“Officials at Highland Park Hospital gave an update on the victims they were treating following the 4th of July shooting.”
Uncle of Robert Crimo, man suspected in shooting at Chicago-area parade, speaks to FOX 32:
“The uncle of Robert Crimo III spoke to FOX 32’s Dane Placko after his nephew was named as the person of interest in a shooting that killed at least six people, wounded at least 30 and sent hundreds of people fleeing from an Independence Day parade in suburban Chicago on Monday.”
“Can society continue its long-run trajectory and commit to institutional, legal, social, fiscal, and educational systems that can advance equality?
World-renowned economist and inequality researcher Thomas Piketty in conversation with Rob Johnson, President of the Institute for New Economic Thinking about Piketty’s just-released book, A Brief History of Equality.
The book condenses 20 years’ worth of research into inequality and provides well-founded reasons to believe that recent trends in the growth of inequality can be reversed in the not too distant future.
Piketty reminds us that the grand sweep of history gives us reasons to be optimistic. Over the centuries, his new book shows, we have been moving toward greater equality. The book guides the reader through the great movements that have made the modern world for better and worse: the growth of capitalism, revolutions, imperialism, slavery, wars, and the building of the welfare state. It’s a history of violence and social struggle, punctuated by regression and disaster. But through it all, Piketty shows, human societies have moved fitfully toward a more just distribution of income and assets, a reduction of racial and gender inequalities, and greater access to health care, education, and the rights of citizenship. Our rough march forward is political and ideological, an endless fight against injustice. To keep moving, Piketty argues, we need to learn and commit to what works, to institutional, legal, social, fiscal, and educational systems that can make equality a lasting reality. At the same time, we need to resist historical amnesia and the temptations of cultural separatism and intellectual compartmentalization. At stake is the quality of life for billions of people. We know we can do better, Piketty concludes.
I’ve never been opposed to foreign aid, or redistribution of wealth, in principle…
…I’ve never been opposed to high taxation on actual wealthy people and business entities…
…I have become an ardent supporter of Basic Universal Income [BUI]…
What do we do, however, about the mountain of corruption standing in the way of income and resources making it into the hands of the masses?…and not being used to commit atrocities?
This has always been one of the biggest outrages, about habitually sending foreign aid to places like Israel, or Saudi Arabia.
You cannot implement a global safety net, or minimum standard of security, when so called “leaders” are there to enrich themselves, while visiting cruelty on the people.
People who have no interest or care in the well being of the masses, have no place in such a system…They will stop such a system from working…
…They need to be brought down, and brought to justice.
It might sound sacrilegious to say I don’t support a free market…but fact is…I do not support a strictly free market…
…Commodity staples need to be heavily structured, in their distribution and costs…Perhaps novelty and leisure items should remain a free market.
Essentials [food, water, clothing, shelter, hygiene, health, transportation, etc.] should always be available and accessible…Cost should never be a barrier…because these are essential to survival in todays world…
…Non essentials are where they can tax, but allow public demand to dictate prices and availability.
To those opposed to this I would ask…How do you justify ranking your own greed for hording, over the literal survival and suffering of the masses?
…That strikes me as…evil…frankly.
What are you going to do with all this accumulated excess, which was originally intended to circulate among the masses in the first place?
How does your ambition “outrank” the simple survival of others?
It seems to me…if nobody is left needing and wanting because of socially institutional impoverishment…there are so many social ills which could be vastly reduced…
…Why cant people be happy, with just having enough to cover their needs?
It will free them to pick and choose their own hobbies and interests.
They can still work towards things which enrich their lives.
I think…nearly everybodys life will be better, when they no longer have to worry about money…When they’re just free to live…
…We have enough wealth, resources and technology on this planet…to where there never needs to be social inequality, of any form.
…Why don’t we have that?…Who is standing in the way?
“Krystal and Saagar cover the reports of GOP operatives being surprised at how little Democrats are doing on Roe and the questions about Dem inaction being asked in conservative media”
That’s the thing…the democratic party is completely corrupt and dysfunctional.
It is total insanity, to give democrats your vote…
…It’s every bit as insane, as giving republicans your vote.
You’re doing more good with your vote, by voting for any dead rat laying on the side of the road.
“During an appearance at a Christian center this past weekend, Republican Representative made a comment that has since gone viral that proves she knows nothing about the US Constitution and how the government works. Boebert claimed that the church is supposed to direct the government, and that “separation of church and state” doesn’t actually exist. She’s misleading the public and they absolutely love what they hear. Farron Cousins explains what’s happening.
*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.
At an event at a Christian center in Colorado this past weekend, Lauren Bobert, uh, basically told a crowd that she has no idea how the federal government works or what’s even in the constitution. Now, those were not the words that she used, but the words that she did use imply that she is very ignorant about how this country was both founded. And of course, how it runs today. So what did she say that was so profoundly stupid? Let me read you the reason we had so many overreaching regulations in our nation is because the church complied the church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not meant to direct the church. That is not how our founding fathers intended it. And I’m tired of the separation of church and state junk. That’s not in the constitution. It was in a stinking letter and it means nothing like what they say it does.
She is a recourse referring to a letter from one of the founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson written, and I believe 1802, um, to the Baptist convention where he mentions of course, separation of church and state. So at one point she’s like, we’ve gotta do what the founders intended. And then she’s like, oh, this one founder. Yeah, screw this guy to hell with Thomas Jefferson, who of course, uh, had created his own Bible where he omitted all the miracles of Jesus and just focused on the teachings to be a better human being, which is what Republicans really forgot to take away from the Bible. They, they actually omitted all the, the teachings and just focused on like, oh wow, cool. He did some really neat magic tricks. That’s awesome. The church has meant to direct the government. Eh, no. See Lauren, if you were to go back and learn, literally just basic history, which I know, you know, you, and I’m not saying this in a horrible, you know what, I’m not even gonna say it.
I’m not even gonna go after her education at all. But those of us with even a rudimentary understanding of world history know that one of the big drivers to even establish the colonies here in the United States was escaping religious persecution. And of course, religious indoctrination, religious rule, again, one of many reasons of course, but that, that was a big factor. And so when, when it came time to write our own constitution in the bill of rights, that was weighing heavily on everybody’s minds, of course they weren’t the original people coming over here, but they understood. They remembered they, they knew their history, unlike Lauren Bobert and they didn’t want to go back down that path. They did not want religion and government to be intertwined in any way. That’s why that’s the first amendment to the us constitution. And sure you can
Quibble about whether or not it actually says the phrase separation of church and state, you know, is that what it means? What it says is what it means is that the United States is not gonna prop up any single religion. You are free to worship free to practice as you please, but you also cannot impose your religion on anybody else. That is what that first amendment means. And that is what Laura Bobert of course is trying to obscure. And when she made these comments, of course, RA rockus applause from the crowd, they loved it. They would love nothing more than to live in a theocracy, right? They love to attack all the other theocracies around the globe like, oh, these horrible people are brutally oppressed by this religion. And they are completely blind to the fact that they’re literally trying to do that here in the United States to the exact same degree of the people that they criticize, actually, in some instances far worse than that, but that’s not the only crazy stupid thing that Lauren BT said.
She also had this to say about Donald Trump and because God called a man who was not a politician to run for office. And I believe that he was anointed for that position. He answered that call despite what other people were saying, despite all the negatives that they were listening and, and saying how unqualified he was. He said, I think I can do something good for this nation. And three Supreme court justices were installed.”
“Last week, a judge in Texas refused to dismiss a disciplinary investigation by the state bar into Sidney Powell’s filing of frivolous election challenge lawsuits. Powell’s attorney tried to argue in court that the cases she filed all had merit and that she was just trying to protect people’s votes, but the judge wasn’t moved at all by these arguments due to the complete lack of evidence to support her claims. Farron Cousins explains what happened.
*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.
Last week, a judge in Texas heard a motion to dismiss from Sydney Powell’s attorneys. And what they were attempting to dismiss is an upcoming disciplinary trial for Sydney Powell in the state of Texas brought by the Texas state bar for knowingly filing frivolous lawsuits. And of course, trying to extend these lawsuits through the process of appeal in order to drive up the costs for everyone involved. Now that’s a pretty substantial charge. One that absolutely could result in Sydney Powell being disbar in the state of Texas. And we do know that she was basically hit with the same kind of complaint in the state of Michigan, where the judge who oversaw that trial, uh, not only penalized her for it, but also made her take a course in basic law so that, you know, she understands how badly she is screwed up. But her lawyers went into court in Texas last week, and actually tried to argue that all of her claims with these lawsuits filed in Wisconsin and Michigan and Texas and everywhere else that they actually had merit. And that she was just trying to be a, a, a good upstanding citizen by protecting people’s votes.
And of course the judge said, no, Uhuh, no, first of all, this is not an evidentiary hearing. You’re you’re trying to get this dismissed and you’re going way off topic, which of course, and the rules that they had laid out prior to last week’s hearings, you weren’t allowed to get off topic and her lawyers absolutely did. So that’s definitely not gonna help your case. Again, it was not an evidentiary hearing. You didn’t need to lay out all your things. You just needed to say why this was a frivolous motion by the Texas state bar and they couldn’t do it. Of course, at one point they did try to claim that this is just a political witch hunt, you know, as if we haven’t heard that phrase enough in the last five years, but again, the judge wasn’t moved and that’s good. We’ve got enough, you know, problematic lawyers in this country.
We don’t need another one, like Sydney Powell going out there flooding our judicial system with these, uh, with these knowingly frivolous lawsuits, which of course is what these are. She has no evidence to back up any of her claims. And in fact, some of the other people that have been involved in some of these lawsuits have admitted that they’ve said, listen, we, we don’t have anything. We, we were kind of hoping we’d find it, you know, during the course of discovery. Well, unfortunately that’s not how it works, right? You have to have some kind of evidence to base your case on you. Can’t just throw something at the wall and hope that you get to the point of discovery to maybe find evidence of a crime that is not how our legal system works. So the state bar in Texas,
This is what they’ve hit her with. According to courthouse news, the bar association claims pow, uh, Powell filed federal lawsuits in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin that were frivolous and violated federal rule of civil procedure, 11 and five subsections of the Texas disciplinary rules of professional conduct. It alleges Powell took positions in the litigation that unreasonably increased the costs of the cases and quote unreasonably delayed their resolution, including it alleged failure, failure to drop a lawsuit in the Eastern district of Michigan when requested relief was moot. Basically what they’re saying is even after her lawsuits had been thrown out without merit, even after she couldn’t provide any evidence to back up any of her claims, she continued to push the lawsuit and appeal the rulings when they were thrown out of court, which of course puts unnecessary cost burdens on the people that she’s suing, you know, P uh, specifically the, the voting machine companies.
So they incurred all of these extra costs because she couldn’t let it go. Even though she knew she had no case to stand on. So hopefully as this goes forward, Sidney Powell gets kicked out of the state bar of more and more states. I mean, based on what I’ve seen.”
So…I’ve been playing Master of Pottery a bit, and I’ve made several vases…they’ve gotten progressively better…the latest have come out great, honestly.
I shall be sharing them, as part of my expanding artistic expression.
“Robert Plomin is a geneticist and psychologist best known for his work in twin studies and behaviour genetics. He is the author of many books including, most recently, ‘Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are.”
Yes…we can disagree on profound issues, still be friends and enjoy the discussion.
“Warner Bros. has publicly DEFENDED J.K. Rowling during the opening of a new Harry Potter exhibit. This is a marked difference from Warner tossing Johnny Depp overboard based on allegations. Could this be David Zaslav sticking it to cancel culture, or just a savvy business move?”
Well…Daniel had an acting career prior to HP…but, yeah…That was nowhere near where HP took his career.
J.K. probably should have been less aggressive…but, it is gross that the main three HP kids turned on her like that.
I think there was some important nuance in J.K.s views, that got lost in all the gnashing of teeth.
01) LINK
Our Love Frontier 