Displaying posts published in

March 2022

Will Smith Strikes and Berates Chris Rock During Live Oscar Broadcast By Kyle Smith

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/will-smith-appears-to-strike-and-berate-chris-rock-during-live-oscar-broadcast/?utm_

Will Smith lost his temper after presenter Chris Rock made a joke about his wife’s haircut at the Oscars tonight. ABC apparently censored the moment by silencing the feed for a few seconds, but here’s what happened.

Jada Pinkett Smith, with a shaved head, was seated at a table up front with her husband Will. Rock: “Jada, I love you, G.I. Jane 2, can’t wait to see it!” Will Smith then came up on stage, appeared to strike Rock, and the audience seemed to react as though this were a scripted bit. But Smith twice shouted, “KEEP MY WIFE’S NAME OUT YOUR F***IN MOUTH!” and the crowd went silent. I don’t think Smith’s reaction was scripted. UPDATE: Jada Pinkett Smith suffers from alopecia, a condition that causes hair loss.

Here’s the moment as someone caught it without ABC’s censorship. Warning: profanity.

The Corruption of the Biden Administration Is Now in Plain Sight There is an inevitable price to pay for tolerating corruption. by Shmuel Klatzkin

https://spectator.org/the-corruption-of-the-biden-administration-is-now-in-plain-sight/

EXCERPTS

Corruption has been around for a long time.

The problem is when we detach power from benevolent responsibility.

So, it should not be surprising that our government of the people, by the people, and for the people could and has at times become the playground of corrupt people. Even in the cabinet of Abraham Lincoln, an exceptional politician in any age, there was corruption. Carl Sandburg writes of how Rep. Thad Stevens complained that Secretary of War Simon Cameron was so dishonest that the only thing he wouldn’t steal was a red-hot stove. Cameron, of course, took offense, and Lincoln tried to calm things down by asking Stevens to retract. “All right,” goes a version of how Stevens replied, “I will retract. He would steal the stove, too.”

In the words quoted, Amos skewered the use of power to obtain sex as well as money. History confirms that this too is a proclivity of powerful people. Whether we speak of the constant parade of women through the bedchambers of such monarchs as Charles II of Britain or Louis XV of France, or of similar parades through the chambers of the Kennedy White House or of wherever Bill Clinton went, or the line of the powerful who flew on the Lolita Express, there is much evidence that power is a supreme aphrodisiac. In grimmer governments, force was used instead (which was made the object of very dark cinematic humor in the British masterpiece The Death of Stalin).

Implicit in Amos’ words is that there is an inevitable price to pay for tolerating corruption. Skilled politicians, adept at feeling the pulse of the people, lose their sharpness through their indulgences. As their corruption increases, competence decreases. Managing the many pretenses that hide its ill-gotten benefits takes up more and more time and energy. Lies need more lies to hide them and so the story keeps getting more and more complicated and less and less plausible. Leaks spring in the dike that quickly become controllable. The collapse can come very quickly.

A Case of Charter School Sabotage Biden’s regulators find another way to undermine school choice.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/charter-school-sabotage-biden-teachers-union-public-school-achievement-gap-hispanic-black-students-charter-schools-program-rules-11648224610?mod=opinion_lead_pos2

The Biden Administration is deep in the tank for the teachers unions, and it is proving it again by imposing new rules to sabotage a modest $440 million grant program for charter schools.

The 28-year-old federal Charter Schools Program helps pay for charter start-up expenses such as technology and staff. The funds go chiefly to state agencies, which award the money to charters, and to nonprofit charter management organizations. The federal Department of Education recently proposed new rules that would discourage charters from even applying for grants—which may be the goal.

Applicants will now have to describe “unmet demand for the charter school.” Having hundreds or thousands of children on charter waiting lists won’t suffice. The Administration wants evidence of “over-enrollment of existing public schools,” as well as proof that the new charter “does not exceed the number of public schools needed to accommodate the demand in the community.”

This means that charter applicants in school districts with shrinking enrollment, which includes many big cities, would almost certainly be rejected. “Demand for charter schools isn’t just about demand for the availability of any seat but the demand for a high-quality seat,” says Karega Rausch, president and CEO of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers. That’s why charters have waiting lists in cities with empty public-school buildings.