Tag: news

The Monster Agenda of ‘The Bride!’

In the risky Hollywood biz, where budgets frequently reach nine figures and a film’s fate is determined by the willingness of film-goers to part with their dollars, Warner Bros.’s “The Bride!” is serving as the perfect cautionary tale on how ill-advised it is to mix woke politics with general entertainment fare.

Written and directed by actress-filmmaker Maggie Gyllenhaal, a movie that is supposed to be a re-imagining of the “Bride of Frankenstein” film has only managed to scrape together a minuscule $7 million domestically in its debut weekend.

Because it has a humongous $90 million production budget hanging over it, the project is on track to lose north of $100 million, once marketing and distribution are factored in.

This was no misfire, but rather a full-blown box-office disaster, joining the ranks of other infamous

flops that have hemorrhaged cash while favoring cultural relevance over entertainment.

But why did this star-studded vehicle, which features an Academy Award winner and two Oscar nominees, fail so spectacularly?

The answer lies in the film’s heavy-handed injection of a political agenda, which transforms what could have been a respectable remake of a horror classic into a hack D-level flick.

Gyllenhaal’s film relocates the story to 1930s Chicago, where a girl, who gets possessed by the spirit of Mary Shelley dies, is resurrected, and ultimately becomes the monster bride of Frankenstein.

This bride isn’t just brought back from the dead, she’s brought to life in order to rage against patriarchal oppression. She does so with awkward homages to modern gender politics, which has the feel of having been shoehorned into the dialogue.

The script relies on graphic depictions of gratuitous violence. Men are consistently characterized as evil, and the plot eventually devolves into a contrived revenge fantasy.

Shelley’s “Frankenstein” novel, published in 1818, is among the most well-known works of English literature. Over the years it has had a significant impact on literature and popular culture, spawning its own genre consisting of stories, films, television content, plays, and even music.

The original tale is one of a mad doctor and his experiment gone wrong, with Shelley delving into thought-provoking themes such as the scope of scientific ethics, the nature of monstrosity, and most importantly, the consequences of playing God.

The lessons of Shelley’s parable are essentially ignored in the Gyllenhaal version. Subtlety is abandoned and the movie quickly degenerates into a lengthy diatribe, with multiple scenes being devoted to chastising the viewing audience.

Folks are not inclined to spend their time and/or money on a film that feels as if they’ve been corralled into participating in a feminist studies seminar.

Entertainment, yes. Escapism, yes. Sanctimony, a definite no.

“The Bride!” is no isolated agenda-ridden film. It’s the latest in a string of politically-charged missteps that have alienated mainstream viewers and consequently tanked at the box office.

Disney’s “Star Wars” sequels stand as the granddaddy of such disasters, illustrating how sermonizing over storytelling swiftly alienates audiences, leading to both losses in revenue and long-term damage to brands.

The “Star Wars” sequels feature content in which diversity and girlboss tropes overshadow coherent plots. They, along with Marvel’s recent offerings, favor identity politics to a such a degree that a billion-dollar franchise has now become damaged goods.

Disney has responded by scrapping projects, canceling trilogies, and shifting its focus to television. And although CEO Bob Iger cited over-saturation and fatigue as possible causes, everyone pretty much knows that this is code for audience rejection of the agenda-driven direction.

Last year’s “Joker: Folie a Deux” from Warner Bros., which is a bizarre big-budget courtroom musical, resulted in a $200 million loss for the studio, which prompted entertainment execs to rethink high-stakes experiments.

It’s a truism that the box office doesn’t lie. Woke content just isn’t able to fill seats when so many in the audience feel as if they are being lectured instead of entertained.

Hollywood’s lesson here is crystal clear and long overdue: Forcing political agendas into movie and television fare is destined to result in failure.

Studios that have insisted on pouring fortunes into woke projects have been placing their bets on prestige while chasing golden trophies. Unfortunately, far too many times they’ve ended up with neither.

The cardinal rule is “First entertain.”

Without this priority brands will continue to be tarnished and shelves will remain empty.

Hollywood knows better.

So does the patient public.

California’s One-Party Rule Could End with a Steve Hilton Win

California is at a breaking point.

The once-Golden State has been pummeled with sky-high taxes, faded dreams of home ownership, soaring crime rates, a crumbling infrastructure, and an absentee governor who is consumed with national ambitions.

As California’s 2026 gubernatorial race draws near, one candidate in particular recently took the lead in the polls: Steve Hilton, a business consultant, restaurateur, and former advisor to British Prime Minister David Cameron.

Hilton has garnered national attention for his common-sense approach to revitalizing the Golden State.

Resonating with the state’s battered populace, Hilton has been focusing on working folks, as opposed to Sacramento insiders and coastal elites. And he has zeroed-in on what voters truly care about: Good jobs, affordable homes, safe neighborhoods, and effective schools.

He received an assist with his candidacy from three issues currently in the news: California’s proposed punitive billionaire wealth tax, the state’s Commercial Drivers License scandal, and the recently uncovered corruption and incompetence that has driven away businesses, families, and untold opportunities.

Some info on the state’s proposed 2026 Billionaire Tax Act.

Pushed by unions and primarily cheered on by the democratic socialist senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, the proposed ballot measure would slap a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of any individual whose assets are valued at $1 billion or more and who was residing in California on January 1, 2026.

In anticipation of the passage of the proposed ballot measure, California is already seeing jobs disappear, wealth flee, and its tax base shrink.

Billionaires are hard at work restructuring assets and pondering exit strategies.

Tech giants who, not so incidentally, are largely responsible for building up California’s economy are now packing up in droves.

The proposed ballot measure is being peddled to voters through the use of old fashioned class envy and newfangled propaganda.

Hilton’s reaction to the idea of a billionaire wealth tax? A flat-out “No.”

Instead of confiscatory gimmicks that punish success and hurt everyone within reach, Hilton proposes actual relief: No state income tax on earnings under $100,000, a flat 7.5% rate on anything above the amount, and the protection of Proposition 13 with no new property tax hikes.

Hilton plans to cut state spending back to pre-pandemic levels, which would end the 50% explosion that occurred in bureaucracy. This is the same bureaucracy that spent $24 billion on homelessness with zero results, wasted $30 billion on high-speed rail that failed to materialize, and engaged in endless giveaways to unions.

Hilton’s pro-growth policies will keep talent and capital in California and put a damper on exits to Texas, Florida, and other more inviting alternatives.

Regarding the Commercial Drivers License (CDL) scandal, here are some notes on the textbook case of Sacramento prioritizing politics over public safety.

Federal audits have revealed that California’s DMV illegally issued more than 17,000 non-domiciled CDLs to foreign drivers, whose legal status did not match their license expiration dates.

These were no minor oversights. The state government put unqualified, oftentimes unvetted drivers in the front seats of 18-wheelers and school buses. The fallout? Deadly crashes, including tragedies in and outside of California.

When the Trump administration’s Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy demanded fixes, California officials dragged their feet. This cost the state $160 million in withheld federal highway funds.

It was not mere incompetence on their part. It was an arrogant insistence on a leftist political agenda. Rules were bent in favor of illegal immigrant drivers, who in many cases were insufficiently screened and lacking in proper instruction, which seriously jeopardized public safety.

Hilton’s solution is to enforce California law, revoke illegally issued licenses, and place valid and competent workers behind the commercial wheel.

If elected governor, Hilton is intent on restoring accountability at the DMV, prioritizing legal workers, and ensuring that roads and highways are kept safe.

After eight years of unchecked one-party Democrat rule, the median price of a home is about $1 million, arrest rates have plummeted, violent crime has risen precipitously, reading and math scores of public school students have dropped, the state’s budget has experienced record deficits,

the cost of living has spiked, the population has declined, and tent cities have continued to line the streets, despite billions having been spent on homelessness.

Hilton additionally plans to enforce laws against shoplifting and open drug markets, empower parents with school choice and charter options, cap hidden housing fees, slash anti-housing regulations so that the American Dream can once again be realized, and deliver abundant energy and water minus the routine blackouts.

His persona is appealing, an outsider with executive experience who is not just another career politician.

Can he end the one-party stranglehold and restore luster to the once-Golden State?

Anything is possible here on the Left Coast.

Nick Reiner’s Uphill Legal Battle

In a case that has shocked the entertainment world, Nick Reiner, son of legendary filmmaker Rob Reiner, stands accused of first-degree murder of his father, and also of his mother, Michele Reiner.

With the inevitable backdrop of the glaring Hollywood spotlight, time will tell whether Reiner’s murder trial ends up devolving into a spectacle of celebrity privilege and familial drama.

Reiner, if convicted, faces life in prison without parole.

Battle lines within the courtroom have already been drawn. His defense team is being led by high-profile attorney Alan Jackson, who previously represented disgraced filmmaker Harvey Weinstein as well as Karen Read, who was accused of murder and subsequently acquitted.

The prosecution team is being led by Habib Balian. Balian is well known for his prosecutorial work on the cases of Robert Durst and the Menendez brothers.

Reiner’s defense team is signaling that the lawyers will likely go in the direction of an insanity plea, a strategy that many legal experts characterize as a steep climb.

This is exactly as it should be.

Far from being flawed, the rigorous standards in our courts for proving insanity are designed to be a safeguard against abuse, ensuring that even in high-profile, heart wrenching, inter-family cases such as this, justice will remain blind.

To be clear, the insanity defense is not, and should never be, a get-out-of-jail-free card for heinous acts.

In most U.S. jurisdictions (including California where Reiner’s case unfolds), defendants must not just prove mental illness was present, but they must also prove that they were incapable of understanding the nature of their actions or of distinguishing right from wrong at the time of the crime.

This is known as the M’Naghten Rule, the legal standard for the insanity defense, which originates from a case in England back in 1843.

Interestingly, it is a standard that, when applied, succeeds in approximately 1% of the cases in which it is attempted.

With regard to Reiner, reports suggest that his history of mental health struggles, and possible substance abuse, will be central to the plea. However, in practice, voluntary drug use rarely qualifies as legal insanity. It often points instead to diminished capacity at best, which might mitigate sentencing, but does not absolve guilt.

The maintaining of the tradition that makes it difficult to assert an insanity defense is important for society at large. It prevents the legal strategy from being weaponized in cases in which the desire for rehabilitation might generate public sympathy, despite the gravity of the crime.

If every defendant with a psychologist’s report could claim temporary madness, prisons would be empty and the families of victims would be left without recourse or closure.

In Reiner’s situation, the alleged premeditation (evidenced by crime scene details that are emerging) makes an insanity verdict even less likely. This is not injustice, but rather it is the system working to hold individuals responsible, regardless of their circumstances or position within society.

Because Reiner’s father was a renowned Hollywood filmmaker, a media frenzy is to be expected, as is speculation about motives.

At this point in time, it is reassuring that the case seems to be being handled like any other first-degree murder prosecution, unswayed by the Reiner family’s fame or inter-family dynamics.

In a recent courtroom appearance, Reiner was denied bail and is being kept incarcerated until he proceeds to trial, much like any other defendant in a similar position would be. No red-carpet treatment, but simply hearing the judge’s gavel strike in the same manner it would for any other individual.

This manifestation of equality under the law is precisely the way it is supposed to be.

We have seen far too many instances in which wealth and status appear to compromise the quality of justice itself, via deferred prosecutions, dismissed cases, and lenient sentences for those who are powerful, affluent, or well-connected.

In the Reiner criminal proceeding up until the present, prosecutors appear to have been using the full weight of evidence, pushing forward with witness statements and a timeline that paints a picture of deliberate violence.

The inter-family aspect adds layers of sorrow, no doubt. Rob and Michele were not just victims, but a father and a mother, purportedly losing their lives in a gruesome manner, allegedly at the hands of their own son, a loss that would tear any household apart.

Despite these alleged factors, though, the court thus far understands that the case should not be treated as a private family matter to be hushed up or plea-bargained away behind closed doors.

The high-profile nature of the case serves to remind us all that murder is murder, regardless of where it takes place or the societal ranking of the individuals involved.

Numerous observers have pointed out that the celebrity aspects of the case may create biases that can cut both ways, with jurors potentially being starstruck or, in contrast, overly punitive.

In its exquisiteness, the law has the protective mechanisms of jury selection, sequestering, and an appellate system that work together to keep fairness in the forefront.

May the principles that guide our legal system remain intact, and may justice for all prevail.

The Threat Posed by the Democratic Socialists of America

For decades many of us were warning that socialism (a.k.a., communism lite) was slowly creeping onto the American stage, largely due to an organization called the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Now, following Zohran Mamdani’s win in New York City’s November 5, 2025 mayoral election, things have become crystal clear. Overt socialism has gotten a major foothold in the largest and most iconic city in America.

Time to take a more in-depth look at DSA.

With over 80,000 dues-paying members, including 11 sitting members of Congress and over 200 state and local officials, DSA has been able to wrestle control of the levers of power in a number of key places in the U.S.

In New York City, the group controls key committees, and in Chicago, 6 DSA members have a seat at the city council’s table.

DSA presents itself as a champion of compassion. However, beneath rhetoric such as “medicare for all” and “affordable housing” lies a radical agenda rooted in Marxist ideology.

The organization has been following the communist playbook to a T, seeking to obtain power through infiltration. It has made insidious steady progress toward this goal.

Unfortunately, it is currently the central focal point of energy for the Democratic Party, a party that appears to have so lost its way it is difficult to imagine any kind of return to sensibility.

Now let’s look at DSA’s core ideology.

Founded in 1982, its ideology is firmly rooted in Marxism, advocating for the end to all capitalism in favor of governmental control of industry.

The organization explicitly calls for the abolition of private property, the nationalization of enterprise, and the replacement of the free market system.

Most of the sustained attempts at the implementation of its ideology have ultimately arrived at communism’s doorstep. Communism’s legacy is one of economic decay, governmental ruin, and social collapse, a distinct pattern that is historically consistent across time, place, and events.

DSA’s own platform, updated in 2023, demands “public ownership of utilities, housing, and finance,” “decommodifying healthcare and education,” and “seizing the means of production,” all prequels to the imposition of totalitarianism and freedom’s ultimate demise.

The reality is DSA is a political insurgency with a proven playbook: Infiltrate, normalize, and dismantle.

Its youth wing, Young Democratic Socialists, is in favor of “abolishing prisons,” a prescription for crime and chaos that disproportionately harms the very vulnerable communities the group professes that it is seeking to protect.

DSA’s 2024 platform calls for nationalizing key sectors of the economy, such as energy and housing.

Its working group, “Ecosocialism,” advocates for “planned degrowth,” deliberately working to shrink the economy in order to meet specified climate goals.

The organization’s 2024 convention passed a resolution that called for “expropriating fossil fuel companies” and “banning private real estate development,” resolutions that translate into a form of national self-destruction.

DSA’s policies reflect a visceral hatred for the free market, and conversely, a worship of government. This inevitably leads to food shortages, black markets, and Soviet-style oppression.

The tenets of its foreign policy are equally atrocious. DSA’s “International Committee” has called for cutting all aid to Israel. It has hosted events with activists that are linked to terrorist groups. And it has refused to condemn Hamas’s October 7 massacre.

A document from the NYC-DSA’s Anti-War Working Group (AWWG), which was recently obtained by the Just The News website, shows AWWG has been plotting ways to pressure newly-elected New York mayor Mamdani to comply with its “demands.”

Demands include arresting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and active IDF soldiers, divesting city pension funds from Israeli securities, withdrawing city funds from banks that do business with Israel, ending city contracts with companies that do business with Israel, operating city-run grocery stores free from Israeli products, and evicting weapons manufacturers and transporters from New York City.

Mamdani is a longtime DSA member and leader. He is listed as one of the group’s “New York State Socialists in Office.”

When DSA-aligned officials are in power, “defund the police” efforts are typically underway as well, leading to skyrocketing crime rates.

Homicides were already up 30% in NYC post-2020, according to FBI data. Now with Mamdani’s victory secured, the trend is unlikely to be NYC’s friend.

Those who are DSA-aligned have also pushed for open borders and sanctuary policies, which have fueled a host of crises, including fentanyl overdoses, human trafficking, surging crime rates, and wage suppression for working-class Americans.

DSA’s own rhetoric betrays itself. Co-chairperson Ari Rabin-Havt recently tweeted about “seizing the means of production” as essential to combating climate change, ignoring how such seizures in Cuba and Nicaragua have led to corruption and poverty.

The communism that DSA is peddling has a 100% failure rate. This is because, among other irrefutable things, it violates human nature and defies economic realities.

We ignore this group at our peril.

It may be that many who subscribe to socialist ideology have never had to work to protect their rights. Someone else has always done that for them.

As one who with wholehearted rejection of communism and its socialism offspring has battled across decades to preserve our God-given rights, I speak for those of us who are still willing to continue to do so.

Just praying that it’s not too late.

Lawmakers’ Desertion Is Soros Funded

Over 50 Democrat legislators recently fled their home state of Texas and took up temporary residence in the ultra-blue states of Illinois, New York, and Massachusetts.

While the who, what, and why of their ill-advised departure continue to be hammered out, the how may be of particular importance to Texans and the country at large.

It appears as though the absconders may have received an assist in their runaway efforts from none other than George Soros, Beto O’Rourke, and possible others.

More than a mere political stunt, the performance act is a frontal assault on the legislative process and blatant mockery of our governmental system.

These state lawmakers swore an oath to serve the people. Needless to say, showing up for the job is a prerequisite. Abandoning their posts and hiding out in various other states is a breach of their core obligations.

They have one major goal in mind: To thwart a constitutionally mandated redrawing of a congressional map, which is necessitated by Texas’s population growth and the societal values of the region.

This quorum-impeding antic is racking up quite a bill. Private jets, luxury hotels, and logistical support for the runaway legislators has been costly. However, the tab is evidently being picked up by the Soros-backed Texas Majority PAC and O’Rourke’s Powered by People PAC.

The involvement of Soros and O’Rourke is particularly concerning. Soros, through his various foundations, has poured millions into radical causes over the past decades, causes that have eroded America’s shared societal values.

O’Rourke is a failed political candidate, who appears to be chasing fame and seeking relevance. His group reportedly has a $3.5 million war chest, much of which has apparently been funneled into covering the legislative duckers’ airfare, lodging, and possibly the $500 per day fines, which every lawmaker faces for dodging the legislative session.

Despite how the mainstream media characterize it, this is not grassroots activism. Rather, it is a cynical ploy on the part of Democrats to have their betrayal of voters paid for and the desired unearned power placed in their hands.

Texas has seen its population explode over the past decade, with millions of residents being added and additional congressional seats being warranted.

Texas is a red state powered largely by conservative principles, such as smaller government, religious liberty, and individual autonomy. Voters in the Lone Star State have repeatedly rejected the left’s agenda of open borders, higher taxes, and radical social policies. The proposed congressional maps reflect these realities.

The truth is the Democrat’s hypocrisy is in plain view. Gerrymandering, or the redrawing of lines on congressional maps, which set unnatural boundaries and carve out slivers of one-party voters, has been the hallmark of Democrats for years now.

Look no further than the states of Illinois and New York. Maps were redrawn prior to elections to secure power for Democrats, with the goal of maintaining it indefinitely.

What Gov. Greg Abbott and the Republican majority in Texas are doing is not a moral equivalent. Rather, the governor and the legislators are utilizing a tool that is at their disposal to bring the congressional map up to current representative standards.

Gov. Abbott has correctly ordered the Texas Rangers to investigate potential bribery charges. If O’Rourke’s PAC is covering fines or personal expenses for the renegade Democrat lawmakers, it may be in violation of Texas’s election laws. House rules explicitly bar the use of campaign funds for personal expenses.

Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton’s lawsuit against O’Rourke’s group alleges that funds are being misused for private jets, hotels, and dining expenses. In the lawsuit, he has accused the political group of misleading donors by claiming contributions would be used for political purposes, when instead the money is being used for what the AG has characterized as “lavish personal expenditures” for AWOL lawmakers.

Atty. Gen. Paxton also claims that O’Rourke promised to cover fines for Democrats if they broke quorum. Additionally, he has petitioned to have 13 of the lawmakers removed from office for their roles in stalling the redistricting plan, and he is seeking a court declaration to allow Gov. Abbott to call special elections in order to fill the seats of missing Democrats.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-TX, has the FBI assisting in the apprehension of the illicitly absent lawmakers.

Ironically, back in 2021 a group of Democrats tried to pull off a similar stunt, fleeing the scene in order to block election integrity measures. They returned empty-handed, their grandstanding achieving nothing.

In the current version of the same ploy, Democrats are hoping to run out the clock on a legislative process that they cannot legitimately outmaneuver.

Staying out of state until December 2025 would cost Democrats more than $3.2 million in fines.

December 2025 also happens to be the filing deadline for candidates to register for the 2026 midterms. Congressional maps would have to be set by that point, and no further redistricting could take place.

These absentee lawmakers are shirking their responsibilities, wasting taxpayer dollars, and undermining the foundations of representative government.

Democrat legislators have chosen to game the system.

May honorable leaders right the wrongs.

Goodbye to MSNBC

Media and technology conglomerate Comcast is spinning off cable news network MSNBC from its roster, along with a number of other cable networks.

The company announced it will create a new publicly traded entity, which will house MSNBC and NBCUniversal’s additional cable television networks.

Comcast is giving the new company an apt moniker, “SpinCo.”

Unveiling of the plans are shaking up the media landscape and sending shock waves through the network’s offices.

It all came to a head when MSNBC lost over half its viewers following the electoral triumph of President elect Donald Trump.

An additional ratings drop occurred after Joe Scarborough, host of the network’s program “Morning Joe,” revealed that he and wife/co-host Mika Brzezinski had recently met with President elect Trump at Mar-a-Lago, ostensibly to “restart communications.”

The ratings tank and spin-off talk had Scarborough questioning his own future employment with the channel.

“I could be completely wrong. We could all be fired a year from now. You never know what’s going to happen tomorrow,” he said on his show.

There are a number of reasons that the spin-off is happening. First up is the fact that streaming is clobbering cable. Execs are understandably concerned about the steady increase in cord cutting that has taken place, especially among the younger demographic. This segment of viewers is accustomed to having non-bundled options and is partial to streaming media.

Comcast has also let it be known that current chairman of NBCUniversal Media Group Mark Lazarus will be named SpinCo’s CEO. Sources have indicated to Variety that Lazarus spoke to an audience of concerned staffers and talent, which included MSNBC personalities Rachel Maddow, Chris Jansing, and Katy Tur.

MSNBC will evidently be joined by the business news network CNBC in being detached from NBC News.

Since the two networks will no longer be a part of NBC, attendees at the meeting with Lazarus reportedly expressed concerns about whether the use of familiar symbols, which have been used by MSNBC for decades, will be allowed to continue.

In a shocking admission, Lazarus said that because of the spin-off he wasn’t sure whether MSNBC would have to give up its current image, identity, or home.

“Everyone is in a panic because everything is up in the air,” one MSNBC source told The New York Post.

Journalists at the network CNBC are coming apart at the seams at the prospect of being separated from NBC’s news division. This is because MSNBC routinely shares reporting, and a significant part of the network’s daytime schedule uses correspondents from NBC News.

Andrea Mitchell, chief foreign affairs correspondent and chief Washington correspondent for NBC News, has anchored a daily MSNBC show since 2008. And MSNBC’s Katy Tur and José Díaz-Balart have dual roles as journalists for NBC News as well.

Lazarus was unable to answer questions about MSNBC’s newsgathering and whether the cable news outlet would have to develop its own capability for collecting and verifying news, which is a daunting task to say the least.

The idea of giving MSNBC a makeover has been tossed around for a long time. The network wasn’t always the far-left echo chamber that it is today.

Back in 1996 it originally launched as a joint venture of Microsoft and NBC (although Microsoft would later divest its stake in the TV network).

Like fellow cable networks had previously done, MSNBC would go on to broaden its horizons by doing political coverage as well as opinion-oriented programming. A variety of viewpoints were represented on its programs, ones that ranged across a spectrum from Phil Donahue on the left to Tucker Carlson on the right.

Oh the good ol’ days, when there was a fairly clear line of demarcation between hard news and editorial opinion. That line served a number of important purposes, including a commitment to truth and accuracy in the conveyance of national and international information as well as an adherence to a journalistic code of ethics.

It could be that the good ol’ news days are going back to the future. And the sport of intellectual sparring will make its own separate comeback.

Let’s all stay tuned in whatever new media way is preferred. And may the Truth win out.