Category Archives: Political Correctness

The Boys Season 3 Review: Preparing to Bust a Cap

When The Boysadaptation debuted, it initially felt like yet another tiresome variation on the 80s grimdark aesthetic. Cool, cool, corporate superheroes who swear and kill? Super-edgy. Yet somehow, now that weve arrived at The Boys season 3, it feels like some of the most adept social satire of the moment. In part, thats because society at large has just gotten so much worse that mildly watered-down Garth Ennis no longer feels much like humorous exaggeration. But weve also seen movies like Dont Look Up attempt to capture and satirize the current moment, and the latest round of The Boys, frankly, does that way better, perhaps because its through the current media filter of superheroes and multiverse.boys season 3 review.

Just for starters, remember around the time of Avengers: Infinity War, that joke going around about how Ant-Man might defeat Thanos? Yeah.The Boys goes further than that.

Theres a lot more to it than dirty jokes, though. While the animated spinoff, The Boys Presents: Diabolicalleaned into the raunch and gore, season 3 takes aim at nearly everything in the zeitgeist right now. The Snyder Cut, Scientology, Fox News, commodification of social justice, Black Lives Matter, Sarah McLachlans animal rescue commercials, the NRA, intersectionality, Rogue Ones reshoots, Rick and Mortys Szechuan sauce fandom, Beyonce, Pepsi, Gal Gadot, Five Nights at Freddys, and much, much more all come in for skewering, along with all the superhero stuff youd expect.

The only major target of the moment it misses due to timing? Russia, depicted in typical post-Cold War, mafia style, with no reference to recent global adventurism. Theres also not a lot of COVID stuff realistically, no show wants all their actors wearing N-95s throughout.

It also leans hard into the Homelander-as-super-Donald Trump angle, with Americas secretly abusive superhero finding himself in several Trumpian situations, and holding similar rallies. Fans who watch just for the dirty jokes may miss some of these levelsor not want to see themselves represented in Homelanders fanbase. But it does beg the question of what Trump himself might be doing in this universe, where celebrities from our world specifically do exist alongside these super-exaggerations.

Sometimes thats fun, as when real big names who are obviously fans of the show appear as themselves. Other times its weird if were going to have the Vought corporation versions of Fox News and Sean Hannity, whats the point of name-checking the actual Hannity late in the season? And after a whole season that spoofed Scientology, were now mentioning Leah Remini and her whistleblowing about the real Scientology?

Just assume multiverse rules work, and some people from our Earth have variants here and some dont. They never say that, but its the easiest explanation.

As the season begins, the world of The Boys appears to be in a good place. Homelanders ratings plummeted since he was exposed as having an affair with a literal Nazi. Starlight and Hughie are fully domestic, with her popularity as a superhero way up, and his position at the Federal Bureau of Superhuman Affairs seemingly secure. Meanwhile, Maeve and Butcher delve into the history of the 20th-century hero Soldier Boy, and his presumed death. At his level of power, whatever killed Soldier Boy could be powerful enough to destroy Homelander as well. BUTsince we all know Jensen Ackles has been cast as Soldier Boy, and his storyline altered to better resemble an 80s style Captain America, its really not a spoiler to say rumors of his demise turn out greatly exaggerated.

Soon enough, things go south again as Homelander figures out that, while the public hates literal Nazis, a significant (mostly white and male) segment of it loves his unapologetic anger at lesser mortals holding him back. And hes also starting to crack up a bit The Boys couldnt possibly have planned to specifically parody the Moon Knight TV show, but theres a mirror dissociation scene that plays that way. It merely demonstrates how plugged in Eric Kripke is to all the current tropes.

Thematically, the show this season takes on the bastardized Stan Lee saying espoused by Butcher that, With great power comes the absolute certainty that youll turn into a right c**t. He gets to test that theory most literally, with a vial that confers temporary powers, but other characters face similar dilemmas. The Boys doesnt entirely take Butchers espoused stance on the issue, but strongly implies that anyone with baggage should sort their issues out before getting anywhere close to power. Starlight, for one, continues to be the near-perfect All-American girl archetype with a steadfast moral compass. Even when Starlight is a nagging girlfriend, shes ultimately at least 90% in the right.

Also, there is a surrogate sort-of Stan Lee character this season whos full of it. Like almost everyone on the show. For all its critique of right-wing politics and corporatization run amuck, any accusations of political correctness seem unlikely to stick when, for example, an entire episode revolves around an orgy.

Still, all the swearing and satire and explicit sex would feel for naught without compelling characters. At the heart of the show, the dynamic between regular guy made-good Hughie and dream girl Starlight remains one fans can invest in. Butcher can be a pill, but this season takes care to show that deep, deep down, theres at least a spark of compassion. MMs individual adventure sees his principles sorely tested when his daughters stepfather pushes all his buttons. Homelander remains singularly compelling as the most morally awful metahuman ever. Antony Starr even offers periodic slips behind the mask to reveal glimpses of the hurt little boy inside. And Ackles makes an awesome addition as the 80s ideal of macho, in the sort of role Jeffrey Dean Morgan would have been a shoo-in for a decade ago.

On the minus side, Frenchie and Kimiko remain fairly boring, save for a Singing Detective-inspired lip-sync musical number. That turns out to be one of the seasons best creative flourishes. Another involves animated characters coming to life when the show busts out of its realistic parameters, it may make the viewer question whats real, but it also truly soars. Like the anti-Supe team at the heart of the show, this all works best when it does not give a [expletive] about the rules.

Expect big changes from the comics storyline, but the culmination manages big action, satisfying drama, and still sets the stage for the next obstacle. As in real life, there may be no ultimate hope of completely overthrowing entrenched power and celebrity. But The Boys does make a case that the constant fight remains worth it, and the small victories worth celebrating. It will almost be disappointing if the series ultimately ends with either heroes or villains entirely victorious.

Season 3 grade: 4.5/5

Recommended Reading: The Boys Omnibus Vol. 3

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. This affiliate advertising program also provides a means to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.boys season 3 review. Also. However. Regardless. Additionally. However. Also. Additionally. Regardless. Also. Super. Now. I. Go. Goodbye. This is also a sentence. Also this. And also that.boys season 3 review

Here is the original post:

The Boys Season 3 Review: Preparing to Bust a Cap - Superherohype.com

I am writing this on Maharana Pratap Jayanti (June 2) and puzzling through the history wars of the moment. In the common sense of the historical world that we grew up in, and that now seems to have all but disappeared, history was immense fun. It opened up the imagination to an incredible variety. Its purpose was never easy moral or political judgement or the search for comfortable narratives or simplistic explanations. It was not a world where the function of history was, to find, as is often said, a common delusion about kinship and a common platform for the hatred of the other. In the world of this history, one never had to choose sides. If you wanted a moral framing at all, you could be a votary of both Akbar and Pratap, trying to imaginatively see a certain kind of integrity in both their projects.

There was no hesitation in acknowledging Aurangzebs bigotry. But one did it in a slightly sotto voce voice, not for political correctness, but because of the realisation that the magnificence of the two historical cultures that I inhabited, Jaipur and Jodhpur, were often facilitated by deep collaboration with Aurangzeb. What would exorcising him even mean? Hunting down every collaborator who was at the frontlines of his army or provided him finance? Would Man Singh and Jaswant Singh also have to disappear as names?

Even the moral debates were wider. The battle over motives in history is one, that for the life of us, we could not understand. Was the desecration of temples, whether by Mahmud of Ghazni or Aurangzeb, driven by the motives of asserting political power or economic gain as secular historians want to assert or was it an act of religious bigotry? How does one even ascertain this? Would it make a difference? Would it make a moral difference if we said the demolition of Babari Masjid was politically motivated, not religiously motivated? Or as one of our history teachers used to say, he would be even more morally offended by temple desecration if it turned out it was done for mere opportunism rather than out of genuine conviction. It was a way of challenging the unexamined assumption that somehow a deed done under the sign of earthly functionality (power or riches) made it a less loathsome act than if it were done out of piety. At least the fanatic is not destroying lightly. He may be deluded, but he has not destroyed you for a trivial reason.

The point is not to settle these questions. It is to remember a context where they could be discussed without violence, censorship or community pride hovering in the background. In retrospect, what made that possible was a degree of detachment. One of the things we had to do in school was what used to be known as Socially Useful Productive Work. We read and recorded cassettes, and wrote exams for visually impaired university students, a practice we continued into the summers of our college days. In retrospect, this was an unexpected gift. It meant reading hundreds of hours of textbooks in Hindi and English. And two things stand out. I am genuinely puzzled by the idea floating around that dynasties like Cholas or Rahtrakutas were sidelined in North Indian schools and colleges. Often these textbooks were terrible introductions to the craft of history. They were compendiums of arguments. The good answer had to know what both Irfan Habib and Jadunath Sarkar or R C Majumdar and Romila Thapar had to say. The methodological premises were capacious. If I am recalling correctly, one popular set of textbooks, written by the widely read V D Mahajan would, in explaining the victory of Ghazni, invoke everything from their more agile military mobility to their discipline on account of the fact that Islam prohibited drink. But their very prosaically put together lists of arguments often up unexpected conjunctures and argumentative possibilities.

It is said we are entering new history wars, where the old shibboleths of Nehruvian and Marxist histories are being set aside. There is great non-academic but serious history being written. Academic historiography in India has a lot to answer for. It was often limited in the questions it asked, the methods it deployed, and the political ends it sought to sometimes serve. It was just not linguistically deep enough to explore the vast ocean of Indian history. Whole fields were sidelined intellectual history, the history of science or just even political history. But this was not some vast conspiracy to sideline Hindu history or heroes, it was a limitation of the methods and training and cabal-like character of many academic disciplines. Though equally, it has to be asked, why so many of our well-endowed centres of traditional learning outside the academy, which had all the languages and manuscripts, did not also broaden their fields and horizons.

But the contemporary fire and brimstone over history is unlikely to lead to a deeper understanding. This is because we are confusing wars of history with the wars of memory. The distinction between history and memory can be overdrawn. But it is an important distinction. As Pierre Nora put it, memory looks for facts that suit the veneration of the main object of recollection, the task of history is always complication, analysis and criticism. Memory has an affective dimension, it is supposed to move you, and constitute your identity. It draws the boundaries of communities. History is more detached, and the facts will always complicate both identity and community. History is not a morality tale as much as a very difficult form of hard-won knowledge, always aware of its selectivity. Memory is easiest to hold onto as a morality tale. History, even if written from the present is about the past; Memory is a kind of eternal truth, to hold onto, and carry forward.

So when the next public discussion of Rana Pratap or Prithviraj or Aurangzeb or Shivaji takes place now, it will not be a battle of bad versus good historians (that is a good battle to have). It will be between forms of memory. The facts are at best props for the dramas of creating kinship and finding enemies. We can truly have true history wars only when we are we have a sense of wry detachment and equanimity about the past. Otherwise what we have are wars of memory, which are sometimes necessary. But they often devour both the present and the past in violent furies.

The writer is contributing editor, The Indian Express

Read the original post:

Why today's debates over Aurangzeb, Shivaji, Rana Pratap or Prithviraj Chauhan are not about good or bad history, but tussles over memory - The Indian...

The prospect of a new name for Fort Bragg is getting mixed reviews from veterans and civil rights leaders in Fayetteville.

A federal commission tasked by Congress with recommending new names for military installations named for Confederate officers has suggested that Fort Bragg become Fort Liberty.

Thats fine with Jimmy Buxton, president of the Fayetteville branch of the NAACP.

Its somewhat mind-boggling that they came up with Liberty, said Buxton, who was invited to share his input when representatives of the naming commission visited Fort Bragg in the fall for feedback.

I knew it had to be changed, Buxton said. I think I can live with Fort Liberty - what liberty stands for. And its what Fort Bragg has stood for for years. It brings a pretty good meaning to Fort Bragg.

Buxton said he didnt have a suggestion for a new name, but one of the men whose name he would have liked to be seriously considered was Gen. Roscoe Robinson, the first African American to command the 82nd Airborne Division.

Retired Army Gen. Dan McNeill, former commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, said he thinks the commission chose wisely, considering all the suggestions it had.

"If you named it after a person, which person would you have picked? he asked. If you picked one, as opposed to groups of others, you would have left others behind.

McNeill said the commission spoke to a lot of diverse people while seeking feedback from the community.

"It was a good job of assembling a wide array of people," he said. "By the time the last meeting occurred, they all seemed to agree on Liberty. A name is what caused this problem to start with. When someone said Liberty, it made a lot of sense to me."

The naming commission announced its recommendations last week. They will be forwarded to Congress and, if approved, to Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, who will have the ultimate authority to rename the installations.

Fort Bragg, with more than 53,000 troops, is home to the 82nd Airborne Division and Special Operations Forces.

The post, which opened in 1918 as a field artillery station, was named after Confederate Gen. Braxton Bragg, a North Carolina native. The Army artillery officer was known for his role in the 1847 Battle of Buena Vista, Mexico. He later served as a Confederate general and was a slave owner.

Troy Williams, a legal analyst and criminal defense investigator, said at this point, he doesnt see the renaming of Fort Bragg as a big deal.

Williams served in the Air Force from 1973 through 1977.

I dont like the Fort Liberty name, Williams said. Its not going to sit well with some people. At this point, this far into the game, its a moot point to change this because they were Confederate officers.

Williams questioned when all the name changing would end in a period of political correctness. He said some military installations are named after Union Army leaders who slaughtered native Indians and the buffalo they hunted.

They were slaughtering these people. Theyve got stuff named after them, he said. My challenge is, are we going to change everything?Williams doesnt like the proposed name.

If were going to come up with a name, at least make it a name that honors people, he said. Fort Liberty what the heck is that? We honored Bragg all these years, and now we cant honor another person?

U.S. Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., whose district includes Fort Bragg, has suggested that its association with Confederate Gen. Bragg instead be with Bragg's cousin, Union Army Gen. Edward S. Bragg of Wisconsin, as a compromise.

Most historians rate Edward Bragg as the better military leader.

William Greene, 59, the quartermaster of VFW Post 10630 in Hope Mills, served five years in the reserve before serving on active duty in the Army from 1985 to 2005.

Greene agrees with Hudson.

To me, personally, Id call it Fort Bragg after the Union guy, Greene said. The Confederate general theyve got to get rid of that. All the Confederate history.

But changing the name would be costly, he said.

Youre talking a lot of money, Greene said. I dont know how youll raise those funds to rename the roads, all the signs. Keep it simple, anyway, so we can save money.

The name Liberty would reflect all the things going on at Fort Bragg, he said.

Im just trying to save some money, he said.

Grilley Mitchell, 67, president of the Cumberland County Veterans Council, had a 20-year Army career that ended in 1993.

You know what? They have already made the decision, he said. I have no opinion. Theyre going to do what they want to do. We just get in line with the marching orders. Thats the reality of things. The military makes the decisions.

Mitchell said hes on record saying that the post should remain Fort Bragg but named for Edward Bragg.

He was an ambassador, a true patriot for the Union, he said. I thought there was a better option. Think of the money that was going to be saved.

The young may call it Fort Liberty, he said. For us, the old school, it will always be Fort Bragg. If you told anyone you were from North Carolina, they say, Fort Bragg. They know Fort Bragg. This should be an opinion made by soldiers who served in the military and their families and not the politicians.

The federal commission recommended new names for eight other Army installations. Fort Bragg is the only one that would not be named after a person.

Read this article:

Reaction to new name for Fort Bragg mixed among veterans, activists - Up & Coming Weekly

Alfonso Pineda Ulloas action-thrillerThere Are No Saintsshouldve worked on multiple levels. Its written by the great Paul Schrader, the man behind such classics asTaxi Driverand the recentFirst Reformed. It boasts a formidable cast of cinema stalwarts. Alas, instead of a scathing critique of racial injustice, a revamping of the man seeks revenge after his family is murdered/kidnapped trope, the director delivers gratuitously violent, vulgar, clichd, jaw-droppingly sexist, and racist cinematic bile.

The plot is barely worth noting, as its as by-the-numbers as it gets. Released from a prison in South Texas, our heavily-tattooed hero, known as the Jesuit (Jos Mara Yazpik), goes after the goons led by a super-evil Vincent (Neal McDonough) who murdered his wife (Paz Vega) and kidnapped his son (Keidrich Sellati). With the cops after him, the Jesuit is running out of time to track and take down those scumbags. Luckily, he receives help from a sexy bartender (Shannyn Sossamon), who can lead him to Vincent. The story then somehow ends up in the Mexican jungle and concludes on the dourest of notes.

What does Ulloa have against the opposite sex? The central protagonist is frequently violent towards women; a multitude of highly graphic sequences portray women as helpless, sex-and-money-craving victims; theyre referred to as gold-digging w****s, beaten, shot, and tortured, their hands impaled by sharp knives.There Are No Saintsseems to regard females as either strippers or scantily-clad, easily-bought, incessantly-blabbering pests. Im far from being a proponent of political correctness, but witnessing such unabashed insensitivity is nauseating.

heavily-tattooed herogoes after the goonswho murdered his wife.

Ulloa never tries to justify his disregard for good taste. Even the Jesuit is frequently referred to as a spic. This is racism for the sake of racism. We all know that it still exists, but theres no point being made here. The same applies to all the over-the-top violence. I normally dig this stuff the gorier, the better but it must either be truly unnerving, played for laughs, or make somesortof a point. In Ulloas film, it just sits there. Shins get blown off, faces smashed, fingernails yanked, bats break bones, boiling water sears off skin, and a child is tortured. Youll wince for all the wrong reasons.

The shaky cam used throughoutThere Are No Saintsdoes the relatively well-orchestrated choreography a disservice. A bathroom brawl, after which our hero casually flirts with the bartender, could have been infinitely more effective if wiser camera placement and editing choices were made. The same applies to a fight inside a moving vehicle later on in the film. Its all sound and fury, signifying zilch. No one learns s**t from anything. Characters dont develop or grow; there are, indeed, no saints nor any redeeming qualities.

Im shocked Schrader wrote this, but then I recollect some of the duds on his mostly-impeccable resume (see, or rather dont,The Canyons). Still, theres no excuse for the vacuum of morals on display. A moral vacuumcanbe pivotal to great cinema, but in a monotonous rehash like this, some humanity is essential. The lackluster dialogue doesnt help. Unless you want to eat a baseball, I suggest you tell me where my money is right now, a character snarls.

I wish I could say that if you were to take out all the offensive s**t, Ulloas film would be silly, bloody fun. Considering the cast and writer, it really should be. However, the result is truly egregious. Id rather eat a baseball than have to sit throughThere Are No Saintsever again.

Go here to see the original:

There Are No Saints - Film Threat

Yet so much of our national dialogue these days urges a laser focus on notions of privilege, bias, inequity and vocabulary, and while most Americans want some kind of gun reform, most are less on board with the idea that we must revolutionize our attitudes on these other issues. A 2020 Pew Research survey found that in the U.S., only 40 percent say people should be careful what they say to avoid offending others vs. 57 percent who say people today are too easily offended by what others say.

As I read that, more of us feel that guns are a pressing issue and political correctness is not. And yet our discourse frequently centers on that issue, only briefly focusing on guns in the immediate wake of tragedies. For those who think racism is still our main problem, we might even think of a reckoning on guns as a component of antiracist efforts, given the repeated instances of violence motivated by racism.

Knowing this and knowing that legislative efforts at the national level went nowhere after shootings at Sandy Hook, Parkland, a Walmart in El Paso and outside a bar in Dayton, the reckoning now would not only have to be a renewed attempt to change gun laws, but also about confronting the fact that doing so appears impossible, and what this suggests about the very trajectory of the American experiment.

My pessimism may seem unwarranted. After all, there was a time when it was reasonable to think little would ever really change on the civil rights front in America. Black citizens and others of good will had been demonstrating, making speeches and were thoroughly fed up long before the civil rights victories of the 1950s and 1960s, only to encounter resistance from a united cadre of nakedly racist members of Congress hostile to calls for integration.

Senator Richard Russell Jr. a Georgia Democrat for whom the Russell Senate Office Building is named filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and earlier in his career responded to a challenger by stating: As one who was born and reared in the atmosphere of the old South, with six generations of my forebears now resting beneath Southern soil, I am willing to go as far and make as great a sacrifice to preserve and ensure white supremacy in the social, economic and political life of our state as any man who lives within her borders.

Part of what turned the tide in the fight for civil rights was a combination of technology and shame. Television offered visual evidence of the barbarity of segregationist racism with a vividness hitherto unknown to many Americans.

But that wont work this time. The instantly accessible moving image long ago lost its novelty, and most Republicans in Congress give no indication so far of being moved by the images from Uvalde or by the facts. As long as they maintain this posture, they have no more shame than the Dixiecrats of yore and our system has come to a point where those of us who do have shame, and want to vote for people who will do something about it, are thwarted.

More:

Opinion | Gun Violence Is Like What Segregation Was. An Unaddressed Moral Stain. - The New York Times

Seven candidates are running for San Diego County Sheriff in the race to replace retired Sheriff Bill Gore. The candidates listed on the June 7 ballot are retired sheriffs Sgt. Charles Chuck Battle, police Capt. John Gundo Gunderson, chief criminal prosecutor John Hemmerling, Undersheriff Kelly Anne Martinez, Combat Infantry Capt. Juan Carlos Charlie Mercado, retired sheriffs Commander Dave Myers, and peace officer Jonathan Peck. Mercado did not reply to requests for a Q&A response. Of these candidates Peck is the only Ramona resident.

We are running a Q&A with the candidates, two each week, through June 2. This week we continue the series with Dave Myers and Jonathan Peck.

Name: Dave MyersAge: 60Residence: La Mesa, 29 years. Born and raised in San DiegoFamily Members: Husband of 18 years, two children, one granddaughterEducational Background:2008 Management Certificate, Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST)2004 University of Pennsylvania - The Wharton School, Certificate, Finance Management2004 Stanford University - Certificate, Financial Management-Leadership2004 Harvard Law School Certificate, Financial Management1983 17th Regional Law Enforcement Academy, Miramar College 45 units (Deans List for Academic Excellence)Chapman University, Criminal Justice Investigation/Advanced InvestigationCA Department of Justice, Under the Influence/Drug AwarenessSan Bernardino Sheriffs office, Advanced Officer Training/Gang Awareness Train the TrainerInternational Law Enforcement Institute, Gang Awareness trainingCA Gang Investigations Association, Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs

Professional Background: Ive worked in law enforcement for 35 years, starting out as a police officer with the Carlsbad Police Department, and then working my way up the ranks at the Sheriffs Department from a patrol deputy to commander. Ive been tasked with handling almost every part of the Sheriffs Department. As commander, I managed 24 patrol stations and substations encompassing all of San Diego County. In addition, I managed the Special Investigations Division, which included homicide, narcotics, terrorism, and gangs and Courts Division, which is responsible for the security at all Superior Court facilities. I created the Sheriffs Department Border Crime Suppression Team to target cartel drug smuggling, human trafficking and gun smuggling and brought millions of federal dollars to our region to combat murders, robberies and rapes along our international border. For 15 years, I served as an elected trustee on the San Diego County Employees Retirement Association, twice elected board chairman. Ive authored several articles, including one on lone wolf terrorism, LGBTQ In Law Enforcement, and regional law enforcement collaboration.

Current Occupation: Sheriffs Commander (retired)Board member, Community Advocates for Just and Moral Governance (MOGO)Honorary Chair, Woody Williams Medal of Honor Foundation (Honoring Gold Star Families)

Dave Myers

(Big Mike Photography)

Why do you want to become sheriff?Ive known I wanted to be a police officer since I was a kid. I was in law enforcement for 35 years and worked for the Sheriffs Department for 33 years. The breakdown of trust between Sheriffs leadership and our communities is unfair to county residents and makes it harder for our deputies to do their jobs. The conditions and record-high death rates in our jails and crime lab mismanagement are unacceptable. Ive been overwhelmed with those in the Sheriffs Department and community members are pushing me to run for Sheriff. I could have stayed retired, but I dont want to leave the department in its current condition. We need to restore accountability and rebuild trust.

The crime rate increased in Ramona by 17 percent from 2020 to 2021, with violent crime increasing 8 percent and property crime increasing 22 percent. How would you address rising crime in Ramona to help reduce those numbers?First, Id hold the command at the Ramona station to account. The Sheriffs Department is a very large organization with access to resources all over the county. Crime trends need to be constantly monitored and when we notice increases, we must adjust resources from around the county to immediately address any possible increases. In the Sheriffs Department, we are one organization. We must know what proactive policing measures are successful and implement successes across the county in crime prevention and policing techniques. We must have open and transparent community involvement.

Drug use and drug-related crimes are a big issue in Ramona, according to the communitys current sheriffs lieutenant. How do you plan to deal with drug issues in Ramona and the backcountry?We are in an opioid crisis in the county of San Diego. Weve seen historically high numbers of opioid deaths. What I wont do is create fear in our communities by perpetuating a false narrative surrounding fentanyl. Sheriffs leadership produced and published a fake news story about fentanyl which creates fear in communities. All local and national medical experts debunked the fentanyl overdose video Sheriffs leadership peddled. As communities we all must work to help long-term drug dependent persons, welcome crisis stabilization centers into our communities and be very proactive in enforcing drug smuggling laws against the cartels and the scourge of prescription opioids.

What is your plan for dealing with homelessness and homeless issues in Ramona and the backcountry areas?For far too long, the unsheltered have been criminalized. In my over three decades of law enforcement, I found very few if any unsheltered community members who enjoy living on the streets. As communities we are defined by our compassion. As communities we must coordinate with local governments to assist our less fortunate community members. I believe government has an obligation to house and assist with hands up not necessarily handouts for community members to gain access to housing, medical care, and education. When a community helps, it creates hard-working, tax-paying citizens who will thrive and contribute to a communities success.

Name: Jonathan PeckAge: 41Residence: RamonaFamily Members: Married with four childrenEducational Background: Trained in the San Diego Unified SchoolsProfessional Background: 19 years in law enforcementCurrent Occupation: Law enforcement, five years in Los Angeles and 14 years in San Diego

Jonathan Peck

(Courtesy Jonathan Peck)

Why do you want to become sheriff? People in my community asked for a constitutional candidate to represent them and their interests. I am that candidate. On a personal level, my children and my wife deserve a community like I grew up in. As a provider and protector I intend to fight for that community.

The crime rate increased in Ramona by 17 percent from 2020 to 2021, with violent crime increasing 8 percent and property crime increasing 22 percent. How would you address rising crime in Ramona to help reduce those numbers?The retired Sheriff and the now undersheriff administration has been geared toward the politically correctness instead of the Constitutional rights of the law-abiding citizen. I intend to bring the Sheriff team back to their original constitutional duties to protect U.S. citizens and stay above the political chaos.

Drug use and drug-related crimes are a big issue in Ramona, according to the communitys current sheriffs lieutenant. How do you plan to deal with drug issues in Ramona and the backcountry?The invasion that has been allowed on our southern border is unacceptable. Article VI of the Constitution says to protect the nation from foreign invasion and domestic violence. The political rules in California have stopped the Sheriffs from protecting us from the drug cartels, sex trafficking and foreign invasion across our border. This is directly related to the California elected officials who no one is putting in check to stop these crimes. At the Tri-Community Sheriff meeting, Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva, San Bernardino Sheriff Shannon Dicus and Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco all talked about their efforts in our backcountry. I intend to team with them to shut down the Chinese and Mexican cartels illegal operations in San Diego County.

What is your plan for dealing with homelessness and homeless issues in Ramona and the backcountry areas?The Sheriff basic duty is to protect the citizens rights, from foreign invasion and domestic violence so they can enjoy life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. The homeless are citizens and need their rights protected. I as sheriff will ensure they are treated equally under the law. Law enforcement doesnt want to arrest a homeless person or any person who is in need in our community. Law enforcement want ways to protect, help and serve. We use to have a community of helpers. Does it still exist today?

Homelessness is a dilemma that our public officials have perpetuated on our citizens of San Diego County long enough. They have thrown give-away programs, housing programs, free hotel accommodations and toleration programs at this situation, all causing an increase in homelessness and vagrancy. The homeless need aid in getting back on their feet, not welfare. There are homeless drug addicts: stop the drug trades. There are homeless who lost their jobs due to the pandemic shutting down businesses: Change elected officials who shut those businesses through emergency policy. There are homeless with mental disorders: give them a place to go to get help: who shut down those institutions or stopped the community ministries doing this. There are homeless who want to be homeless: these need to be given options of becoming a good community member or be encouraged to seek their living elsewhere.

Read more here:

San Diego County Sheriff's candidates share their views - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Police beat: The Growing Attacks on Cops

Per Fraternal Order of Police data, the number of US law-enforcement officers shot in the line of duty this year through May 1 hit 123, a 35% increase over 2021, reports City Journals Charles Lain Lehman. Long-run data also suggest that policing has indeed gotten more dangerous since 2020, reversing its dramatic decline since the 1990s. And the surge in ambush-style attacks on cops suggests offenders are not only more violent but also feel less inhibition in attacking officers, thanks to increasing hostility toward police from civilian leadership. This rising prevalence of officer injuries and deaths augurs poorly for efforts to curtail the national violent crime spike.

From the right: Orwellian Erasure of Women

During my recent treatment for breast cancer, a nurse assured me that my chest cancer prognosis was promising, notes Patricia Posner at The Wall Street Journal. It was the first time I had personally encountered the effort to degender medicine. Its now widespread: Since 2020, Harvard Medical School has been declaring that not all who give birth are women. But certain biological and physical differences . . . affect only women. I am sorry if this offends anyone, but men dont menstruate or give birth. Women are incrementally being erased in a rush of political correctness to ensure no trans person is offended, yet most women are quiet for fear of being attacked as bigots. But Its Orwellian that today many of us feel compelled to remain silent about our female bodies, motherhood and our health as women.

Conservative: Dems Promised Calm, Deliver Rage

The Democratic Party sold itself in 2020 as Americas choice for calm, cool and collected, recalls The Federalists Eddie Scarry. Yes, the people who whipped up mass COVID hysteria and instigated months of violent Black Lives Matter rioting were the same ones who insisted theyd settle everything down. Two years on, the left is as obnoxious and bitter as ever. Winning the White House and taking full control of Congress only made them worse. When a Supreme Court draft opinion on abortion leaked, Democrats immediately began reminding us how uncomfortable things can be when they dont get their way. Mobs have protested at justices homes, and left-wing pundits say of the court, Lets burn this place down. It seems the angry, vindictive left is here to stay.

White House watch: Joes Anti-Israel New Spox

The new White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, reports National Reviews David Harsanyi, authored a 2019 Newsweek piece urging Democrats to skip the AIPAC conference. It doesnt openly contend that Israel shouldnt exist, but her regurgitation of BDS talking points says just as much. She claims that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee fails to uphold progressive values by inviting a prime minister from the only nation in the Middle East where Muslim votes count. She slams AIPACs severely racist, Islamophobic rhetoric but, Harsanyi notes, doesnt offer a single quote or hyperlink substantiating the contention. She cant, since AIPAC is one of the most milquetoast organizations in D.C. Its so sensitive to partisan criticism that it supported a trip to Israel for antisemites Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.

Legal desk: Fall of a Dem Superlawyer

Democratic superlawyer Marc Elias, notes The Washington Free Beacons Kevin Daley, is having a bad run. He was laughed out of court over his defense of NYs legislative gerrymander and slapped by special counsel John Durham for an attempt to shield [his firms] communications on Russiagate with smear-merchant Fusion GPS. Elias tactics are now drawing rebukes from judges, prosecutors and even fellow Democrats. All this after blundering into a major defeat in the Supreme Court in 2021 on voting rights. And now Durhams submitted a second filing on Elias relationship with Fusion a sure sign that the special counsel isnt letting the matter lie, and a request for sanctions could be near.

Compiled by The Post Editorial Board

More:

The growing attacks on cops and other commentary - New York Post

The Pitch:Amidst the post-SNL sketch show boom of the 80s and 90s, The Kids in the Hall stood head and shoulders above the pack. The fivesome of fresh-faced Canadian absurdists Dave Foley, Bruce McCulloch, Kevin MacDonald, Mark McKinney, and Scott Thompson felt fresh, new, and exciting; their material was edgy and provocative in a way that still leaned into Pythonesque silliness, ruffling feathers without the pain of plucking them.

While the five have worked together off and on since the Lorne Michaels-produced shows cancellation (most notably, in their film debut flop Brain Candy, plusheaps of touring shows across North America in recent years), it took Amazon to bring them back from their 17-year hibernation from sketch television.

And here they are, not as young as they used to be (as theyll be the first to tell ya) but with their comedic sensibilities as sharp as ever. They may not be kids anymore, but in a lot of ways, their comedy feels ageless.

These Are the Daves I Know, I Know:In a lot of ways,this newKids in the Hall is playing straight to their existing cult of core fans, digging (in some cases literally) their old material from the graves in which they sat for nearly two decades. The opening sketch bears out that sense of world-weariness, that furtive step back into the limelight for five white Canadian dudes nearing their sixties: a Lorne Michaels type (McKinney) commissions the revival of the Kids after a garage salefinally makes Brain Candy a profitable film.

The Kids are dug back up from their mass grave; they balk at their wrinkled, sagging bodies. Am I still the cute one? Foley asks feebly. Its fantastically dark stuff, goofy and fatalistic in the way only the Kids can really pull off this time elevated with Amazon-level production values and more localized Canadian references than you can shake a loony at.

Honestly, the smartest move the Kids make is in leaning into their status as legends and, in some ways, relics. Theyre old white men, after all, and they know theyre hardly the freshest voices in comedy anymore; but paradoxically, that gives them the license to poke fun at their own out-of-touch-ness without it reading as acquiescence.

One extended sketch about post-Toobin Zoom etiquette quickly morphs into an extended workplace group masturbation session; another sketch touches on cultural appropriation through the lens of literal clown shoes. There are just enough layers of absurdism slathered on top to keep the digs from feeling reactionary, instead positing a world where all the rules and stipulations of so-called political correctness were taken onlyto their most cartoonish conclusion.

The rest is here:

30 Helens Agree Amazons Kids in the Hall Revival Is Hilarious: Review - Consequence

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The strangest thing about the debate over parents roles and rights in their childrens education is that there is a debate at all.

As former teachers ourselves, we know firsthand that nothing is more valuable to a classroom or school let alone to individual students than parental involvement. Of course they should have access to instructional materials teachers use in class. Of course parents should decide when and how morally complicated issues are introduced into the classroom if at all.

RHODE ISLAND PARENTS ENRAGED AT SCHOOL BOARD FOR REMOVING HONORS CLASSES IN EQUITY OBSESSION

Parent speaks at March 30 Barrington Public Schools meeting. (Barrington Public Schools)

The idea of public school personnel laying claim to children independent of and even confidential from their parents would be laughable if it werent so frightening. Good teachers bend over backwards to be transparent with their students moms and dads. They want parents to be in the loop, part of a team helping each student develop the skills necessary to succeed.

Adults who try to hide what they do with other peoples children for hours at a time, by contrast, have no business in a classroom. Yet somehow a large proportion of Americas school boards, school administrators, and teachers unions apparently take as a given this subverted idea that government officials, not parents, are childrens primary educators.

Sadly, this isnt a new development. Like so many other once-respected public institutions, Americas schools have been breaking down for years now. Declining test scores and political correctness attest to just how far public schools have descended into academic mediocrity and "woke" indoctrination. It took remote learning during COVID-19 to alert parents to the dangers and failings of our school systems.

American students are not just taught critical race theory and other Marxist claptrap, theyre steeped in it. In classes ranking themselves according to their identity privilege, little kids are being forced to celebrate communism. This really happens.

Trans activism in schools, too, has progressed far beyond affirmations of respect and tolerance for all people. On the contrary, in Virginia, one school board shamelessly covered up a sexual assault committed by a trans girl to protect their narrative, and then had the victims father arrested when he called them out. Schools are helping children "transition" and keeping it a secret from their parents.

Meanwhile, our students actual educations are a punchline. Even before COVID, only about one third of students were at grade proficiency or better in reading, and only about 40 percent in math. After two years of anti-science school closures, those unacceptable numbers are only getting worse, and theyll leave poor, minority communities long neglected by our education status quo even further behind.

And yet, caught red-handed in their extremism and negligence over countless Zoom classes, the left doubled down!

They denied CRT is taught in schools. Democrats Virginia gubernatorial candidate said at a debate, "I dont think parents should be telling schools what they should teach." President Bidens advisors orchestrated a contemptible campaign directing the FBI to investigate and label protesting parents as "domestic terrorists."

And now, were witnessing the lefts fury at a new Florida bill that merely delays public school instruction about sexual orientation and transgenderism until fourth grade. The outrage and misrepresentations of the bill reveal that the left isnt interested in teaching, but rather in pushing a woke agenda on our kids that is anti-God, anti-America, anti-free enterprise, and especially anti-Western civilization.

Legislation guaranteeing school transparency and restricting woke content are proliferating in state legislatures across the country, including in Alaska. They represent lawmakers essential first acts of self-defense against theanti-family theories now running too many school districts.

We got the jump on parental rights in Alaska back in 2016 when as a state senator, I (Mike) teamed up with Rep. Wes Keller on legislation that codified the recognition of parents as the authority in their childrens education. It gives parents the right to review any class, activity, assessment, or program and to withdraw their child if requested without penalty. It also requires two weeks notification about any curriculum covering sexual activity or reproduction with the same power to review.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE OPINION NEWSLETTER

But public policy alone cant fix whats wrong in our schools. Americas moms and dads are the "sleeping giants" who will mend our broken education system. At the end of the day, parents must decide what gets taught and who does the teaching at their kids schools and for that matter, which schools their kids attend.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Public schools today willfully encourage child ignorance and family dysfunction. Conservatives must redouble our efforts to serve parents sacred right to direct their childrens education not because its politically advantageous(though it is), but because Americas boys and girls are worth it.

Kevin Roberts is president of The Heritage Foundation.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM GOV. DUNLEAVY

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM KEVIN ROBERTS

Link:

Parents are 'sleeping giants' who will fix American education - Fox News

A security guard is framed inside a coat hanger as demonstrators protest outside of the US Supreme Court, Tuesday, May 3, at dusk in Washington. A draft opinion suggests the US Supreme Court could be poised to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case that legalized abortion nationwide, according to a Politico report released Monday. Whatever the outcome, the Politico report represents an extremely rare breach of the court's secretive deliberation process, and on a case of surpassing importance. [AP]

A decision by the US Supreme Court to overturn the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion nationwide would resemble a historic turning point. The courts rulings are usually an indication of how the countrys political pendulum swings; and few issues are more sensitive to the American public than abortion. The planned overturning of the Roe vs Wade ruling is a sign of what we should expect in the coming years from the federal judges appointed by ex-president Donald Trump. These are not conservative, well-informed judges but ultraconservative activists who aim to change the American paradigm and push society in the direction of deep conservatism.

The Supreme Court ruling could, in fact, help the incumbent president, Joe Biden. Large chunks of American society may well be conservative but they are nevertheless against restricting abortion rights. Such a move might mobilize these masses ahead of crucial congressional elections in November, potentially stopping the Republicans from scoring some all-but-certain victories.

An important issue of course is, how did we get here? How did conservative fundamentalism sweep such large parts of American society? The wave of ultra political correctness that appears to have gotten hold of the Democratic Party in recent years (for example the debate over defunding the police or the debate over gender-neutral language) certainly has not helped.

Excessive behavior usually leads to more excessive behavior, particularly when financial conditions are tight and when people question the status quo.

American history shows that the country tends to swing from one extreme to the other. These days the pendulum tends to accelerate in a more violent and unpredictable manner. It also swings higher. The issues which cause the pendulum to swing are almost always identity-related; they have to do with religion, with migration, with peoples right to self-determination. They often veer beyond the classic political diving lines. At times of crisis dormant faults are reactivated. Meanwhile, social media give voice, and power, to those who want to make a fuss on either side. In the middle, the great majority is guided more by reason and moderation. It usually results in developments that pull it back to the center court of politics, as will likely happen again with the abortion rights case.

See the rest here:

Abortions and the pendulum - Kathimerini English Edition