News

Earlier this week, Fox News Channel’s Chief Palace Correspondent, John Roberts, broke the horrifying details of a sinister deep-state plan that infiltrated the highest office in the land. Roberts detailed the account in his report on Tucker Carlson’s nightly show, and this disturbing story could have ripple effects that will be felt from Hodu to Kush. “This could only have resulted from a gross amount of incompetence, combined with truly awful government overreach,” Roberts asserted. “It really goes to show just how much our leadership here in Shushan wants to control your life.”

Last week, former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg jumped simultaneously into the debates for the Democratic primary and a shark cage. Upon entering, Bloomberg was bombarded by attacks from his fellow candidates, which he was obviously ill-prepared to defend. Those of us who lived through three Bloomberg terms in New York City should not be surprised by how lackluster he was. Bloomberg was never “Captain Charisma” while he was mayor, and that reputation definitely continued in the debate. Still, this week, I’d like to discuss the attacks his opponents levied on him, how he handled them, and how he should have handled them.

I’d like to look at the concept of change. For the purposes of this discussion, I am going to differentiate between two types of change. The first type of change is personal change. This is any change that is made to the individual. It could be as simple as a new hair style to as monumental as choosing a person with whom to spend the rest of one’s life, and everywhere in between. The second type of change is collective, or societal change. This change could involve the changing of public discourse, the passing of new laws, or the election of a new leader (or in some countries, a coup that changes the leadership by force).

It’s been a few weeks since the death of NBA legend Kobe Bryant. The public interest in celebrity news has always fascinated me. I never understood why people cared about the private lives of celebrities. If they are doing something good, like donating to charity or visiting children in the hospital, I can understand the draw, but when it’s the small things, like what they are wearing to a wedding or what they had for breakfast or even what they named their kid, I can’t seem to wrap my head around why that gets media attention.

In the most recent Democratic primary debate, the country was treated to the underlying reason as to why Donald Trump will be winning the 2020 presidential election. But I am getting ahead of myself. Let’s start with the comparison of the two major parties and where they stand with their constituents. Republicans are widely united in their support for President Trump. According to Gallup, throughout 2019 his approval ratings amongst Republicans have been reliably hovering around 90%. It’s clear that it’s not just Trump’s base that likes his presidency so far, but the vast majority of the Republican Party, as well. Meanwhile, the highest favorability rating held by any Democratic candidate amongst Democrats is 75%, which is held by Bernie Sanders. Joe Biden is second at 72%, with Elizabeth Warren coming in third at 63%.

 Judging by recent events, the answer is to that question is obviously no. The incident that everyone has been talking about these last few weeks is the monologue of Golden Globes host, Ricky Gervais, at the start of the 77th annual edition of the event. Gervais lambasted the Hollywood elite throughout his eight-minute speech, and boy, he did not hold any punches. In front of Apple CEO Tim Cook, the host called out Apple for operating sweatshops in China. He then turned it on the rest of the room, quipping that “If ISIS started a streaming service, you’d call your agent, wouldn’t you?” He also made an “Epstein didn’t kill himself” reference, and responded to the pearl-clutching by saying, “I know he’s your friend, but I don’t care.”