'It's not an argument'

News Avatar: The Last Airbender Netflix’s Avatar: The Last Airbender Renewed for Two More Seasons See the cast’s reaction to the renewal on video – it’s incredibly cute. By Vanessa Armstrong | Published on March 6‚ 2024 icon-comment 0 Share New Share Twitter Facebook Pinterest RSS Feed The first season of Netflix’s live-action adaptation of the children’s animated series Avatar: The Last Airbender will be sticking around for at least two more seasons. The streaming platform announced the news today‚ and shared a video of the cast finding out the news via Zoom call. The call‚ frankly‚ was rough: Daniel Dae Kim‚ who plays Fire Lord Ozai on the show‚ channeled his character’s villainous tendencies and first made it sound like the show was canceled. Ultimately‚ however‚ Kim came clean (though just after Aang actor Gordon Cormier started tearing up)‚ and the cast—which also included Matthew Yang King‚ Paul Sun-Hyung Lee‚ Kiawentiio‚ Elizabeth Yu‚ Dallas Liu‚ and Ian Ousley—cheered with joy. While the first season of the series didn’t fare as well critically as I’m sure Netflix would have preferred‚ the streaming platform has reported that it has remained the No. 1 English-language show since its premiere on February 22‚ 2024. That translates into 41.1 million views‚ according to Netflix‚ though what a “view” entails isn’t clear. Whatever a “view” is‚ 41.1 million was apparently enough for the streaming platform to commit to the series for another two seasons. No news yet on when we’ll see any future episodes‚ but in the meantime‚ we can watch the video below‚ where the young actors in the series go through some real-life emotional turmoil. [end-mark] AVATAR: THE LAST AIRBENDER is renewed for Seasons 2 &; 3… and here's how we told the cast. pic.twitter.com/PjsEvFooON— Avatar: The Last Airbender (@AvatarNetflix) March 6‚ 2024 The post Netflix’s <;i>;Avatar: The Last Airbender<;/i>; Renewed for Two More Seasons appeared first on Reactor.

Our English teachers taught us to use extreme caution before writing a word such as “always” or “never.” Such totalizing words are rarely accurate‚ since most principles have exceptions. But you won’t see this advice applied by critics of “book bans‚” who tend to speak as though no book chosen by a school librarian is ever inappropriate for kids. My colleagues at The Heritage Foundation found that about three-fourths of books on lists of “banned books” are actually still in the libraries where the books were challenged. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.) Many of the rest are indeed inappropriate for children. They contain “images of people engaged in sex acts or graphic descriptions of those acts.” The material is so graphic‚ in fact‚ that it’s censored on broadcasts to avoid Federal Communications Commission fines. Moreover‚ movies and TV shows have ratings. Anyway‚ none of the books is “banned.” Kids generally can bring their own copies to school or buy them at a bookstore. Since 1982‚ the Supreme Court has made it clear that while books may not be removed from school libraries to suppress ideas‚ there are legitimate reasons to remove books. Those reasons include when a book is obscene in general or is obscene as to minors‚ and when a book is inappropriate for the age‚ grade‚ or developmental level of students. When a book is inappropriate for the curriculum‚ it also can be removed from classrooms. That point should be obvious. After all‚ the Supreme Court also has permitted censorship of school newspapers. The high court also has permitted punishment of students who held a banner reading “bong hits for Jesus.” In that case‚ the school argued successfully that it could in fact suppress an idea if that idea were about promoting the use of illegal drugs. And the court has permitted punishment of a student who used pervasively vulgar language at a school assembly. Adults really do‚ it turns out‚ have a role in determining what expression is acceptable for kids at school. And some of the same schools that resist book challenges have speech codes. They unconstitutionally ban “hate speech” and “misgendering‚” but if the same language is in a book‚ they think nobody ought to challenge it. Next week‚ I will be making these points at a private school‚ where “book banning” is the conference topic. I will note that the school’s libraries use the term “age-appropriate” to describe their book curation. Do librarians never make mistakes? I also will tell the students that a complete opposition to book challenges is unlikely to express their true position. Do the kids really think they were ready for the sexual‚ violent‚ gory‚ or scary content of any book when they were in the first grade? Do they think their younger siblings should be able to access all of that at school? Do the kids really think it would be appropriate for the school librarian to advertise to first graders a book making the case against the existence of Santa Claus‚ the Easter Bunny‚ and the Tooth Fairy? More likely‚ kids still believe that preserving innocence is one of their values. That argument should hold for most adults‚ too. Probably no one is arguing that every challenged book is inappropriate for kids. Just as librarians can err in adding a book to the library‚ schools can err in removing them. The key is to develop a review process that puts the most knowledgeable people in charge—parents and‚ secondarily‚ teachers know the kids best—and makes the fewest mistakes. For those critics of “book bans” who are unwilling to admit that even one book could ever be bad enough to remove from a school library‚ it’s time to mature and acknowledge that unlike the printed page‚ life is not black and white. Then we can have the important discussion of how to properly protect kids. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post Critics of ‘Banning’ Books Are Wrong: They’re Not All Suitable for Kids appeared first on The Daily Signal.

John Kerry: If Russia Wants to Be Loved‚ It Should Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Congress is Once Again Considering a Ban of TikTok (While Biden is Using it to Appeal to Young Voters)

With former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley dropping out of the Republican primary on Wednesday‚ all eyes looked to the general election‚ and polls showing former President Trump leading President Biden nationally made many of the cast of ABC’s The View shake in their heels. But the network’s chief Washington correspondent‚ Jonathan Karl was there to reassure them and the liberal audience that Democrats would cure Americans of the “collective amnesia” that was supposedly keeping them from accurately remembering the Trump years. Encapsulating The View’s general mood post-Super Tuesday‚ staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) announced that her outfit had a special meaning. “I'm wearing funeral chic today because I'm so devastated over what we saw yesterday‚” she said‚ while also proclaiming that Republican voters put “party before country.” To explain the support Trump was receiving‚ Karl invoked the condescension of the far-left New York Times in proclaiming that Americans writ large were suffering from a “collective amnesia” and were supposedly misremembering what the Trump presidency was like. Karl boasted that he was doing his part to keep Trump out of office again by publishing yet another anti-Trump book (because you shouldn’t help America without making a little bit of scratch for yourself on the side): There's been a collective amnesia about what it was like when Trump was president. It's why I wrote Tired of Winning; I wanted people to be aware of what really happened‚ particularly at the end. But not just that‚ but what Trump has been doing and saying privately and in some cases publicly that hasn't really been noted as much of what he would do if he got back into the White House.     But the polls loomed large in the mind of faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin and they weren’t sitting well with her. “Donald Trump is a uniquely unfit unprincipled man‚ yet The New York Times/Siena polling from this weekend and prior ABC polling has him beating Joe Biden head-to-head outside of the margin of error‚” she said. Wondering to Karl: “Are they running scared enough?” Karl acknowledged the fact that it was more than one or two polls showing that result. “The current FiveThirtyEight averages all the public polling and Trump has a two-point lead over Biden in national polls right now‚” he said. He did admit that Biden was “certainly” working up “from a deficit” in the polls but wanted to remind everyone that‚ “If you go back exactly four years ago to Super Tuesday of 2020‚ Biden had a two-point lead over [Trump].”  “You don't put too much stock into what polls tell you today about how people will vote in November‚” he added‚ receiving the praises of moderator Whoopi Goldberg. Reiterating the condescension that Americans had “collective amnesia‚” Karl tried to reassure them that Democrats would cure it. “Democrats are going to be spending the next eight months making sure people know exactly what Donald Trump is all about‚” he declared. And despite the fact that the liberal media kept the focus on Trump and starved his challengers of oxygen‚ Karl suggested Trump had “been kind of off in the shadows” and there was only some “coverage of his criminal cases and everything‚” but more was coming. “Don't put much stock into that polls tell you today about how people will vote in November‚” he added again. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View March 6‚ 2024 11:06:43 a.m. Eastern (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: It's party before country. I mean‚ I'm wearing funeral chic today because I'm so devastated over what we saw yesterday. And my question for you is‚ were you able to glean anything from the exit polls‚ and get a look at the mindset of those voters that we just talked about. Because backstage we were talking about the fact that six in ten of North Carolina primary voters say they'd consider Trump fit for the presidency even if he's convicted of a crime. JON KARL: Yeah. HOSTIN: Even if he's convicted of a crime and roughly six in ten North Carolina GOP primary voters deny that Biden's 2020 election win was legitimate. KARL: And if you go further into those exit polls‚ what you'll see is a vastly different answer -- set of answers if you're asking Haley voters or if you're asking Trump voters. Almost all Trump voters believe the election was stolen. This wasn't. Almost all of Haley voters don't – understand the truth and haven't bought into the lie. And on the question of if you would still support him if still convicted‚ almost all of Haley voters say “absolutely not.” So‚ this is again why he will have a challenge going into— And let's remember‚ and‚ by the way‚ The New York Times used the phrase today‚ “the collective amnesia.” HOSTIN Yes. KARL: There's been a collective amnesia about what it was like when Trump was president. It's why I wrote Tired of Winning; I wanted people to be aware of what really happened‚ particularly at the end. But not just that‚ but what Trump has been doing and saying privately and in some cases publicly that hasn't really been noted as much of what he would do if he got back into the White House. But the exit polls show that‚ you know‚ that there's a significant chunk of the Republican Party‚ people like Alyssa over here‚ I think‚ who are just never going to vote for Donald Trump. And that's going to be a problem. (…) 11:09:01 a.m. Eastern ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Donald Trump is a uniquely unfit unprincipled man‚ yet The New York Times/Siena polling from this weekend and prior ABC polling has him beating Joe Biden head-to-head outside of the margin of error. Is Joe Biden running scared enough? Because he had this quote where he said – it kind of sounded like Trump’s “I alone can fix it” – ‘I beat him before‚ I’m the best guy to do it again.’ Are they running scared enough? KARL: Well‚ first of all‚ it's several recent polls. The current FiveThirtyEight averages all the public polling and Trump has a two-point lead over Biden in national polls right now. If you go back exactly four years ago to Super Tuesday of 2020‚ Biden had a two-point lead over – So he's starting – you know‚ certainly from a deficit. But first of all‚ you know this well. You don't put too much stock into what polls tell you today-- WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Thank you! KARL:  -- about how people will vote in November. GOLDBERG: Yes! Say it again‚ Karl! Jon Karl‚ say it again! Say it again! [Applause] KARL:   I mean -- HOSTIN: Obama's disapproval rating was the same – pretty much the same and then he won. KARL: And look‚ you do have that collective amnesia that we talked about. Democrats are going to be spending the next eight months making sure people know exactly what Donald Trump is all about. And‚ you know‚ he's been kind of off in the shadows. I mean‚ there has been coverage of his criminal cases and everything‚ but we're at the beginning of a very long presidential campaign‚ and‚ again -- I'll say it again. Don't put much stock into that polls tell you today about how people will vote in November. GOLDBERG: That’s right. JOY BEHAR: It's exhausting. KARL: If we did that President Clinton would be preparing to hand the baton off. GOLDBERG: You mean President Hillary Clinton? KARL: Yes. Yes. President Hillary Clinton because polls all said she was going to win. (…)

Adobe chair and CEO Shantanu Narayen gave a disturbing answer on the role of government in combating “disinformation” and his company’s collaboration with the Biden Administration on the matter.   Narayen discussed Adobe’s work with both U.S. and global governments during a conversation with The Washington Post Live on Tuesday. While addressing host and Post Columnist Geoffrey Fowler‚ Narayen said the quiet part out loud by admitting Adobe has “been working with the White House” on disinformation and artificial intelligence. Narayen’s remarks came in response to a question from an audience member named Edward Jopeck. “‘How should the government be helping assess and manage the risks posed by the combination of AI and disinformation?’ What role do you think they should play?” Fowler asked‚ reciting the posed question. It seems the dystopian saga of Big Tech-Government collusion carries on with impunity‚ with Narayan disturbingly admitting that the White House is “extremely interested” in how the tech industry and government “work together” to tackle disinformation ahead of the 2024 election. This big tech collusion with the government may be prohibited in the future. The Supreme Court will hear a case on the extent to which Big Tech can collaborate with the federal government‚ sparked by federal government pressure on tech companies such as X (formerly Twitter) to censor constitutionally protected content.  Adobe has worked with several other tech companies and even the BBC to label AI and real images while extracting location and time data from pictures taken with certain cameras. This issue came up during The Post event as Narayan spoke up in favor of “content credentials” identifying the source of each image.  SEE MORE: Shantanu Narayan’s Response to AI Open Letter. Shantanu Narayan’s Thoughts on Labeling AI Content. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

A United States Air Force employee and former Army officer is accused of sending classified information across a foreign online dating platform when prompted.David Franklin Slater‚ a 63-year-old employee at the Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha‚ Nebraska‚ allegedly sent national defense information to a person purporting to be a woman living in Ukraine through a dating platform in 2022.Slater‚ who was also a U.S. Army lieutenant colonel‚ had top secret clearance at the base and took the position soon after retiring from his previous military role‚ the Department of Justice said per Fox News.Slater allegedly "willingly‚ improperly‚ and unlawfully" sent information that was classified as "SECRET‚" with reason to believe it could be used against the United States or could aid a foreign country.The messages‚ allegedly sent to Slater through the dating platform‚ are as follows:"American Intelligence says that already 100% of Russian troops are located on the territory of Ukraine. Do you think this information can be trusted?""Dear‚ what is shown on the screens in the special room?? It is very interesting.""By the way‚ you were the first to tell me that NATO members are traveling by train and only now (already evening) this was announced on our news. You are my secret informant love! How were your meetings? Successfully?""Beloved Dave‚ do NATO and Biden have a secret plan to help us?""Dave‚ it's great that you get information about [Specified Country 1] first. I hope you will tell me right away? You are my secret agent. With love.""Sweet Dave‚ the supply of weapons is completely classified‚ which is great!""My sweet Dave‚ thanks for the valuable information‚ it's great that two officials from the USA are going to Kyiv.""Dave‚ I hope tomorrow NATO will prepare a very unpleasant 'surprise' for Putin! Will you tell me?""You have a job in the Operations Center today‚ I remember‚ I'm sure there is a lot of interesting news there?" BREAKING: U.S. Air Force employee charged with giving classified information to woman he met on dating site — (@) Slater "knowingly transmitted classified national defense information to another person in blatant disregard for the security of his country and his oath to safeguard its secrets‚" Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen of the Justice Department’s National Security Division said. "The Department of Justice will seek to hold accountable those who knowingly and willfully put their country at risk by disclosing classified information."The indictment also reportedly included that Slater had attended U.S. Strategic Command briefings on the Russia-Ukraine war and was privy to information that was highly classified.The Air Force employee also allegedly sent information that included military targets and Russian military capabilities.Slater faces up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250‚000 for each count he is accused of.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

On Super Tuesday‚ Elon Musk urged Tesla employees and other Austin‚ Texas‚ voters to oust George Soros-backed Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza‚ endorsing a Democratic opponent who he stated would "actually prosecute crimes‚" Fox Business reported.Musk posted on X Tuesday morning‚ "Sorry to bother everyone with this note‚ as it applies to people in the greater Austin area‚ but please go to the polls and vote for a new District Attorney!" The Tesla CEO reposted a video from Democratic DA candidate Jeremy Sylestine. Tomorrow is Election Day. If you haven't voted yet‚ make a plan to vote and head to the polls.\n\nWhy is this election so important? Let's look at some of the facts and issues:\n\n- The DA's office has let the backlog of cases grow to over 6000‚ which\u00a0means justice delayed for\u2026 — (@) In Sylestine's video‚ he stated‚ "The DA's office has let the backlog of cases grow to over 6‚000 cases.""What that means is justice delayed for thousands of people who are sitting on the other side of those lawsuits waiting for them to be heard‚ waiting for justice to be served‚" he continued. "On top of that‚ we also know that Jose Garza‚ during his administration‚ has run off over 75 experienced felony prosecutors‚ which has led to direct harm to the Travis County population."In February‚ Musk posted on X that the Travis County race was "an important political contest‚" calling Americans nationwide to "vote for a brighter future." While this is an important political contest in Travis County‚ there such contests throughout the world. \n\nWherever you can‚ vote for a brighter future! — (@) Garza took office in 2021 on the promise to "reimagine" the criminal justice system and end "over-prosecution" and police misconduct. He received $600‚000 during his campaign from the Texas Justice and Safety PAC‚ a Soros-funded group. Garza had no prior experience as a prosecutor.According to Bloomberg‚ Musk sent an email Tuesday to Tesla employees calling on them to oust "far left" Garza and place their support behind Sylestine‚ stating that the more moderate Democratic would "actually prosecute crime."Garza has defended his policies‚ saying he is "doing exactly what Travis County voters elected him to do‚ fixing our broken criminal justice system by standing with survivors‚ working to end the excessive use of force by police‚ and prioritizing treatment over incarceration for nonviolent drug offenses‚" Fox Business reported.In November‚ Garza abruptly left the funeral of Jorge Pastore‚ a fallen Austin police officer‚ after receiving a cold reception from attendees."When he came walking in‚ I thought what gall this man has to show up at a funeral for an officer killed in the line of duty when all he's done since he's been in office is go after cops‚" one funeral attendee told Fox News Digital at the time.Last year‚ Garza's office allowed a bus driver who fatally struck a bicyclist while under the influence of prescription drugs to avoid prison time. Garza also offered a no-jail-time plea deal to a man who confessed to assaulting a woman and exposing himself to a child.Despite Musk’s support of Sylestine‚ Garza secured a victory in Tuesday’s election with an over 30-point lead.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A video of a family with four “transkids” went viral across social media this week. Many conservatives were justifiably appalled and pointed out that the chances of randomly having four children with severe body dysmorphic disorder in the same family are incredibly low. Commenters on the video suggested that the mother must be mentally ill and acting out Munchausen syndrome by proxy. But this demonstrates a serious failure of the right to understand human nature. The mother of those four children was not demonstrating mental illness but her desire to achieve social status by adopting the behaviors endorsed by the dominant moral system of the day. She was using her children as a signal of conversion to the new state religion‚ and this war of belief cannot be won without understanding the spiritual nature of the conflict. People will always virtue-signal; it is a key aspect of human nature that will never go away. One of the dumbest ideas ever to be embraced by the opponents of wokeness was the demonization of “virtue-signaling.” The latest incarnation of the progressive social revolution began on college campuses where “social justice warriors” would dye their hair‚ shout down conservative speakers‚ and engage in other performative histrionics to signal their devotion to leftist causes. While many professors and administrators participated in this revolutionary activity‚ some liberal intellectuals correctly identified this more radical wave of progressive belief as dangerous to the status quo that kept them in power. These progressive castoffs entered an awkward alliance with the conservatives whom they had been mocking most of their lives‚ and so the intellectual dark web was formed. A religious imperative The basic strategy of this alliance was to treat wokeness as a new faith and deploy the same tools that had proven so adept at dismantling Christianity as America’s public religion in previous generations. Endless YouTube videos‚ comedy sketches‚ and internet posts were created to mock the new progressive vanguard for their dedication to this more radical leftist morality. Intellectuals held debates‚ wrote books‚ and recorded endless hours of podcasts that dissected and debunked the ideological basis of wokeness. The woke were derided as intolerant‚ moralistic‚ and closed-minded clowns. But instead of shrinking from mockery and intellectual deconstruction‚ the progressive revolutionaries simply redoubled their efforts‚ winning more converts and capturing more institutions. The IDW and its conservative allies lost‚ and wokeness became the primary religion of the American ruling elite. Humans are religious and social beings; this is so deeply woven into our nature that all efforts to expel it have failed spectacularly. Liberal modernity has trained us to see ourselves as free-thinking individuals who make rational and objective decisions‚ but in truth we are all very conscious of status. People want simultaneously to fit into the group and to stand out as high-status individuals within that group‚ so we tend to observe what other high-status people do and mimic their behavior. Our decisions are more often guided by religious assumptions elevated by our peers than by our own independent rationality. Working out‚ dressing well‚ attending church‚ obtaining a master’s degree‚ attending a Black Lives Matter protest‚ or “transitioning” your kids are all attempts to signal status depending on the values that dominate a society at any given time. People will always virtue-signal; it is a key aspect of human nature that will never go away. The question is never “will we virtue-signal?” but “whose virtues will be elevated?” The great temptation The disillusioned leftists of the IDW were elites displaced by the woke revolution that threatened their ruling status. Their alliance with conservatives was forged in an attempt to return to a moral framework that held 2000s-era liberalism as the neutral default of American culture. Conservative Christians should have known better than to side with the very people who had been deconstructing their own faith for decades‚ but the temptation to join with previously high-status elites and deploy the same tactics that had been so successfully used against them proved too tempting. Simply put‚ conservatives have internalized their status as beautiful losers. Christians have abdicated their responsibility to lead and have bought into the myth of secular liberalism as the moral default of the United States. The only thing that will defeat wokeness is a more vital‚ beautiful‚ and true faith. Conservatives are natural defenders of the status quo. Once secular liberalism proved victorious‚ Republicans simply adopted the language and norms of that movement and began to defend them instead. Christians maintained some of the private aspects of their faith‚ but in the cultural and political realm they fully embraced the framework of secular liberalism as the default order of their society. Couching core moral disagreements in the clinical language of mental illness only serves to demonstrate how thoroughly conservatives have internalized secular liberal rhetoric. It is not just that Christian conservatives have made themselves irrelevant; it is that they have made themselves the enthusiast slaves of the ideology that conquered them.The right is easily defeated because it only understands the political as the opportunity to restore neutrality‚ while the left understands the political as the opportunity to define neutrality. There is no universal and objective standard that will mediate conflicting truth claims in a society. A metaphysical framework that defines value‚ meaning‚ and the common good will always exist. You can dress this framework up in scientific jargon or intellectual pretensions‚ but it will still be fundamentally religious in nature. Secular liberalism was never truly secular‚ and wokeness is not a religious assault on secular neutrality. Wokeness is simply a more overtly spiritual continuation of the progressive revolution that toppled the protestant Christian consensus that ruled the United States for most of its history. Secular liberalism will not defeat wokeness‚ and conservatives cannot achieve victory by defending a neutral status quo that never existed. Christians did not lose to secular liberalism because of rational argumentation or the power of scientific truth. We lost because our faith was weak. Wokeness may be a gutter religion‚ but if it is venerated by our ruling elites and rewarded by our institutions‚ it will be emulated by the average person. The only thing that will defeat wokeness is a more vital‚ beautiful‚ and true faith.