriotic assimilation in contemporary America is, as Hankins notes, because “our public schools and cultural institutions, public and private, have embraced a new religious faith: that of multiculturalism.” He suggests undermining this new religion along with its evil siblings — diversity, equity, and inclusion, “anti-racism,” radical gender theory, and all forms of wokeism.

Krikorian, Gottfried, and Hankins all appear to hope that our schools and cultural institutions will once again transmit a patriotic civic religion to immigrants and the native-born. The American left will, of course, oppose patriotic assimilation in principle. It is no accident that the Biden administration prohibited the use of the word “assimilation” in government documents.

RELATED: National conservatism is the revolt forgotten Americans need

Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images

Moreover, the question of who we are as Americans raises the issue of what exactly immigrants should be assimilating to. Does it mean assimilating to a set of universal principles and ideas or a particular people and culture? Or both? Does being an American have an ideological component?

During the 1990s and the first decade of the 21st century, conservative thought leaders overemphasized the concept of America as a “proposition nation.” They taught that, unlike other countries, America was founded on ideas rather than culture or traditions. This attitude went hand in hand with support for mass immigration, coupled with little to no emphasis on assimilation. If our nation is based solely on ideas, then anyone in the world can easily become an American if they agree with them.

The American right’s overemphasis on the proposition nation narrative was a mistake.

Furthermore, liberal conservatives (today’s “FreeCons”) argued that since assimilation was successful in the days of Ellis Island, it would continue being successful. But this ignores the two main reasons assimilation worked in the early 20th century. American leaders, such as Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Calvin Coolidge, insisted on Americanization, and immigration was reduced drastically in the 1920s.

The American right’s overemphasis on the proposition nation narrative was a mistake. Not surprisingly, the American left adopted this ideological narrative and reinterpreted core American ideas as the revolutionary expansion of the progressive project, promoting DEI, LGBTQ rights, and the “fundamental transformation” of the United States.

Ideas and culture

In 2001, the eminent constitutional scholar Walter Berns wrote a magnificent monograph titled “Making Patriots.” Berns embraced America’s civic religion and affirmed the absolute necessity of a citizenship education that inculcates a “love of country” in both immigrants and the native-born and focuses on “how to transmit” that love “from one generation to the next.”

I have one crucial point of disagreement with Berns, however. He writes that American nationhood is unique because it is based “not on tradition, or loyalty to tradition, but on an appeal to abstract and universal and philosophical principles of political right.”

Because of this attachment to principled ideas, Berns asserts that Stephen Decatur, the greatest American naval hero of the early 19th century, was being somehow unpatriotic or “un-American” when he declared in a famous toast after defeating the Islamist Barbary pirates, “Our country, in her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be right, but our country right or wrong.”

RELATED: How woke broke the country

Photo by Eric Raptosh Photography via Getty Images

Decatur, who served his country with extraordinary bravery and prowess in war, revealed an instinctive love of America and a concrete attachment to American nationhood. These sentiments should not be disparaged as being beyond the pale of an acceptable form of patriotism. As Montesquieu argued, an emotional attachment and instinctive love of country are necessary for any republic to survive. We could use many more Stephen Decaturs today.

I maintain that American patriotism rests on both ideas and culture. Claremont Review of Books editor Charles Kesler said correctly, “The American creed is the keystone of American national identity, but it requires a culture to sustain it.”

American nationhood has an ideological component, and there are times when ideas trump culture. Paul Gottfried notes that 18th-century American colonists were shaped by a shared culture, including the King James Bible, Shakespeare, Protestant theology, Plutarch, and the like. True, American patriots and Tories shared the same culture, but from 1776 to 1783, they killed each other over what constituted the best regime.

So what is to be done today?

First, we must mobilize the emotion-laden concepts of Americanization and patriotic assimilation. We must pit these concepts against the left’s weaponized theories of multiculturalism and diversity, which have besieged universities, schools, foundations, nonprofits, civic organizations, corporations, faith-based institutions, and all levels of government

Second, Mark Krikorian is right that we must “reduce immigration across the board,” both legal and illegal. Current levels of immigration are clearly harming the prospects of assimilation.

America faced a similar situation in the 1920s when Calvin Coolidge argued, “New arrivals should be limited to our capacity to absorb them into the ranks of good citizenship. America must be kept American.” We need to act on Coolidge’s sage advice again.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at the American Mind.

​Opinion & analysis, Opinion, Immigration, Immigration crisis, Assimilation, Assimilate, National identity, National defense, Citizenship, English, Language, Customs, Culture 

As Blaze News recently reported, a Canadian homeowner has been charged with aggravated assault after fighting and injuring an armed male who allegedly broke into his Lindsay, Ontario, residence in the middle of the night last month.

Amid the growing outrage — including from Ontario Premier Doug Ford, who said “something is broken” in the system when one is punished for self-defense — the chief of the Kawartha Lakes Police Service fired off a scolding message to the public on Facebook, calling the criticism against cops “unjust and inaccurate.”

‘But as it stands, we know the best defense for most people is to comply.’

Chief Kirk Robertson added that the “law requires that any defensive action be proportionate to the threat faced. This means that while homeowners do have the right to protect themselves and their property, the use of force must be reasonable given the circumstances.”

Well, things are only getting more bizarre as the issue grows hotter up north.

Turns out the break-in suspect was armed with a crossbow while the homeowner was armed with a knife, the Toronto Star reported, citing court documents.

RELATED: Blaze News original: 5 infuriating times authorities punished victims of physical attacks — as well as a Good Samaritan

Photo by BfdF/RDB/ullstein bild via Getty Images

The break-in suspect — 41-year-old Michael Breen — is no stranger to law enforcement, either. The Star said in addition to the list of charges against him in connection with the Lindsay incident, recent court records show other outstanding charges against Breen, including illegal use of a credit card. The paper added that Breen also allegedly failed to appear in court, after which a warrant for his arrest was issued June 19.

RELATED: Pregnant Tesla passenger ‘injured by flying rock,’ police in Canada say — and observers have field day with cops’ word choice

Meanwhile, those who know the homeowner — Jeremy McDonald — told the Star he’s “distraught about” the charges against him.

Jesse Kalabic — who operates Thirteen Tattoo shop in the unit directly below McDonald’s second-floor apartment — added to the paper that McDonald is “concerned” and that “it’s become a very big issue now, and he doesn’t want to be in the spotlight.”

What’s more, Kalabic revealed to the Star an additional traumatic element for McDonald, saying the break-in suspect “went through his [young] daughter’s bedroom window. Luckily, she wasn’t there.”

Kalabic added to the paper it’s unfortunate that McDonald — who works in construction — is facing charges when he didn’t start the altercation. Kalabic also told the Star he hopes the government will investigate legal reforms concerning the level of force one can use in self-defense that “doesn’t leave the burden on the homeowner, who should always be seen as the victim.”

RELATED: Canadian pastor arrested again; prosecutor claims Artur Pawlowski influenced truckers to keep protesting after they agreed to stop: ‘Overt threat to violence’

A pair of Canadian writers for Blaze News — Joe MacKinnon and Andrew Chapados — couldn’t agree more.

“The fact that this homeowner was charged for non-lethally confronting an intruder not only is an indictment of the Canadian legal system but also serves notice to would-be criminals: Your victims are powerless under the law to take action against you. If a thug breaks into your home through your daughter’s window, you should be criminally charged for not putting him six feet under the ground,” MacKinnon told Blaze News.

Chapados added to Blaze News that “while sentiments from the premier are nice, federal laws need to change. In the meantime, Doug Ford needs to pressure the attorney general and Crown not to pursue charges against the homeowner.”

As concern and anger over the issue spread throughout Canada, another recent headline out of Ontario has only underscored the public’s frustration with police.

Amid a pair of violent home invasions — one that claimed a homeowner’s life — the chief of the York Regional Police actually told homeowners that if their residences are invaded, “don’t engage unless absolutely necessary,” the Star reported in a separate story.

“In the unlikely event that you find yourself the victim of a home invasion, we are urging citizens not to take matters into their own hands,” Chief Jim MacSween said. “While we don’t want homeowners to feel powerless, we urge you to call 911 and do everything you can to keep yourself and loves ones safe until police arrive and be the best witness possible. This could mean locking yourself in a room away from the perpetrators, hiding, fleeing the home, but don’t engage unless absolutely necessary.”

RELATED: ‘Time for the protesters to hear our jackboots on the ground’: Royal Canadian Mounted Police in group chat allegedly celebrate violence against protesters

The Star said MacSween sidestepped questions about politicians such as Ford who called for stronger self-defense laws in the wake of the Lindsay incident.

“The premier can make his own statement and his own mind up about that,” MacSween noted, according to the paper. “What I would say is as a police service, we’ll follow the laws as they’re written; if the laws change, we’ll change with the laws.”

The Star said the chief soon added: “But as it stands, we know the best defense for most people is to comply.”

As you might guess, commenters ripped MacSween just like they blasted the Kawartha Lakes Police Service after the Lindsay break-in:

“You just gave criminals a free pass,” one commenter said.”Instead of telling homeowners to ‘comply,’ why don’t you tell criminals that they will be tossed into prison [with] no chance of bail or parole and the key thrown away??????” another commenter wondered.”This clown is ridiculous. When seconds count, the cops are minutes away,” another commenter stated. “When a criminal enters my dwelling, my home, my family’s safe place, he/she/it forfeits his/her/zems life. The criminals can comply with the law and not enter my home.””Fire this coward immediately,” another commenter declared.

MacSween’s sentiments mirror a directive last year from a Toronto police official, who told residents amid a spike in car thefts that they should leave their car keys at their front doors so car thieves don’t harm them.

“To prevent the possibility of being attacked in your home, leave your fobs at the front door because they are breaking into your home to steal your car; they don’t want anything else,” Cst. Marco Ricciardi said, according to City News Toronto. “A lot of them that they’re arresting have guns on them, and they are not toy guns. They are real guns. They’re loaded.”

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

​Canada, Self-defense, Lindsay, Ontario, Homeowner charged, Break-in, Police, Victim blaming, Comply with criminals, Crime 

A federal grand jury has indicted a far-left university instructor for his alleged actions during a federal raid of California pot farms over the summer.

On July 10, Jonathan Caravello, 37, was among a group of Cal State University Channel Islands faculty and students who protested federal agents carrying out search warrants at a state-licensed marijuana facility operated by Glass House Farms in Camarillo.

He ‘turned around, ran towards the canister, picked it up, and threw it overhand back at Border Patrol agents.’

The crowd of unruly protesters soon turned violent, throwing rocks at government vehicles that attempted to leave the facility, breaking windows and side-view mirrors, the DOJ claimed in a press release.

According to the criminal complaint obtained by Blaze News, Caravello engaged in several behaviors that impeded federal agents from doing their job. For one thing, the complaint said, he marched along the yellow police tape “loudly playing a siren sound on the megaphone” that he directed toward Border Patrol agents.

RELATED: Pot farm raid update: Trump’s DHS found convicted rapists and kidnappers working near migrant kids

Photo by BLAKE FAGAN/AFP via Getty Images

After agents began releasing tear gas “to assist with crowd control, ensure officer safety, and to allow law enforcement to depart the location,” a gas canister rolled near the feet of some protesters, including Caravello, the DOJ press release said. Caravello first attempted to kick the can, but it “rolled past him,” so he “turned around, ran towards the canister, picked it up, and threw it overhand back at Border Patrol agents,” it claimed.

The canister thrown by Caravello “came within approximately several feet above law enforcements’ heads,” the criminal complaint added. Other statements in the criminal complaint indicate that Caravello may have thrown multiple “canisters” at agents.

Caravello then left the scene, only to return a couple of hours later, having changed from a blue shirt into a pink shirt and wearing a different pair of shoes, perhaps in a failed attempt to “disguise” himself, the criminal complaint said. He was subsequently identified as the “agitator” who threw the canisters and arrested despite his apparent resistance.

“CARAVELLO would not comply and attempted to grab a BP Agent’s leg,” the criminal complaint said. He also “continuously kicked his legs and refused to give the BP agents his arms.”

‘We do not need to prove injury to prove assault with a deadly or dangerous weapon.’

The day after his arrest, the California Faculty Association claimed on Instagram that ICE agents had “kidnapped” Caravello by throwing him into an “unmarked vehicle” without explanation. The Instagram post also included a video of the protest, as well as a clip of Caravello’s appearance at a Camarillo City Council meeting the night before.

“Many of my students are undocumented,” Caravello said during the public comment period of the meeting, “and many of their families are undocumented. It’s my responsibility to protect them, and so I’ve been patrolling the city streets, following armed, masked thugs trying to kidnap my neighbors.”

During his public remarks, which he delivered almost exclusively in a dull monotone, Caravello denounced the “genocide” in Palestine, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and alleged instances of police misconduct in the U.S. dating back to the 1960s, as well as current ICE efforts at immigration enforcement.

The only moment in which Caravello’s voice became slightly animated was when he seemingly addressed members of the council but without lifting his gaze from his prepared statement to look at them. “You, our elected officials, should swear [ICE] off, if not in policy then in spirit, to at the very least pay back your undocumented community members for picking your f**king strawberries,” he said with emphasis, prompting a faint spattering of claps from the audience.

“No one is illegal. Power to the people,” he concluded, returning to his previous monotone delivery.

RELATED: ‘We got him’: Suspect who violently threw rocks at officers during LA ICE riots arrested after fleeing to Mexico, feds say

Screenshot of criminal complaint

Caravello is listed as a philosophy lecturer with the Mathematics Program at CSUCI. The university confirmed to Blaze News that he remains employed there and will be teaching this semester. The university also claimed that it will not be assisting with his defense.

“We are aware of the recent indictment involving Jonathan Caravello. As this matter is currently before the courts, we will not be commenting on the details of the case. We respect the legal process and believe it is important to allow it to proceed without speculation. Our focus remains on our ongoing work and commitments to our students,” CSUCI said in a statement to Blaze News.

Caravello has been charged with one count of assault on a federal officer using a deadly or dangerous weapon. He faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted. He is currently free on $15,000 bond.

Neither Caravello nor the California Faculty Association responded to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Public affairs officer Ciaran McEvoy of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California did not directly respond to Blaze News’ question about whether any agents were injured on account of Caravello’s alleged actions, but did state, “We do not need to prove injury to prove assault with a deadly or dangerous weapon.”

After clarifying that agents were not executing an “immigration raid” on the day in question but “judicially approved search warrants in connection with an ongoing investigation,” McEvoy added, “We have no further comment.”

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

​Glass house farms, Immigration, Border patrol, Jonathan caravello, Cal state university channel islands, California faculty association, Politics