Monthly Archives: August 2022

The Den Theatre will welcome back comedian Greg Fitzsimmons for an evening of stand-up on Saturday, October 15 at 9:30 pm on The Heath Mainstage, 1331 N. Milwaukee Ave. in Chicago's Wicker Park neighborhood. Tickets ($18 - $38) are currently available at thedentheatre.com or by calling (773) 697-3830.

Mixing an incisive wit with scathing sarcasm, Greg Fitzsimmons has achieved success as a stand-up, Emmy Award-winning writer and host on both radio and TV. Greg is host of The Greg Fitzsimmons Show, on SiriusXM's "Howard 101" and twice a week puts out the hugely popular FitzDog Radio podcast. A regular on @Midnight, Conan O'Brien, Jimmy Kimmel, and The Tonight Show, Greg has made more than 50 visits to The Howard Stern Show.

Greg has a new one-hour standup special on Comedy Central, stars in season 2 of How to be a Grown Up (TRU TV) and appeared on Louie (FX) this past season. He is a frequent guest on The Adam Carolla Show and The Joe Rogan Experience and will appear later this year in both Comedy Bang Bang (IFC) and Aqua Teen Hunger Force (Adult Swim).

A frequent panelist for five years on Chelsea Lately, Greg also spent five years on VH1's Best Week Ever, hosted Pumped (The Speed Channel) and he starred in two half-hour stand-up specials on Comedy Central. Greg's 2011 book, "Dear Mrs. Fitzsimmons," climbed the best-seller charts and garnered outstanding reviews from NPR and Vanity Fair.

Writing credits include HBO's Lucky Louie, Cedric the Entertainer Presents, Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher, The Man Show and many others. On his mantle beside the four Daytime Emmys he won as a writer and producer on The Ellen DeGeneres Show, sit "The Jury Award for Best Comedian" from The HBO Comedy Arts Festival and a Cable Ace Award for the MTV game show he hosted called Idiot Savants.

Tickets: $25 regular seating ($18 obstructed view); $38 front row VIP table seating; $32 VIP table seating; $28 mezzanine table seating. All ticket prices include cocktail service with a two-drink minimum.

COVID guidelines: In the interest of keeping patrons and staff safe, and in accordance with the League of Chicago Theatres, The Den will continue to require proof of vaccination to attend any event for the indefinite future. While masking is no longer required, The Den strongly encourages patrons to continue wearing a mask when not eating or drinking. For the most current information on The Den's COVID guidelines, visit thedentheatre.com/covid19-policy.

Artistic Director Ryan Martin opened The Den in 2010 in the Wicker Park neighborhood with a single theatre space. Now celebrating its twelfth year, The Den is a multi-level live entertainment venue that boasts five intimate and unique theaters ranging from 50 - 300 seats. The first floor houses The Den Bar & Lounge - a full-service bar where audiences gather before and after performances to share a drink and community with like-minded culture-hounds. Currently, The Den is home to four resident theatre companies including Broken Nose Theatre, First Floor Theater, Haven and The New Coordinates (formerly The New Colony). Hundreds of other companies and artists from Chicago and beyond have called The Den home - from national names to local stars, The Den consistently plays host to a lineup of exciting and diverse talent. As a building created for interdisciplinary arts, The Den has accommodated a wide variety of programming, including plays, musicals, film screenings, dance, improv and stand-up comedy, seminars and speaking engagements. For additional information, visit http://www.thedentheatre.com.

Read more from the original source:
Comedian Greg Fitzsimmons to Perform at The Den Theatre in October - Broadway World

If Fox breaks its ties to Trump, the network would be likely to seek out another candidate as the conservative standard-bearer with DeSantis a front-runner, although the competition for the Fox imprimatur would be intense.

Trump is the subject of a wide array of lawsuits and of a host of criminal and civil investigations. The Washington Post reported on July 30:

Trump is facing historic legal and legislative scrutiny for a former president, under investigation by U.S. lawmakers, local district attorneys, a state attorney general and the Justice Department. Authorities are looking into Trump and his family business for a medley of possible wrongdoing, including his actions leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol and how he valued his various assets for loan and tax purposes.

The filing of formal criminal charges against Trump, much less a conviction, would have a major impact on his prospects as a candidate.

At the same time, it would be a fundamental mistake to underestimate Trumps prospects. In a Wall Street Journal column last week, Karl Rove described the amount of money awaiting Trump should he decide to run for a second term:

The former president controls four political-action committees Save America; Make America Great Again, Again! Inc.; Trump Make America Great Again PAC; and Make America Great Again Action. The PACs cash on hand as of June 30 came, respectively, to $103.1 million, $10.3 million, $7.3 million and $700,000, giving Mr. Trump more than $121 million at his disposal.

Fred Wertheimer, founder and president of Democracy 21, a campaign-finance reform advocacy group, wrote in an email responding to my inquiry that Trump cannot directly transfer this money into a Trump for President 2024 committee:

But he can arrange the money in a way that the money will be spent only on his campaign. Trump can consolidate all his PAC funds into one super PAC, which is informally known as a single-candidate super PAC. The super PAC must make expenditures independent of the candidate it supports and it makes all of its campaign expenditures to support one candidate, in this case Trump. But everyone gets around the independence requirement by having close political associates control the single-candidate super PAC. Its a wink and a nod situation.

In addition to the political action committees cited above, the network of fund-raising organizations and tax-exempt advocacy groups at Trumps disposal include the America First Policy Institute, The Conservative Partnership Institute, America First Legal, American Moment, the Center for Renewing America and the Claremont Institute, Save America JFC joint fund-raising committee, Save America leadership PAC, Trump Victory, and Make America Great Again Policies Inc.

Tracking the flow of money to and from these organizations is exceptionally difficult because the organizations continuously transfer money among themselves. For example, in the 2019-20 election cycle, America First Action, a super PAC, reported contributions of just over $20 million from America First Policies, Inc., a nonprofit charitable organization categorized as a 501(c)(4) under I.R.S. rules, according to the Federal Election Commission. During the same period, America First Action gave America First Policies $2.04 million to cover the cost of in-kind payroll/offices expenses.

Trump has a vast array of 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) nonprofit tax-exempt advocacy groups that serve several purposes. They perform what Peter Singer, a senior fellow at New America, describes as a shadow government function, filled with people who either have been or want to be in government or both, a way station for prospective political appointees. These advocacy groups, Singer continued, can set a political partys agenda, giving a 2025 Trump administration a jump-start.

I asked several political scholars about Trumps 2025 agenda. Some were less alarmed than others at the threat posed by the former president.

Go here to see the original:
Opinion | Trump Has Big Plans for 2025, and He Doesnt Care Whether You Think Hell Win - The New York Times

On Wednesday, the NYU researchers launched a searchable database of Facebook digital political ads theyve managed to pull together despite the ban, putting them right back in the companys crosshairs.

Im scared of getting sued. But what Im more scared of is another Jan. 6, said Laura Edelson, one of the academics behind the project and co-lead at NYUs Cybersecurity for Democracy project.

Meta, Facebooks parent company, stripped Edelson and two NYU colleagues of their access to its own database of political ads just weeks before Joe Bidens presidential victory two years ago. The company accused them of breaking its terms of service on privacy by creating a browser extension that enabled users to provide the researchers with granular information on the types of ads appearing in their news feed. Meta also threatened to sue the researchers, who argued their work didnt violate the companys policies.

We are still getting that fundamental data [from Meta] through other channels, Edelson said when asked how NYU was still collecting the companys political ad database almost two years after getting banned from directly accessing that data. She declined to say what those other channels were.

Meta, which opened up more of its Facebook political ad data to vetted outside researchers in May and subsequently provided greater transparency to the wider public over how they were targeted with paid-for messages on the platform, said the NYU researchers work still broke the companys terms of service.

The company declined to comment specifically on whether the academics new ad database was similarly in violation of its policies.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg speaks at Georgetown University in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 17, 2019.|Nick Wass/AP Photo

The conflict highlights how little has been resolved over how online political ads should be tracked and how outside groups can be allowed to keep tabs on digital advertising spend that is estimated to hit $1.3 billion during the midterm election cycle. Thats playing out in the build-up to Novembers election an early warning sign ahead of the flood of digital campaigning already starting ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

With Congress failing to move forward on any rules for how social media companies monitor politically divisive content or falsehoods, the companies have been left to fend for themselves. Theyve rolled out online platforms to promote get-out-the-vote campaigns, worked with outside fact-checkers to dampen the spread of incorrect information and reduced how political groups can target would-be voters via digital ads.

Yet outside researchers like those at NYU believe social media companies still are not doing enough to police how political messages and misinformation spread widely on these platforms.

And as digital political tactics quickly evolve ahead of the tech companies existing efforts including the use of paid social media influencers to promote partisan messages lawmakers and former employees also question how successful, and even willing, these firms are at policing their online platforms between now and the November election.

Its very frustrating, said Katie Harbath, Facebooks former public policy director for global elections and a former Republican Congressional staffer. Its been very hard to get a sense of what is happening. There are a lot of new vectors that are popping up that are going to remain really tricky for the platforms to deal with.

Outsiders who track political ads also argue that Facebook is failing to solve one of the easier problems providing user-friendly access to detailed data on political ad spending. Other issues like determining when politically divisive content falls afoul of its terms of service have proven tougher to combat as the amount of polarizing content on the worlds largest social network has skyrocketed.

My frustration about [Metas] ad library is that theres a sense of oh, look what you can do. But actually, unless you actually try to use it, you dont realize what a poor tool it is, said Claire Wardle, a professor at Brown Universitys Information Futures Lab and co-founder of FirstDraft, a nonprofit organization that tracked election-relation misinformation.

Edelson has become the public face of the pressure campaign for Facebook to improve its tools. The former Palantir computer scientist testified to lawmakers in the wake of the 2020 presidential election about the need for better data access to understand what is happening on social media. She won friends within Congress like Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who wrote to Metas chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, questioning his companys ban imposed on the NYU academics.

Facebook has not fixed the fundamental security vulnerabilities in both their ad networks and their platform more broadly, Edelson said in an interview. I dont think Facebook is doing a good enough job of providing functional transparency.

Rules for broadcast television require disclosures on political spending from politicians and outside groups. But there is no similar requirement for major websites and almost all spending on them remains a black box especially on connected TV services like those of DirecTV and Comcast.

Edelsons team collects reams of publicly available political ad information directly from Meta, including demographic and regional breakdowns for such paid messaging. They then analyze it for patterns about who is spending the most on these ads and which groups are not abiding by the companys rules that require political players to publicly outline they are spending to reach voters nationwide.

Ahead of Novembers election, Facebook spending on political ads has so far focused on wedge issues like the recent Roe v. Wade decision by the Supreme Court, as well as what limits, if any, should be placed on Second Amendment rights, according to POLITICOs analysis of the NYU database.

Since late May, for instance, almost $13.5 million has been earmarked for abortion-related ads, with a signficant spike in purchasing in the wake of the decision in late June to overturn Roe rulingg. Planned Parenthood, the abortion-rights group, represented more than one-third of that spending with ads that targeted states like Texas, where a local court ruling outlawed abortion.

Edelson argued the database provides a much-needed resource to track spending both by campaigns and lobbying groups that were funneling money into swing state elections.

Maybe this cycle is when Facebook really nails it, that they provide transparency tools that will put us out of business, she said. But if they dont, then I think were going to need to do this all over again in 2024.

Zach Montellaro contributed to this report.

CORRECTION: A previous version of this story misspelled Katie Harbaths name.

See the article here:
Fight over online political ads heats up ahead of midterms - POLITICO

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

Read more:
The mind just keeps on boggling | Contributed Columns | wyomingnews.com - Wyoming Tribune

The Wolf (Bad Bunny) and Ladybug (Brad Pitt) square off in Bullet Train.Photo: Sony Pictures

A constant social media refrain asks if certain older movies could still be made today based on elements like cost, logistics, politically incorrect content, or a filmmakers formula-defying creative process. Bullet Train begs the question of whether movies inspired by those filmmakers should even be attempted today, unless theyre being done by the original directors themselves.

Bullet Train filmmaker David Leitch may fancy himself a spiritual descendant of Quentin Tarantino and Guy Ritchie, who established their distinctive styles decades before Ktar Isakas acclaimednovel of the same name was published in 2010. But Leitchs talky, violent hit man movie, with Brad Pitt at the center of an over-cranked ensemble cast, reminds us why Hollywood has all but abandoned attempts to copy the successes of Tarantino and Ritchie. This film is not just bloated, tedious, dim-witted, and glib, its also redundant.

Sandra Bullock

Maria Beetle

Trained killer Ladybug wants to give up the life but is pulled back in by his handler Maria Beetle in order to collect a briefcase on a bullet train heading from Tokyo to Morioka. On board are fellow assasins Kimura, the Prince, Tangerine, and Lemon. Once on board the five assasins discover that their objectives are all connected.

Pitt plays Ladybug, a former hitman hired by his longtime handler Maria (Sandra Bullock, returning a favor after Pitts appearance in The Lost City) to steal a briefcase full of cash from active hitmen Tangerine (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Lemon (Brian Tyree Henry). Despite Marias assurances about the simplicity of the job, Ladybug quickly encounters opposition not only from Tangerine and the Thomas The Tank Engine-obsessed Lemon, but also The Prince (Joey King), a conniving Brit posing as a schoolgirl; Yuichi Kimura (Andrew Koji), an anguished Japanese father seeking vengeance after his son was pushed off of a roof; Hornet (Zazie Beetz), an assassin with her own designs on the briefcase, and other targets to execute; and The Wolf (Benito A Martinez Ocasio aka Bad Bunny), a Mexican cartel member who came to Japan after the death of his wife, for which he blames the luckless Ladybug.

Ladybug must not only defeat these foes, but figure out what events put all of them in his path. This leads to a variety of flashbacks, subplots, surprises, and secret motives, which Leitch and screenwriter Zak Olkewicz (Fear Street: Part Two1978) shuffle with little regard for pacing or the basic logistics of the films setting: how long exactly does it take for a high-speed train to travel from Tokyo to Kyoto (it was Morioka in Isakas novel)? A quick Google search indicates that the trip lasts about two hours and 15 minutes, but for some reason, this train runs all nightmaking Ladybugs escalating gauntlet feel more like a meandering travelogue through the characters one-dimensional personalities.

The muscular, charming energy that Leitch brought to set pieces and fight sequences in Hobbs & Shaw extends past the tipping point of improbability here, with a train thats full of passengers at times and empty others, without any real explanation. There are stabbings, poisonings, gunshots, snake attacks, hand-broken windshields, explosions, derailings, and more, and the only person who seems to notice is a little old lady who wishes Ladybug and Lemon would be quieter while they beat each other senseless.

As a conflict-averse assassin, Ladybugs efforts to resolve each new confrontation runs out of gas, especially since Pitt has played some version of a capable dope with more words than brains since at least The Mexican. Watching the actor have fun on screen should actually be fun, but here it feels like hes dragging the train along, instead of effortlessly riding it. Meanwhile as Lemon, Henrys obsession with Thomas & Friends is like a remnant of the era in which Tarantino spiced up Crimson Tide with monologues about the Silver Surfer. And the result here is just as obnoxious as it was watching Tarantino rant about Top Gun when he appeared in Sleep With Me. And even though Taylor-Johnson tapped into a surprisingly appealing persona when he adopted a working-class Cockney accent for a supporting role in Christopher Nolans Tenet, he repeats himself here and reduces his charm to sub-Guy Ritchie levels.

The less said about the rest of the cast the better, although Koji and the always stellar Hiroyuki Sanada desperately fight to inject dignity into the story of their familys multi-generational betrayals and misjudgments. But Leitch and Olkewicz feebly draw out those themes across the myriad conflicts and saddle these performers with those topics in an act of misjudged authenticity. Controversies over a mostly English-language adaptation of a Japanese novel notwithstandingwhich Isaka himself has largely dismissedwhat proves to be more offensive is the films unskilled attempt to inject seriousness into what should have been a cheeky summer distraction. Its fine for a movie about a bunch of competing killers to itself place no value on human life, and even to joyfully indulge in that kind of nihilism, but the way the filmmakers inject a sense of pathos feels about as earnest and meaningful as an airport gift shop souvenir before the flight home from some far-flung foreign country.

That said, whether or not Isaka started with an adequate level of originality on the page, this kind of story occupies a place thats simply too well-defined on screen. Especially when its anchored by an equally familiar performance by Pitt, whose movie stardom has been amplified by the talents of filmmakers like Tarantino and Ritchie, but doesnt always generate enough wattage to juice up a lackluster project on its own.

Ultimately, Bullet Train aims to be slick when it needs to be smart, and predictable when it should be provocativeeffectively making all of the wrong stops at exactly the wrong time. The problem isnt that Leitch doesnt have the talent to pull off a film like this, but that he doesnt have the personality. Rather, he possesses the proficiency to be a contemporary studio journeymanas long as he chooses the right journey.

Read this article:
Bullet Train takes Brad Pitt for a ride before it goes off the rails - The A.V. Club

In a bad new epidemic of hypocrisy and wokedom that Simon Lincoln Reader calls an outbreak of California Blue, involving examples of cosplay disguised as activism such as Prince Harrys mouthing off about climate change having just landed at Van Nuys in a Gulf Stream, Reader says hed rather have the old-fashioned corruption of Faith Muthambi any day of the week. He imagines Faith and her friends cackling in the back of a Hummer limousine, bursting with polony and Fanta Pine, speeding wildly in front of plumes from extremely leaded petrol en route to a party at an abattoir, compared with UKs fey Rishi Sunak gazing soulfully out at the ocean with a look of *deep concern* over sea levels. And he argues theres rising intolerance of California Blue and its symptoms everywhere, from Holland to Sri Lanka to the US. Readbelow for some straight-talking, politically incorrect opinions. Sandra Laurence

By Simon Lincoln Reader*

Tom Bower is possibly Britains most popular biographer but his new book on the fracturing of the Royal Family (Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War between the Windsors) could easily have been called The Descent of Man. More than gossip, a dramatic portrait emerges of a young man contaminated by a condition known as California Blue. This disease is more dangerous than Monkeypox or whatever next the WHO has in mind for us: it took a young (by all accounts, excellent) soldier with a fondness for smoking and naked billiards into the despair of cosplay disguised as activism, where everything is racist. Through Harry a great tragedy is confirmed: Western Man the species defined by the brilliance of life in his late grandfather is dead, and the imposter who replaced him mouths off about climate change having just landed at Van Nuys in a Gulf Stream.

Im afraid that one of the contenders for leadership of Britains Conservative party and subsequently, the role of Prime Minister, is himself infected with California Blue. Prior to coof little was known of Rishi Sunak besides his marriage to the daughter of one of Indias richest men (founder of Infosys), who he met in Silicon Valley. That changed in a cabinet re-shuffle in 2020; just as things were hotting up courtesy of Wuhan, Boris Johnson appointed Rishi Goldman Sachs alum as Chancellor. As these kinds of detached people terrified of tough decisions so often do, Rishi bounced from one stinker to the next, kicking the can further down the road until the opportunity to stab Boris Johnson appeared.

Rishi is a Californian politician, but in Britain. Even before he was announced a finalist, he was replying to questions with non-answers perhaps the most alarming was an attempt to answer the question: What is a woman? Instead of adult human female, he mumbled his way through a erm-um-uh-I support-the-Prime-Ministers-declaration-ah-um response, which is how the problems in Los Angeles County started decades ago. As one of the two finalists for Number 10 Downing Street, he declared, I flew back from the US in 2021 to stop the government plunging the UK into another lockdown! That statement has since been described as categorically false by government sources and reporters. In contrast, his opponent Liz Truss (Foreign Secretary) answered No when asked whether she would consider a lockdown in the event of another leak from Wuhan.

Dont be fooled by his Brexit credentials; the Harry, or Californian Blue, is strong in him in other ways. He wants a central bank digital currency to obliterate Bitcoin. Hes a massive fan of Britains ailing, sclerotic (but the diversity) NHS. Worse and very Californian is his defiance of historys documented lessons, specifically the history of finance, which shows that if you increase the circulation of cash without a corresponding increase in real supply, the end result is ten times out ten something called inflation.

So if it came down to Faith Muthambi vs Rishi, my cross would be next to the old girl. At least with her youll get exactly what you expect: old-fashioned corruption with increasing reluctance toward discretion. Whilst Rishi is splashed across newspapers standing next to Dr Jill Biden staring out at the ocean with a look of *deep concern* (sea levels), Faith and her friends will be cackling in the back of a Hummer limousine, bursting with polony and Fanta Pine, speeding wildly in front of plumes from extremely leaded petrol en route to a party at an abattoir. Every June, the civil service will ensnare Rishi with a Pride flag forcing him to send a tweet photo to Brett Herron, GOODs failed mayoral candidate, expressing sympathy (solidarity) that Cape Towns City Council refuses to use pronouns. Try to do that with Faith see what happens to you. You wont find her at any event hosted by unelected creepy organisations determined to instruct elected officials or you will, but only to procure those small bottles of Scotch from the hotel bar fridge, to pair with other small bottles she took from the airline getting there. In addition, Rishi has a fondness for skinny ties and no man should ever wear a slim Jim.

Because 95% of the worlds prestige media journalists are infected with it, this might not be readily apparent but theres rising intolerance of California Blue and its symptoms everywhere, from Holland to Sri Lanka to the USA. And if you dont believe me that elected infected officials who invested in the narrative are untrustworthy and beyond mad, just look at what California Blues patient zero, Nancy Pelosi, got up to this past week.

Read also:

(Visited 21 times, 21 visits today)

Read more:
SLR: Give me old-fashioned South African corruption any time! - BizNews

When you think of Richard Madeley, you probably also think of Alan Partridge.

The infamous socially inept and politically incorrect media personality - sorry, I'm talking about Partridge here - is known for his howling blunders.

Over the years, Madeley has drawn parallels with Steve Coogans bumbling, tone-deaf comedy character thanks to his hilarious off-key takes on the latest news stories.

The veteran host is a one-of-a-kind - and has built up a huge fan base for his unique way with words over the years.

He took over presenting on GMB from Piers Morgan - another man who bears a close resemblance to Partridge.

Previously Steve Coogan, who plays the bumbling personality on screen, admitted that he thought the pair were pretty similar.

"I suppose if you fused Richard Madeley with Piers Morgan you might get close to who Partridge is at the moment, he told Naga Munchetty on BBC Breakfast.

The ITV star seems okay with this branding, as he told one local paper: "I suppose I do have a bit of Partridge about me, but there's a bit of Partridge in every journalist on the planet."

Now as his name (once again) trends on Twitter thanks to his interview with Chloe Kelly, we've taken a deeper look into whether Madeley really is the real-life Alan Partridge. Back of the net!

Image:

He once scolded a guest for weeping when he met the paramedics who had saved his life, telling them: "Stop crying. This is supposed to make you happy."

He then added: "Anyway, after the break, the biggest dog in the UK. And he really is big. Don't miss it!"

Reflecting on a teacher remortgaging her home to save her dog's life, the 66-year-old asked viewers: "What price do you put on your pet's care? Is there a point where you just say, 'Too expensive, the dog has to die?"

While interviewing a group of Primordial Dwarves, he asked: "Do you find that people patronise you? That means they talk down to you."

The rise of 'Me Too' sparked a much-needed discussion about the inappropriate sexual conduct across countless industries.

Discussing the problem in Westminster, Richard said: "And that's one of the questions of the day. To touch or not to touch? When is it appropriate and when is it not? We'll be talking about that very soon."

Chatting to some 'freegans' who raids supermarket bins for food, he cheekily asked: "What's your supermarket skip of choice, then? I quite like shopping at Waitrose".

To one guest who had a stammer: "You looked as if your head was going to come off!

Quizzing one of the Birmingham Six, he asked: "What do you notice most that has changed during your 18 years in jail? Cars have five gears now, for example.

Image:

Richard married wife Judy in 1986 and the pair had two children: son Jack and daughter Chloe.

They ended up presenting This Morning on ITV together in 1988 - and along the way, Richard has been rather frank about their life.

He once told viewers: "When me and Judy were trying to conceive, I used to douse my balls in icy water before intercourse.

Another time, he mused: "Remember when you had thrush Judy? You had a terrible time of it."

When Judy once revealed she once dreamed of becoming a doctor, he shot her down, saying: "No, you would have ended up killing everybody."

And after she once confused a viewer's age, he laughed: "Ha ha, she failed maths. She did, she did!"

Image:

Famously, he once told Bill Clinton: I know what its like to be wronged by the press. I was once accused of shoplifting. Unlike you though, I knew I was innocent.

In 2007, former Dr Who Peter Davidson was interviewed by Richard, alongside his daughter, actress Georgia Moffett.

They aired a clip of her new show in which her character complains of her husband: "I just wish he had a bigger d***."

"Did Georgia wish you had a bigger d***?" Madeley then asked her dad - leaving people in stitches

While interviewing Keira Knightly, he yelled to his production team: Can we get some make-up please? Get Keira looking like a crack wh*re shed make a good crack wh*re!

Introducing Paul Gascoigne, he said: "He suffers for us. He bears our pain in the most public way possible. He serves a timeless human need, one that goes back long before the time of Christ. Perhaps this has always been Paul Gascoignes destiny.

Earlier this week, he called England player Chloe Kelly 'Coco' in an awkward interview on Tuesday morning (2 August).

The football star was appearing on Good Morning Britain two days after her extra-time goal saw the Lionesses win the Euro 2022 final.

Wrapping up the interview, Madeley called Kelly Coco and thanked her for coming on the show.

Chloe -or Coco as I call my daughter Chloe -thank you for coming in, the presenter said.

Image:

Appearing on ITV's Good Morning Britain in 2021, Corrie actor Nigel Havers remained professional when Richard Madeley asked: 'Do you ever get mistaken for the Duke of Westminster?', confirming he didn't.

Awkwardly he had referred to the wrong duke - Gerald Grosvenor, who died in 2016...

"You look at the beach and you think, ahh, pretty pretty, lovely golden sand, thats safe. Not in certain parts of the country quicksand!

Watch out this summer...

Image:

The presenter once complained he had to carry around salt to ensure his dishes are correctly seasoned.

He told viewers: I have salt in my bag. Increasingly in restaurants they wont give you salt because its bad for the heart. I carry a little vial of salt, because if youre in a restaurant, and you order the soup, say, and it comes and its under-salted, why would you sit there for the next 15 minutes sipping under-salted soup?

Chatting about the heavy topic of war crimes, he said: "Obviously, we had the Nuremberg trials after the war and we hanged quite a few Nazis and imprisoned a lot of others and we let them out eventually.

"But we didnt go after the Hitler Youth as far as Im aware. We didnt go after the Hitler Youth we only went after adults who served in the Hitler regime. And thats something to reflect on, I think.

Read More

Read More

View original post here:
Richard Madeley's cringiest gaffes as GMB host is coined the new Alan Partridge - The Mirror

Funnyman John Oliver recently offered a confused message on whats driving rent prices sky high. This week he moved onto inflation, and his analysis was much sounderthough he still made one critical mistake.

The British-American comedian and host of HBOs Last Week Tonight with John Oliver begins by noting everyone is pointing fingers over inflation. President Joe Biden blames Vladmir Putin. Republicans are blaming Joe Biden and his Build Back Better spending agenda. Democratic lawmakers Sheila Jackson Reid and Elizabeth Warren say its corporate greed, while other commentators have cited supply chain disruptions.

There has been a flurry of finger-pointing, Oliver says, with many tending to place the blame at whatever they were already mad at.

Some of these arguments make little sense, however, including corporate greed.

Its not like corporations only just got greedy the last two years, Oliver says, adding that some companies may be using the inflationary environment to charge higher prices. Most economists will tell you thats not what caused inflation in the first place.

He also debunked Bidens common refrain that inflation is Putins tax hike, though Oliver rightly noted the war in Ukraine has not helped inflation, since it has increased energy demand and disrupted supply.

When Biden said, Inflation is largely the fault of Putin, that is clearly not true, Oliver says. Inflation was happening before Putin even invaded Ukraine, so thats just not how time works.

Not only does Oliver reject these two misguided explanations, he largely gets the basics of inflation correct.

Too much money chasing a limited supply of goods can lead to inflation, he says.

This is an almost verbatim quote of Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist who explained that inflation is caused by too much money chasing after too few goods. And Oliver notes that by expanding the money supply to finance massive stimulus spending, the government inadvertently created too much money without a corresponding increase in goods, causing inflation.

Importantly, Oliver says this wasnt the only cause of inflation, something some of Bidens critics have overlooked. (Government lockdowns, which crippled supply chains, also played a role, as did the war in Ukraine and government policies that hampered energy production.)

Olivers segment is funny and even informative in some ways. He goes off the rails though in a few ways.

First, as noted above, Oliver admits that people did have more cash on hand because of the Federal Reserves money pumping, but he argues that this policy was necessary because it helped us avoid a Covid-induced financial crisis.

The financial crisis was not induced by Covid, however. The financial crisis was induced by government, which closed the economy and put millions of Americans out of work.. This is an important distinction, and one Oliver probably overlooked in large part because he supported government lockdowns and ridiculed people who opposed them. Lockdowns failed to tame the virus, an abundance of evidence shows, but the action prompted the massive stimulus spending to avoid the Covid-induced financial crisis Oliver cites.

This was not the only way the lockdowns caused inflation, however. The governments pandemic response is also what caused the supply chain problems.

"If you don't make stuff, there's no stuff, Elon Musk noted early in the pandemic.

Throughout the segment, Oliver points out that these supply chain issues have also exacerbated inflation. While the monetary expansion resulted in more money, the supply chain issues resulted in fewer goods and servicesa perfect recipe for inflation.

But Oliver misses a simple fact: however you slice it, inflation was caused by the government, whether its the supply chain disruptions they caused with lockdowns or the erosion of the dollars purchasing power through money printing.

This matters, because Oliver seems to see the solution to inflation as more government. Throughout his segment, he defends the Federal ReserveIt was not like the Fed was alone in calling this wrong. Most economists thought inflation would go away on its ownand concluded his show by advocating more government intervention to alleviate the problem. (Taxpayer-funded rental insurance. Taxes on higher-income earners to finance refundable child tax credits.)

I want to like John Oliver. Hes funny, has a great accent, and is not an unintelligent person.

But in his highly-entertaining and pretty informative analysis on inflation, he somehow still manages to miss the true culprit of inflation. Governmentabove any other single entityis the root of our inflationary problems. Nor should this come as any surprise.

I do not think it is an exaggeration to say history is largely a history of inflation, usually inflations engineered by governments for the gain of governments, the Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek once observed.

John Oliver is right that corporate greed and Putins tax hike are poor answers when it comes to explaining inflation. But he still cant seem to see that the government is the root of the inflation problem, not the answer to it.

See more here:
What John Oliver Gets Right (and Wrong) about Inflation - Foundation for Economic Education

Nine months after the Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann died at the end of a noose in Israel, a controversial but thoughtful commentary about his trial appeared in The New Yorker. The public reaction stunned its author, the famed political theorist and Holocaust survivor Hannah Arendt (1906-1975). It was February 1963.

Arendts eyewitness assessment of Eichmann as terribly and terrifyingly normal took the world by surprise. Her phrase, the banality of evil, entered the lexicon of social science, probably forever. It was taken for granted that Eichmann, despite his soft-spoken and avuncular demeanor, must be a monster of epic proportions to play such an important role in one of the greatest crimes of the 20th Century.

I was only following orders, he claimed in the colorless, matter-of-fact fashion of a typical bureaucrat. The world thought his performance a fiendishly deceptive show, but Hannah Arendt concluded that Eichmann was indeed a rather ordinary and unthinking functionary.

How callous! A betrayal of her own Jewish people! How could any thoughtful person dismiss Eichmann so cavalierly?! Arendts critics blasted her with such charges mercilessly, but they had missed the point. She did not condone or excuse Eichmanns complicity in the Holocaust. She witnessed the horrors of national socialism first-hand herself, having escaped Germany in 1933 after a short stint in a Gestapo jail for anti-state propaganda. She did not claim that Eichmann was innocent, only that the crimes for which he was guilty did not require a monster to commit them.

How often have you noticed people behaving in anti-social ways because of a hope to blend in, a desire to avoid isolation as a recalcitrant, nonconforming individual? Did you ever see someone doing harm because everybody else was doing it? The fact that we all have observed such things, and that any one of the culprits might easily, under the right circumstances, have become an Adolf Eichmann, is a chilling realization.

As Arendt explained, Going along with the rest and wanting to say we were quite enough to make the greatest of all crimes possible.

Eichmann was a shallow and clueless joiner, someone whose thoughts never ventured any deeper than how to become a cog in the great, historic Nazi machine. In a sense, he was a tool of Evil more than evil himself.

Commenting on Arendts banality of evil thesis, philosopher Thomas White writes, Eichmann reminds us of the protagonist in Albert Camuss novelThe Stranger(1942), who randomly and casually kills a man, but then afterwards feels no remorse. There was no particular intention or obvious evil motive: the deed just happened.

Perhaps Hannah Arendt underestimated Eichmann. He did, after all, attempt to conceal evidence and cover his tracks long before the Israelis nabbed him in Argentina in 1960facts which suggest he did indeed comprehend the gravity of his offenses. It is undeniable, however, that ordinary people are capable of horrific crimes when possessed with power or a desire to obtain it, especially if it helps them fit in with the gang that already wields it.

The big lesson of her thesis, I think, is this: If Evil comes calling, do not expect it to be stupid enough to advertise itself as such. Its far more likely that it will look like your favorite uncle or your sweet grandmother. It just might cloak itself in grandiloquent platitudes like equality, social justice, and the common good. It could even be a prominent member of Parliament or Congress.

Maximilien Robespierre and Louis Antoine de Saint-Just, I suggested in a recent essay, were peas in the same pod as Eichmannordinary people who committed extraordinarily heinous acts.

Hannah Arendt is recognized as one of the leading political thinkers of the Twentieth Century. She was very prolific, and her books are good sellers still, nearly half a century after her death. She remains eminently quotable as well, authoring such pithy lines as Political questions are far too serious to be left to the politicians, The most radical revolutionary will become a conservative the day after the revolution, and The sad truth of the matter is that most evil is done by people who never made up their minds to be or do either evil or good.

Some of Arendts friends on the Left swallowed the myth that Hitler and Stalin occupied opposite ends of the political spectrum. She knew better. Both were evil collectivists and enemies of the individual (see list of suggested readings below). Hitler never intended to defend the West against Bolshevism, she wrote in her 1951 book The Origins of Totalitarianism, but always remained ready to join the Reds for the destruction of the West, even in the middle of the struggle against Soviet Russia.

To appreciate Hannah Arendt more fully, I offer here a few additional samples of her writings:

The moment we no longer have a free press, anything can happen. What makes it possible for a totalitarian or any other dictatorship to rule is that people are not informed; how can you have an opinion if you are not informed? If everybody always lies to you, the consequence is not that you believe the lies, but rather that nobody believes anything any longer.This is because lies, by their very nature, have to be changed, and a lying government has constantly to rewrite its own history. On the receiving end you get not only one liea lie which you could go on for the rest of your daysbut you get a great number of lies, depending on how the political wind blows.And a people that no longer can believe anything cannot make up its mind. It is deprived not only of its capacity to act but also of its capacity to think and to judge. And with such a people you can then do what you please.

_____

The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convincedNazior the convincedCommunist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.

_____

The essence oftotalitarian government, and perhaps the nature of every bureaucracy,is to make functionaries and mere cogs in the administrative machinery out of men, and thus to dehumanize them.

_____

The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal. From the viewpoint of our legal institutions and of our moral standards of judgment, this normality was much more terrifying than all the atrocities put together, for it impliedas had been said at Nuremberg over and over again by the defendants and their counselsthat this new type of criminal, who is in actual facthostis generis humani,commits his crimes under circumstances that make it well-nigh impossible for him to know or to feel that he is doing wrong.

_____

Totalitarianism begins in contempt for what you have. The second step is the notion: Things must changeno matter how. Anything is better than what we have. Totalitarian rulers organize this kind of mass sentiment, and by organizing it they articulate it, and by articulating it they make the people somehow love it.They were told before, thou shalt not kill; and they didnt kill. Now they are told, thou shalt kill; andalthough they think its very difficult to kill, they do it because its now part of the code of behavior.

_____

The argument that we cannot judge if we were not present and involved ourselves seems to convince everyone everywhere, although it seems obvious that if it were true, neither the administration of justice nor the writing of history would ever be possible.

Hannah Arendt (movie trailer)

Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? by Richard J. Bernstein

Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil by Hannah Arendt

What Did Hannah Arendt Really Mean by the Banality of Evil? by Thomas White

Two Monsters of the French Revolution Who Were Consumed by PowerAnd Lost Their Heads on the Same Day by Lawrence W. Reed

What the Nazis Had in Common With Every Other Collectivist Regime of the 20th Century by Lawrence W. Reed

Excerpt from:
Hannah Arendts Chilling Thesis on Evil - Foundation for Economic Education