Author Archive: Ed Driscoll

HERE WE GO:

Exit quote: “When an ambassador tells his own people to leave the country he is assigned to, he is not managing risk. He is clearing the blast radius.”

THE CRITICAL DRINKER: Paramount Wins — This Is HUGE.

Related: CNN Anxiety Mounts as Paramount Nears Control: ‘People Think It Could Be the End.’

When CNN anchor Jake Tapper broke into coverage on Thursday evening with a major Warner Bros. Discovery sale update, he remarked that the news “affects everybody I’m looking at right now in the studio.”

Anxiety is high inside CNN, as staffers grapple with the growing likelihood that Paramount’s David Ellison — who appointed Free Press cofounder Bari Weiss to reshape CBS News and has recalled having “great conversations” with President Donald Trump about acquiring CNN parent Warner Bros. Discovery — could ultimately take control of the cable news channel.

“It’s concerning,” one CNN staffer told TheWrap, noting how Ellison posed days earlier alongside Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, each giving a thumbs up before attending the State of the Union together. The unease comes alongside reporting that David Ellison has promised the White House changes to CNN, while his father, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, has talked about the possibility of axing specific hosts.

While CNN may not be the most coveted property in the WBD stable — rival suitor Netflix only desired HBO and the studio assets — it is the most politically radioactive. Trump has bristled at CNN’s coverage for years, blasting stars like Jim Acosta during his first term and Kaitlan Collins in the second. He made clear in December that the news channel, rather than TNT or the Food Network, was front of mind in the WBD sale saga, declaring that “it’s imperative that CNN be sold” and placed under new management.

“People think it could be the end of CNN,” a second staffer told TheWrap. “ As much as people say that’s not possible, what’s to say that’s not possible?”

The fallout from the New York Times’ 2020 struggle session over Tom Cotton’s op-ed continues to be massive. I hope it was worth it back then for all concerned.

CHATGPT – IT’S NOT JUST FOR COLLEGE TERM PAPERS ANYMORE! Mark Oppenheimer: Kitty Kelley was assigned a review of my Judy Blume biography, but did she read it?

Kelley writes:

Judy Blume began life in 1938 as Judith Marcia Sussman, an Orthodox Jew born “scrawny and underweight” in Elizabeth, New Jersey.

I write the opposite: the Sussmans, far from being Orthodox, were secular and non-observant, and they seldom went to synagogue. (Also, I did not write that she was born scrawny, but rather that “Judy was the smallest child in the ­ house—­brother David was four years ­ older—­and she was scrawny, chronically underweight.” So the quotation is wrong, and the meaning is wrong—she was an underweight child, not an underweight newborn.)

Her father was a dentist; her mother kept house for Judy and her older brother. After Hebrew school and a bat mitzvah, Blume graduated from New York University with a B.A. in education.

In the book, I explain why Judy did not have a bat mitzvah.

“I married at twenty-one…everyone did,” she recalled.

This quotation is not in my book. The first part—“married at twenty-one”—exists, in a different context, but the stuff after the ellipsis is an invention.

Feeling “suffocated” in her first marriage, Blume divorced after several years and immediately rebounded to a second husband. She left him two years later and “cried every day,” she said. “Anyone who thinks my life is cupcakes is all wrong.” She married George Cooper in 1987, and they remain together to this day.

This is all fiction. “Several” years? She and John Blume were married over 15 years. There is no usage of “suffocated” to refer to her first marriage. Blume did not leave her second husband after just two years. She never said she “cried every day.” I don’t know where Kelley got all this, but not from my book.

And that line about cupcakes? It is not in my book either. So far as I know, Judy Blume has never used a baking-related metaphor, or any dessert-related metaphor, to describe her life. She has not compared her life to cupcakes, éclairs, gateaux basque, or Cinnabons. If she has, it’s news to me, and it’s not in my book.

(Update: on further Googling, I do find that cupcake quotation attributed to Blume on several websites, including a British astrology site that has Blume filed under “Capricorn research.” But the quotation is not in my book. So did Kelley decide to chuck my book aside and do her own Blume-related research, turning, as one does in such situations, to internet astrologers? And then attribute her research into my book?)

Well, she wouldn’t be the first woman writing for a high-profile Washington publication to break out the Ouija board, but as Oppenheimer rhetorically asks near the beginning of his Substack:

The month before your book is published is, for any writer, a stressful time. We ask ourselves many questions: Will it be reviewed? If so, will it be reviewed favorably? And, “Will legendary celebrity biographer Kitty Kelley kick back in her Jacuzzi, tell Alexa to ‘play smooth jazz,’ sip some bubbly, fire up ChatGPT, and insert its madcap hallucinations into a review of my book?”

It certainly sounds like the latter is exactly what happened.

DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS: Vanguard reaches settlement with Texas in key case on ESG investing.

Vanguard has reached a settlement with Texas and other Republican-led states that accused the asset manager and its biggest competitors of conspiring to suppress coal production in a key case about environmental, social and governance investing.

The asset manager will pay $29.5mn to settle the litigation, leaving BlackRock and State Street to fend off the case alone. Vanguard, which manages $12tn in assets, did not admit wrongdoing.

Texas and several other states sued the three companies in 2024, accusing them of using the vast influence they derive from managing passive funds to push for net zero carbon emissions.

The states argued the three biggest US index fund managers did this through proxy votes and other forms of influence, which in turn pressed coal companies to cut production, pushing energy prices higher.

Meanwhile, the asset managers have argued in court that there is no evidence they directly sought to limit coal output or worked together to push companies to reduce their carbon emissions.

Vanguard decided to settle the litigation to avoid the potential for tens of millions of dollars in legal fees and to get rid of the “distraction”, said people familiar with the matter. BlackRock and State Street have not reached a settlement and the litigation continues.

“We’ve reached a resolution to put this matter behind us,” Vanguard said, adding that it “reaffirms our longstanding practices and standards and the passive nature of our index funds”.

* * * * * * * *

“This sets a new standard for institutional investors that every company should follow,” said Ken Paxton, attorney-general of Texas.

Coal is “an essential industry to support America’s ever-growing energy demands, and my office will continue to uproot and destroy any attempt by investment giants to push a woke agenda that puts American energy at risk”, he added.

Paxton’s statement comes as the White House has tried to revive the fortunes of coal as a vital part of the country’s energy mix.

Well, good. Let’s see how things turn out in Cuba before going Net Zero in the US: Cuba Becomes The First Country To Reach Net Zero. Shouldn’t We Be Celebrating?

RICH LOWRY: Candace Owens hits new low with ‘depraved’ Erika Kirk conspiracy madness.

Usually, conspiracy theories spring up around assassinations that are hard to fathom, or have some ambiguity about them.

It is clear that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing JFK, but it’s understandable that there have been questions about the event.

It is the depraved achievement of Candace Owens to make a bonkers true-crime drama, with all sorts of mysteries and twists, out of an open-and-shut murder case.

Kirk’s accused killer, Tyler Robinson, had a motive, left a trail of damning evidence, and confessed to multiple people.

To dismiss all this and call for Erika Kirk to be frog-marched into a police station is so mad, it makes Owens’ conviction that both the moon landing and dinosaurs are fake look well-grounded by comparison.

It is a symptom of our time that such malevolent buffoonery is rewarded with a huge audience.

It’s impossible to discredit Owens because she’s not in the credibility business to begin with.

The Washington Post used to at least nominally be in the credibility business a long time ago, but in recent years, they’ve decided to completely abandon it for clicks, grins, and ginning up the leftist base:

JEFFREY BLEHAR: Netflix Is Out on Warner Bros.

I’ll admit, I missed big by predicting something “delightfully sordid.” Instead, we got something unpleasantly sordid: The final nail in the coffin for the Netflix bid was almost certainly board member Susan Rice’s ill-timed appearance on a podcast hosted by Preet Bharara on February 20, where she promised “accountability” for Trump administration wrongdoers once the Democrats took office. This was interpreted by MAGA’s most agitated online voices as a promise of lawfare against the administration — the irony of complaining about this is apparently completely lost upon them — and led to Laura Loomer loudly demanding the former national security adviser resign her position on the board of Netflix.

Since Loomer has Trump’s ear, that meant that Trump himself began to instantly parrot Loomer’s line, demanding Rice resign from Netflix or “pay the consequences.” That put Netflix in an impossible position — they were not going to earn the eternal wrath of progressives by caving to Trump and firing Rice, not for a bid they were going to have extreme difficulty getting Trump’s approval on anyway. So they have bowed to the inevitable and cut their losses.

The upshot is that Netflix’s competitor Paramount — owned by Trump ally David Ellison — now seems all but assured to win the battle to purchase Warner Bros. You will read plenty of shrieking about the dangers of “media consolidation” in the coming days from journalists who all secretly pray to one day work a salaried position at the New York Times; little of it will be worth listening to. On an aesthetic level, some will celebrate the fact that the soulless Netflix will now no longer yank Warner Bros. movies out of theaters — but the death of the theatrical experience can only be delayed, not denied.

I agree with the last statement; as John Podhoretz wrote in December:

But yesterday morning, hours before the WBD-Paramount merger was officially announced, “George MF Washington” published his latest substack: One Step Closer to the Edge.

There is no good option here… Hollywood losing its most storied movie studio is bad for the movie business however you try to slice it. But when I consider the matter of Warner Bros and its two suitors Paramount and Netflix, there are only two things I care about…1) which potential buyer is more likely to treat the Warner Bros library with the respect it deserves… and 2) which suitor is committed to preserving the institution of theatrically released movies, which I still believe is good for the soul of America. What no one in Hollywood’s artist or executive community ought to be doing is rooting for one side or the other because Orange Man Bad.

Instead we ought to remember that oppositional defiance of the Orange Man was one of the main drivers of broad Hollywood support for closing movie theaters in order to protect audiences from a bad cold in 2020. Our industry was certain that we could casually press pause on a wildly successful 100-year-old business model in order to bring about a desirable political outcome, and then simply switch it back on whenever we wished without having to face any economic consequences.

How’d that one turn out?

One of the themes that emerges from left-leaning author Ronald Brownstein’s 2021 book, Rock Me on the Water: 1974 – The Year Los Angeles Transformed Movies, Music, Television, and Politics is how utterly obsessed Hollywood was with Richard Nixon in the 1970s, and how that obsession and paranoia was reflected in their work. Talking about Warren Beatty’s 1975 film Shampoo, Brownstein writes:

The movie presents Nixon’s election as the collective result of Americans’ personal corruption and hypocrisy*. All the televised snippets from Nixon and his vice president, Spiro Agnew, about rebuilding respect, upholding law and order, promoting unity, and restoring the nation’s “moral code” are deeply ironic by the time audiences hear them in the movie. And yet this message is delivered in a tone more of sorrow than anger, one that underscores the complicity of the electorate in choosing leaders capable of such immorality. Lester, the businessman who symbolizes America’s establishment, is presented as a figure worthy of understanding, not disdain, when he tells George, “I don’t know what’s right or wrong anymore.”

Sound familiar? And yet, Nixon eventually began to garner strange new respect from leftists years after they forced him out of office, and Hollywood produced some pretty good movies in the early to mid 1970s, before Steven Spielberg and George Lucas showed industry executives that the real money lie in depoliticizing their product and remembering how a happy ending does wonders at the box office. In contrast, Hollywood’s hatred of the Bad Orange Man during his first term may have hastened the big screen’s demise by a good decade or so.

* Time magazine’s 1969 Man of the Year collectively smiles.

THE COLONEL JESSUP EFFECT STRIKES AGAIN:

Related thoughts from the Critical Drinker:

(Classical reference in headline.)

DEMOCRACY DIES IN GASLIGHTING:

 

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NO GUARANTEE OF FUTURE RESULTS:

REPORT: Paramount Skydance victory in Warner Bros. Discovery bidding war came after failed Netflix exec visit to win over White House.

Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos failed Thursday to convince a skeptical Trump administration to approve his proposed takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery – and with that, his nearly done deal to buy WBD’s streaming service and studio went into a death spiral.

Late Thursday, WBD deemed a revised bid of $31 a share from rival Paramount Skydance a “reasonably superior offer,” forcing Netflix to pull its bid thus ending a six-month takeover battle that has captivated Wall Street and the media business.

The backdrop of the announcement was the increasingly insurmountable regulatory hurdles Netflix faced in dealing with the Trump administration. As first reported by The Post, earlier Thursday, Sarandos sat with a skeptical Attorney General Pam Bondi, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles and Justice Department antitrust officials to try to convince the administration not to oppose the deal on antitrust grounds.

* * * * * * * *

The head of its news division, former opinion journalist Bari Weiss, will now likely control a combined news division that includes WBD’s cable news network CNN.

Oh to be a fly on the wall when Weiss meets with Christiane Amanpour.

In the meantime, some on the left aren’t taking the news very well:

 

SONY’S MISTAKE, ACCORDING TO OBAMA:

Michael Lynton was the CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment when it greenlit Seth Rogen’s film The Interview. You’ve most likely never seen it because it displeased the Supreme (Communist) Leader of North Korea and led to North Korea’s hack of the company’s emails, confidential scripts, and his family’s personal information. Sony limited distribution of the film in order to mitigate the damage.

The Wall Street Journal published an excerpt of Lynton’s memoir in its February 21 Review section. In the excerpt Lynton blames the malformation of his character for what he deems a monumental corporate mistake. I was disgusted to read President Obama’s concurrence in Lynton’s assessment:

Eight months later, after it became clear that the North Koreans had hacked Sony, and after the studio had lost its relationships with many of its most important stars—including Will Smith, Adam Sandler and Angelina Jolie—I spoke to President Obama about the whole incident. Unsurprisingly, he asked the right question: “What were you thinking when you made killing the leader of a hostile foreign nation a plot point? Of course that was a mistake.”

I read the excerpt that Saturday. My first thought was I am so glad Obama isn’t president. My second thought, as to both the memoir and Obama’s contribution, was sometimes it’s better to keep your mouth shut. My third thought was I blame Obama — the Supreme (Communist) Leader sized him up for a chump. I was surprised the Journal published the excerpt without some reflection on its contents. It is pitiful.

Back in 2007 and 2008, then-Senator Obama was frequently compared to JFK. But the real JFK had no problem had no problem with Frank Sinatra and John Frankenheimer making a movie which depicted the assassination of an American presidential candidate at Madison Square Garden:

In an interview [Angela Lansbury] said many people asked her what it was like to work with Frank Sinatra and she always tells them she doesn’t know because they didn’t have any scenes together other than a quick one where they were getting their coats on.

It wasn’t until later she learned that Frank Sinatra was an integral part of making sure the movie was made.

“I know that Frank wasn’t the easiest person for John to work with,” she said. “But they seemed to have an alliance. I think Frank understood what a tremendous opportunity it was for him to play this role. He knew that his friend (President) John Kennedy adored the book. Frank talked to JFK about the role and one of his questions oddly enough was ‘who’s playing the mother?’”

I’ve heard that tale told before with Kennedy asking Sinatra, “Who’s playing the Red Queen?” In any case, as Lloyd Benson would say, Senator, you are no Jack Kennedy.

DR. OZ’S PRESCRIPTION: “We learn via X that Dr. Oz has deferred $259.5 million of quarterly federal Medicaid funding in Minnesota to prevent payment of questionable claims while further investigation is completed.”

Much more like this, please.

ROD DREHER: Jesse Jackson: Godfather of the Great Awokening.

In a sense, Jackson never fully recovered from his love child scandal. With Democrats out of the White House through most of the 2000s, he had much less influence. The next Democrat to take the presidency was Barack Obama, who, as the first black president, de facto diminished Jackson’s unique role.

Then again, it could be argued that in the Obama era and beyond there was no need for Jesse Jackson, because his worldview—one based on leveraging identity politics for political and corporate power—had broadly triumphed in elite culture.

In 1987, Jackson joined a student protest at Stanford University, demanding an end to its mandatory “Western Culture” humanities course. “Hey hey, ho ho, Western Culture’s got to go!” protesters chanted. The students won. In the next academic year, Stanford introduced a multicultural replacement, including non-Western perspectives and those from women and people of color.

That protest, and Jackson’s role in nationalizing its anti-Western goals, drew considerable comment at the time. Within 30 years, though, what was then seen as a radical demand had become the establishment position within all academia, and remains so today.

And:

Though Jesse Jackson was only a shadow of his former activist self at the time of his passing, his significance should not be overlooked. Though the Great Awokening had many sources, the canny and entrepreneurial Reverend Jackson was its godfather. If you seek his monument, look to every corporate HR department and major media institution, and to university programming, and patterns of foundation grant-making over the last 20 years or so.

And, more darkly, look to the rise of identity politics in the younger generation of whites, who are not intimidated by Jackson-style moralizing. A growing number of them openly embrace pro-white racism, violating a taboo on which Jackson’s moral power depended. What was good, financially and politically, for Jesse Jackson, his allies, and his activist descendants may yet prove disastrous for American democracy.

Regarding the “Hey hey, ho ho, Western Culture’s got to go!” protest at Stanford, in his obit for Jackson at NRO, Dan McLaughlin wrote:

Charity toward the departed suggests leaving off further discussion of Jackson’s public career here, but not without noting the man’s abundant gifts as a public speaker in his prime. As P. J. O’Rourke described Jackson’s convention speech in 1988: “I did, however, want to hear Jesse Jackson speak. He is the only living American politician with a mastery of classical rhetoric. Assonance, alliteration, litotes, pleonasm, parallelism, exclamation, climax and epigram — to listen to Jesse Jackson is to hear everything mankind has learned about public speaking since Demosthenes. Thus Jackson, the advocate for people who believe themselves to be excluded from Western culture, was the only 1988 presidential candidate to exhibit any of it.”

Concurrent with Jackson as Patient Zero in the Great Awokening, from Newt Gingrich to Dubya and Jeb Bush to Trump, Jackson never saw a Republican he couldn’t compare to Hitler, despite wishing to see socialism to go national himself, endorsing Bernie Sanders in 2020.

JOY REID’S TIME TRAVELING HACKERS NOW EMPLOYED BY JIMMY KIMMEL:

Will Kimmel be editing Harper’s or the New York Times after his show goes off the air?

 

DAVID HARSANYI: Yes, Democrats are crazy.

Anyone with a functioning moral compass is horrified by the thought of the government seizing confused children from parents and allowing strangers to mutilate their bodies via “gender-affirming care,” a perverse euphemism for plying children with puberty blockers or hormones, or worse.

During the State of the Union, President Donald Trump proposed that “no state can be allowed to rip children from their parents’ arms and transition them to a new gender against the parents’ will. Who can believe that we’re even talking about it?” Republicans then stood and clapped when the president introduced Sage Blair, a teenager who the state of Virginia allowed to “transition” while hiding it from her parents. Democrats sat, as they would for most of the president’s speech. “Look, nobody stands up,” Trump said, pointing to the minority party. “These people are crazy.”

Yes, they are. I’m positive most of the politicians sitting on the Democrats’ side of the congressional divide during the State of the Union recognize that children don’t have the maturity, much less the magical ability to choose a gender. I’m sure most of them would be distressed if one of their own demanded to be identified by the wrong sex and asked to be mutilated. But they’re all members of a political party that’s been captured by fringe social science quackery and militant factions of unhinged activists. Democratic Party candidates who fail to embrace gender pseudoscience probably aren’t going to win primaries. And that’s crazy.

Exit quote:

QED:

#HIMTOO? World Economic Forum boss quits after review of Epstein links.

The president and CEO of the World Economic Forum (WEF), Borge Brende, has resigned after a review into his links to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The forum ordered an independent review into Brende over his ties to the disgraced financier following the release of Epstein files by the US Department of Justice.

Brende has acknowledged he dined with Epstein three times between 2018 and 2019 and communicated with him by email and text, but said he was “completely unaware” of his past criminal activity.

2018, huh? Katie Couric, Woody Allen, and George Stephanopoulos Attended Party With Epstein After 2008 Conviction.

Top media figures dined with Jeffrey Epstein after he served 13 months in jail following a plea in which he pleaded guilty to two counts of prostitution in 2008. He had been accused of molesting dozens of girls.

Epstein was arrested on July 6 and charged with sex trafficking; authorities said nude photographs of underage girls were found in his New York mansion after he was arrested.

Katie Couric, George Stephanopoulos, Woody Allen, and Chelsea Handler were among the media and Hollywood figures who dined with Epstein at his house in New York City in 2010, reported the Daily Beast in 2011. The event? A party for Epstein’s friend Prince Andrew, at the time the fourth in line for the throne in Britain.

And once again:

DON’T BE A GLASSHOLE: Mark Zuckerberg’s Court Appearance Proves Smart Glasses are Problematic.

Arriving at a social media addiction trial in Los Angeles last week, Mark Zuckerberg and his legal team were donning stylish Meta Ray-Bans. The one problem? You’re not allowed to wear smart glasses in court.

The judge “upbraided the Meta team”, according to tech journalist Jacob Ward, who was in the courtroom at the time. He called it “an extraordinary misstep”.

But not everyone was convinced it was a mistake: SFGate called it “supremely odd product placement” while Gizmodo reckons Zuckerberg figured there’s “no such thing as bad press”.

Judge Carolyn Kuhl warned the Los Angeles Superior Court last week that anyone recording proceedings will be held in contempt of court. “If you have done that, you must delete that, or you will be held in contempt of the court,” the judge said. “This is very serious.”

Photography is generally banned in L.A. County’s Superior Court. “Judicial officers have the discretion to place limitations on video recording and photography in their courtroom,” a court spokesperson tells CBS News.

In June of 2019, Christine Rosen of Commentary wrote a lengthy article titled “What Is To Be Done About Facebook?”, in which she noted that “From the company’s earliest days, Facebook’s leaders have adopted a remarkably consistent approach to the exposure of problems and missteps: a mercenary variation of the ‘ask for forgiveness, not permission’ strategy.” Wearing smart glasses in court is entirely consistent with that worldview.

BOTTLE SHOCK: California winery owner gives hottest take yet on why industry is dying.

The owner of a Sonoma County winery believes the industry is dying because Boomers are.

Jon Phillips, the owner of Sonoma County winery Inspiration Vineyards and Winery, told The Post that the population decline of the industry’s top wine-consuming generation has led to a recent downturn in sales.

“A lot of people have a misconception that the Boomers are drinking less,” he said. “This cannot be emphasized enough: it’s not because the Boomers are drinking less, it’s because there are less Boomers.”

Phillips, a Boomer himself at 65 who has produced wine since 1999, says Gen X has been unable to fill the void left by their forebears.

“These were the people that were really responsible for joining wine clubs and Gen X that came after boomers just weren’t really into wine to the same level that the boomers were into wine,” he said.

At one point he struggled with his wine club subscription service, but not because of demand or inferior wine.

“It’s because my customers literally were dying,” he said.

He says in conjunction with the declining Baby Boomer demand is less interest from younger generations like Gen Z and Millennials who have slowly adopted wine. Other factors like tariffs and recent wildfires have hurt wine-growing and producing operations, he added. He also pins new negative messaging concerning alcohol on declining sales.

Jeremy Clarkson writes that for British young people, booze is increasingly being replaced with the stickiest of the icky: “Of course Gen Z loves weed, it’s kale in a Rizla” rolling paper.

Well obviously, health is now an issue because someone with pink armpit hair and a keffiyeh recently decided that if you to go to the pub with your mates and have a couple of pints and a laugh and maybe a kebab on the way home, you may become a red-nosed Tory. Far better to do a downward dog and drink something effervescent from a monk’s limestone well in Nepal. But actually, if you talk to Gen-Z kids, they will tell you that beer at £6 a pint is the main problem. Because £6 may as well be £6 million if you have a student loan to pay off and you’re not prepared to earn a bit extra by going online and putting things in your front bottom.

These kids say they haven’t lost the desire to get a bit of a buzz on with their mates; they’ve simply worked out that weed costs a hell of a lot less than going to the pub and they have a point. One round of drinks for four is £24. A gram of weed is about half that. And remember, they have been told this drug comes from a plant which means it snuggles nicely in the war underbelly of the socialist, woke, anti-meat agenda. It’s kale in a Rizla.

Cheap. Fun. And healthier than booze. But is it? When I was at school no one had mental health issues. There were kids that had what we called ants in their pants and others who were a bit miserable occasionally, but these things could be cured with a bit of light bullying over a nice pint.

Today, you’re weird if you don’t have a mental health issue of some kind. Last year, ten million employees claimed they were suffering from something with a modern acronym. One in five snowflakes and Gen-Z kids actually took time off work because of it. Every year, the cost to the economy is reckoned to be £57 billion.

And worse, as Glenn spotted last week: Adolescent cannabis use linked to doubling risk of psychotic and bipolar disorders.

(Classical reference in headline.)

¡SALUD AL SEÑOR CLOWARD Y A LA SEÑORA PIVEN!

Exit question:

(Alusión clásica en el titular.)

DALILAH’S LAW: U.S. Senator Banks introduces commercial driver’s license-related bill announced by Trump during State of the Union.

Dalilah’s Law, a commercial driver’s license-related bill spoken about at length by President Donald Trump during Tuesday’s State of the Union address, was recently introduced by U.S. Senator Jim Banks, a Republican from Indiana.

The bill, introduced on Wednesday by Banks, prohibits states from issuing commercial driver’s licenses to individuals who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United States or holders of certain work visas.

Named after Dalilah Coleman, a first-grade student who was injured in a crash involving a semitruck driven by Partap Sigh, an Indian man who was driving a semi-truck in California, Trump spoke about the introduction of the bill during Tuesday evening’s speech.

“Many, if not most, illegal aliens do not speak English and cannot read even the most basic road signs as to direction, speed, danger or location,” Trump said, according to a transcript of the State of the Union from the American Presidency Project. “That’s why tonight, I’m calling on Congress to pass what we will call the Dalilah Law, barring any state from granting commercial driver’s licenses to illegal aliens.”

Much more like this, please.

GREAT MOMENTS IN ENVIRONMENTALISM: Cuba Becomes The First Country To Reach Net Zero. Shouldn’t We Be Celebrating?

There it was on the front page of Saturday’s New York Times: with a small assist from the United States, the island nation of Cuba has almost entirely ended the use of fossil fuels. Finally, we have the first country in the world to achieve the climate movement’s Holy Grail and nirvana — Net Zero! Or at least a very close approximation. This should be cause for a huge celebration.

You would think that the Times, which has been demanding the elimination of fossil fuels for at least a couple of decades, would be leading the celebrations. But weirdly, now that Cuba has finally shown the way, the Times chooses to put a completely different spin on the achievement. The headline and subheadline are (print edition): “U.S. Choking Oil Deliveries To Cuba Ports; Military Action Brings a Nation to Its Knees.”

The piece reports that the Trump administration is helping Cuba to achieve Net Zero by preventing oil tankers from landing there. Somehow in this piece, that is spun as a bad thing. It has brought Cuba “to its knees.”

The funny thing is that here in the U.S., it was just over a year ago that we had President Biden and an administration full of zealous environmentalists who were using every governmental power at their disposal to force Americans to stop using fossil fuels. By Executive Order 14057 of December 8, 2021, Biden had directed all federal agencies to pursue an aggressive “all of government” operation to achieve “net zero” on an accelerated schedule. Goals number 1 and 2 from that EO are “100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity on a net annual basis by 2030,” and “100 percent zero-emission vehicle acquisitions by 2035.” In 2023, the Department of Transportation released a “Blueprint” for eliminating all carbon emissions from the transportation sector. In 2024 EPA released a plan to eliminate fossil fuels from electricity generation. Similar initiatives were everywhere in the government.

Presumably, Trump helping Cuba reach Net Zero has the backing of the German Greens, who dusted off the Morgenthau Plan to return Deutschland to the Dark Ages,  Scientific American, and Kamala Harris:

ROGER SIMON SCORES EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: Sigmund Freud Analyzes the SOTU.

RS: And when President Trump said of the Democrats, “These people are crazy!”… What did you think of that?

SF: “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”

RS: You’ve said that before.

SF: In another context, yes.

RS: So you think they are crazy. How’d that happen?

SF: From what I called “the narcissism of small differences.”

RS: Which is?

SF: A common enough occurrence at many dinner tables. Family members, wittingly or not, gradually assert positions—not all that different from those of the others, but enough—from their own egotistical needs and desires, with the deliberately obscured intention of singling themselves out, of taking control, and continue to do so over time until the original normative family position changes, sometimes for the better but more often for the worse.

RS: You’re saying this is the same pattern but writ large?

SF: Indeed… and with possibly catastrophic results. What was, not so long ago, your Democratic Party is pretty much what your Republican Party is today. Social programs and reforms that originally made some sense kept expanding, when a number of Democrats, impelled by this form of narcissism, demanded more and more, building on each other, until reaching the absurdities we see today in the realms of sexuality and identity, among others, that depart from any version of reality and make their holders seem, well, “crazy,” as Donald Trump put it in layman’s terms.… No doubt you read Carlyle on the French Revolution. It’s the prototype.

RS: Democrats are today’s Jacobins?

SF: So far, no guillotines, but beware… Unfortunately, the Republicans aren’t much better, only on the margins. Your entire Congress reeks of corruption. You can even smell it up here.

Read the whole thing.