Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

n the neon-lit haze of a late-night Los Angeles diner, where ordinary lives intersect over coffee and quiet regrets, a wild-eyed stranger bursts through the door claiming to hail from a doomed tomorrow. Sam Rockwell unleashes manic urgency as this time-displaced messenger takes the mismatched patrons hostage—not for ransom, but to assemble an improbable squad for a breakneck, one-night mission to avert catastrophe.    The post Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die first appeared on Worth it or Woke.

In the radiant glow of arena lights and chart-topping acclaim, MercyMe’s Bart Millard stands at the pinnacle of success—yet shadows from the past linger, threatening the fragile family he’s built. As a devastating diagnosis strikes close to home and the demands of fame pull him in every direction, an unlikely friendship sparks renewed hope, testing faith through fire and forging unbreakable bonds.    The post I Can Only Imagine 2 first appeared on Worth it or Woke.

Mistakes were made. The post The singer Roger McGuinn regretted taking control from: “Much better” first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

Surprising... The post Who plays the flute on ‘Mona Bone Jakon’? first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

A few days ago, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) gave America some very welcome news. During a press conference he said that his Democratic members had two choices with regard to President Trump‘s upcoming State of the Union address: “The two options that are in front of us, in our house, is either attend with silent defiance, or to not attend.” This will definitely be a win-win for everyone who tunes in Tuesday evening to hear what the President has to say about his first-year accomplishments and future plans for the country. If the Democrats are silent or simply elsewhere, the SOTU is bound to be a far more dignified affair than usual. Not that we won’t miss listening to Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) braying incoherent nonsense and waving his cane while being escorted out of the House chamber by the sergeant-at-arms, or watching our congressional representatives wave paddles in the air like so many vultures at an estate auction. Such asinine antics do have their entertainment value, of course, but most of the people who invest an hour or so of their time to watch President Trump speak will probably be more interested in the substance of his address than performative stunts. Nonetheless, for those who still yearn for sound and fury signifying nothing, a number of Democrats plan to participate in competing public events during the speech, according a report in NOTUS: They’re instead boycotting the speech by going to counterprograms, launching their own responses outside the chamber or staying home. About 20 Democrats are already slated to attend “The People’s State of the Union” event on the National Mall, hosted by progressive organizations MoveOn and MeidasTouch. A spokesperson for MoveOn told NOTUS that number is expected to grow through Tuesday. And Defiance.org is hosting the “State of the Swamp” event at the National Press Club with several current and former lawmakers … While some are publicly revealing their plans, most Hill Democrats haven’t announced whether or not they will boycott Trump’s speech. It doesn’t seem to have occurred to the Democrats who will join events staged by far left activist groups like MoveOn.org that they will be upstaging the person chosen by their leadership to deliver the official rebuttal to Trump’s SOTU — Virginia  Gov. Abigail Spanberger. She will recite the Democratic response to the President’s address after he concludes his remarks. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), made much of his choice of Spanberger last week: “She knows Americans want lower costs, safer communities, and a stronger democracy — not chaos and corruption. Gov. Spanberger will lay out a clear path forward: lower everyday costs, protect healthcare, and defend the freedoms that define who we are as a nation.” Nor is it difficult to predict what they will say about the President and his State of the Union address. The SOTU rebuttal is a notoriously thankless job under the best of circumstances, yet party leadership often uses it to highlight “rising stars.” Sadly, it tends to have the opposite effect. Stacey Abrams, for example, was widely lauded by the Democrats and the corporate “news” media for her “historic” rebuttal of President Trump’s 2019 SOTU. Yet, she lost her much-anticipated 2022 gubernatorial race against Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and has since been mired in legal and financial scandals. Spanberger is another Democrat “rising star,” but she may succumb to the SOTU rebuttal curse after being upstaged by the following publicity hounds who plan to attend and speak at the MoveOn.org and Defiance.org counterprogramming rallies: The “People’s State of the Union” rally: Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen Arizona Rep. Yassamin Ansari Vermont Rep. Becca Balint Texas Rep. Greg Casar Texas Rep. Veronica Escobar Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal Illinois Rep. Delia Ramirez New Jersey Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman Connecticut Rep. John Larson The “State of the Swamp” rally: California Rep. Eric Swalwell Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton New York Rep. Dan Goldman Virginia Rep. Eugene Vindman Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden Minnesota Mayor Jacob Frey Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson Former Georgia state Rep. Stacey Abrams Other Democrats who will boycott the President’s SOTU include Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rep. Dina Titus (D-Nev.) and Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.). It isn’t clear where these people will be, but there is little doubt they will be armed with microphones. Nor is it difficult to predict what they will say about the President and his State of the Union address. They will use words like “authoritarian,” tell lurid tales about American citizens gunned down by ICE agents, claim that the economy has been destroyed by tariffs, insist that we are at war with Venezuela and that Trump is about to attack Iran. Moreover, all of this balderdash will be heavily leavened with dramatic lamentations about the J6 “insurrection.” Which brings us back to the question posed in the title of this column: Does anyone care if Democrats boycott President Trump’s SOTU? At the risk of sounding like an old codger, this reminds me of a joke: A guy is driving through the country and encounters a fork in the road that doesn’t include a sign indicating which choice leads to his destination. He tells a man standing nearby where he’s headed and asks if it matters which way he goes. The man answers, “Not to me.” That’s how much anyone should care about the Democrat boycotts. READ MORE from David Catron: Redistricting Betrayal in Virginia The SAVE Act: Why Are Senate Republicans Dithering? The Abigail Spanberger Bait-and-Switch

Turner Classic Movies is really shining this month with its annual 31 Days of Oscar marathon leading up to the 98th Academy Awards show March 15th. The irony has been inescapable. TCM is playing Oscar-nominated treasures from the last century that seem to mock the offerings of the present one. Of the past 10 Best Picture winners — Arora, Oppenheimer, Green Book, The Shape of Water, Everything Everywhere All at Once, CODA, Nomadland, Parasite, Moonlight — only one, Oppenheimer, was a major hit, the rest obscurities or marginal successes. And these were the winning films. No one can name the runners-up. While just this past weekend, TCM ran Bullitt, Grand Prix, Ben-Hur, Lawrence of Arabia, Cleopatra, Gone with the Wind, Doctor Zhivago, The Bridge over the River Kwai, Patton, and The Deer Hunter. Clearly, Hollywood, we have a problem — a dying artform. I watched most of these epics over the weekend. Their level of visual craftsmanship in presenting human truth seems as distant today as the Pyramids. And like the Pyramids, they constructed these wonders without modern technology, only sheer manpower. Not for the whim of pharaohs but our entertainment. And what marvels they gave us: the car chase in Bullitt, the Monte Carlo run in Grand Prix, the chariot race in Ben Hur, the camelback attack on Aqaba in Lawrence of Arabia, the body-littered street in Gone with the Wind, the Moscow massacre in Doctor Zhivago, the collapsing Bridge on the River Kwai along with the train on it. And in all these classics other than the single dud, Cleopatra, the spectacle is a vital extension of human truth, not a juvenile comic-book filler. Which is why in Lawrence of Arabia, the striking of a match and cut to a desert sun is worth a whole movie full of falling cities and superhuman battles. It’s why the old films will endure forever and the new ones, even Oscar recognized, are already forgotten. The amazing car chase in Bullitt fixates the point where the previously stymied detective becomes the hunter. Grand Prix viscerally showcases the dangers of the race and the skill and courage of the men who enter it. The rear attack on Aqaba was a historic military feat that cemented the legend of T.E, Lawrence, though he did not actually lead it. The carnage in Gone with the Wind is the visual fitting punishment for the South’s great sin, slavery, and lesser sin, pride. It’s why I always cringe when the otherwise excellent TCM hosts virtue signal about the film’s supposed glorification of slavery when it does exactly the opposite. As Clark Gable’s Rhett Butler brutally points out. “Look at them. All these poor tragic people. The South’s sinking to its knees. It’ll never rise again. The Cause … The cause of living in the past is dying right in front of us.” One of my rules is always trust genuine film artists over woke scolds. The chariot race in Ben-Hur may be the most riveting, thrilling nine minutes ever put on screen. Like Gone with the Wind, Doctor Zhivago is a love story set against a civil war. Unlike the older picture, where the protagonist’s selfishness quashes the romance, here it’s the geopolitical turbulence. Based on the Boris Pasternak novel banned by the Soviets, the movie celebrates individual and artistic freedom over the collective. This is why Hollywoke filmmakers could never make it today, even if they had a fraction of David Lean’s talent, which they most certainly don’t. They’re more in line with the philosophy of Zohran Mamdani than Pasternak. “We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism,” Mamdani famously and stupidly said. The chariot race in Ben-Hur may be the most riveting, thrilling nine minutes ever put on screen — the triumphant culmination of two years of planning and execution. Yet it’s unforgettable not as an awesome supplement to the story but an integral part of it. Director William Wyler and his team knew the race had to be memorable as the fitting climax to the central enmity of two men, Judah Ben-Hur (Charlton Heston) and Messala (Stephen Boyd). Messala had put political ambition over brotherhood and almost destroyed his friend, Judah, and his family. With the aid of Christ, Judah survived the slave ships to confront Messala in the circus. The payoff had to be more than satisfying, and is it ever. The incomparable sequence accomplishes a near impossible contrast — making Ben-Hur both a rich Christian morality tale and a rewarding revenge story. Deservedly, the film earned an unprecedented 11 Academy Awards, including Best Actor for Heston and Best Picture. Speaking of Best Picture, let’s take a look at this year’s nominees: Bugonia, F1, Frankenstein, Hamnet, Marty Supreme, One Battle After Another, The Secret Agent, Sentimental Value, Sinners. Once again, only one was a huge hit — the latest Jerry Bruckheimer (Top Gun, Pirates of the Caribbean, Beverly Hills Cop) guy pleaser about a white macho racecar driver starring the white macho Brad Pitt. Bruckheimer produced the anti-woke industry-saving blockbuster Top Gun: Maverick four years ago, which no one in Hollywood tried to imitate. So instead the competition for F1 includes a satire about an insect apocalypse (Bugonia), the latest Guillermo del Toro (The Shape of Water) new grotesquery about love between girl and beast (Frankenstein), the feminist story of Shakespeare’s girlboss wife (Hamnet), a call for overthrowing conservative government (One Battle After Another), and an antiwhite, anti-Christian vampire film (Sinners).  I know what I’ll be watching this Oscar Night — TCM’s presentation of the two best movies ever made about Hollywood, Sunset Boulevard and The Bad and the Beautiful, when art and talent meant something there. READ MORE from Lou Aguilar: When the Legends Die: Robert Duvall Munich and the Fate of the West The Kids Will Be All Right  

President Trump’s Board of Peace had its first meeting on Thursday. About two dozen nations have pledged about $6.5 billion to the organization which is supposed to help rebuild the Gaza Strip which was destroyed in Israeli retaliation for the genocidal Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. Trump said at the meeting that the organization would work with the United Nations and not against it. But the UN which, as I’ve written elsewhere, is an organization that is entirely useless from a U.S. national security and foreign policy standpoint, needs to be replaced by an alliance of democracies. The United States has pledged $10 billion over 10 years to the Gaza rebuilding effort. But despite the billions pledged by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, there is a complete roadblock to the Board of Peace’s work. That roadblock is Hamas. Five countries — Indonesia, Morocco, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, and Albania — have committed to send troops to keep the peace in Gaza. But how they can cope with the resurgent Hamas is entirely unclear. Unless these countries have committed troops to combat Hamas, they will not be able to restore peace. It should be noted that the U.S. has not committed troops. The BoP will be a temporary obstacle for the Israelis to destroy Hamas. Egypt and Jordan have committed to train security forces for Gaza, which will bring them into contact with Hamas. In the wake of Hamas’s October 2023 assault on Israel, a negotiated peace agreement aimed to stabilize the situation. Nevertheless, Hamas appears to be violating the agreement in at least two important ways. First, Hamas is not disarming. They refuse to do so despite their evidently false commitment to do so to comply with Mr. Trump’s plan. Hamas is probably re-arming with the help of the Iranian regime which is its principal supporter. Second, Hamas is trying — so far successfully — to reassert its control over the Gaza Strip. They have been patrolling the streets — reimposing their authority — and murdering members of opposition groups including Arab militias. It matters not to Hamas that a reported 70,000 Gaza residents — including, mostly, Hamas members — have been killed since the October 2023 attack. Ideologically, Hamas cannot and will not stop trying to destroy Israel. That will be a clear and final cancellation of the Board of Peace’s plan to rebuild Gaza. After the members of the BoP rejected former UK prime minister Tony Blair to head the group, it has apparently devolved to former Bulgarian prime minister Nickolay Mladenov to fill the post. With all due respect to Mr. Mladenov, the choice of him to head the group sounds like no one else would take the job. He previously served as the top UN representative to the region, which is not a great recommendation for the job. He now assumes the title of High Representative to Gaza, whatever that means. At the BoP’s first meeting, Mr. Trump described the group as the most prestigious board ever assembled. Yet among its 50 members were relatively few heads of state. Prestigious or not, the task before them — securing peace and rebuilding Gaza — appears daunting. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is probably the greatest statesman since his predecessor, George C. Marshall. (It’s a great pity that he has said that if Vice President J.D. Vance runs for president in 2028, he would not.) Mr. Rubio said, “There is no plan B for Gaza. Plan B is going back to war. Plan A, the only path forward, is one that rebuilds Gaza in a way of enduring and sustainable peace where no one has to worry about returning to conflict, human suffering, and destruction.” But Mr. Rubio’s Plan B is apparently where this is all going. The Israelis know that and so does everyone else involved in the BoP. The BoP won’t be able to disarm Hamas nor will they try to. Hamas — and its principal supporters Iran and Qatar — will rearm with more guns and missiles and then attempt another October 2023 massacre of Israelis. Mr. Trump wants to create another Riviera in Gaza complete with massive hotels and casinos. It’s a pipe dream that cannot — while Hamas, Iran, and Qatar enable Hamas to rebuild — be achieved. The BoP will be a temporary obstacle for the Israelis to destroy Hamas. But even if they do, another group with the same sponsors and supporters, will arise. This is an endless war with no peace in sight. READ MORE from Jed Babbin: The Decline of Trust in the News Two Regimes, One Reality Iran and the New Domino Theory  

I awoke this morning at The Oaklander Hotel on the campus of the University of Pittsburgh, a night away from the kids with my wife. It was so ironic. From my window I can see the William Pitt Student Union, where my wife and I met in 1989. I can also see Heinz Chapel, where we got married on May 22, 1993. It sits next to the majestic Cathedral of Learning. I can also see the spot where the greatest home run in the history of baseball was hit on October 13, 1960, by Pittsburgh Pirates second baseman Bill Mazeroski in the bottom of the ninth inning against the New York Yankees. It was game seven. Maz’s “shot” won the World Series, as the ball sailed over the head of another future Hall of Famer, Yankees legend Yogi Berra, who (no) wasn’t the catcher for that game. The image of Maz’s hit flying past the 14-foot Longines clock above the wall at storied Forbes Field is iconic. I have an artist’s rendering of it hanging at my office at Grove City College. As do thousands around these parts. Maz will always remain in the hearts of the people of the Pittsburgh region. To this day, it sounds like millions rather than thousands of people from Pittsburgh and western Pennsylvania were at that game. But of course, that wasn’t possible. Forbes Field — one of those sacred shrines of baseball that isn’t there anymore — held only about 36,000 fans. My Uncle Carl was there. He and a friend drove down the day before from Emporium, Pa. (a long drive) and slept in sleeping bags on the ground at Schenley Park behind the stadium. My dad wasn’t there, but he did what countless fans did after the game: he got in his car in nearby New Kensington, parked it on the lawn of the Pittsburgh Hilton, and celebrated like crazy late into the night. Most people listened on radio or watched on TV. A small contingent glimpsed the game from the top floor of the Cathedral of Learning, which towered high above the field. There’s a classic photo taken from up there, which likewise has been framed and appears on the walls of many locals. Notably, Forbes was torn down after the 1970 season, breaking the hearts of many. (Besides Mazeroski’s homer, Babe Ruth hit his last three home runs at Forbes Field, all in one game. The last homer was the first ever to clear the right-field roof. The crowd went nuts.) But part of the brick wall in left-center field was left standing and remains preserved as a memorial to this day. It stands next to Pitt’s law school and outside the “Forbes Quad” building that inside retains the home plate from Forbes Field encased in glass. You can go there and stand where Maz stood when he belted that ball. Beyond the wall is a small recreational baseball field, appropriately called Mazeroski Field. That 1960 Word Series was quite a ride. The Yankees team vastly outscored the Bucs overall, trouncing them in blowouts in the three games they won. They had players such as Berra, Roger Maris, Mickey Mantle, pitcher Whitey Ford, and coach Casey Stengel. Of course, the Pirates were no slouches. A fellow Hall of Famer on Maz’s team was a fellow named Roberto Clemente. The team was loaded with stars, including the National League’s MVP that year, Dick Groat, who had been a standout in basketball (an All-American at Duke). It has been correctly argued that the forgotten Groat was one of the best athletes of the 20th century. But though the Yanks outscored the Bucs overall, the latter won the requisite four games out of seven, thanks to Mazeroski’s shot heard round the world in the 9th inning of game seven. It remains the only walk-off home run to win a World Series in game seven. After Mazeroski retired at the end of the 1972 season — playing all of his 17 seasons with the Bucs — an intense debate commenced over whether he merited being inducted into the Hall of Fame. The problem for Maz — ironic given that he was known for the greatest home run ever — was his offensive numbers. They were good but not great, though admittedly hampered by the massive distance of the Forbes Field left-center wall (he retired with 138 home runs and over 2,000 hits). However, his defensive production was extraordinary, even unsurpassed — and made him a seven-time All Star. His ability to turn a double play was picturesque perfect. He holds the all-time record for double plays turned by a second baseman. When he retired, no player ever had as many double plays. Conservative columnist and baseball pontificator George Will argued that if baseball was merely about offense, then pitchers shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame. Defensive greatness ought to count. Will argued that Hall of Fame voters were guilty of “discrimination” against defensemen. He was right. When you combined Mazeroski’s phenomenal Gold Glove numbers with respectable offensive numbers — atop the 1960 home run — he deserved a spot in the Hall. And indeed, just that finally happened in 2001. Mazeroski’s speech at the induction ceremony was quite the display. A humble, local Pittsburgh “yinzer,” he was so nervous and so emotional that he couldn’t get through his text and finally said something like “forget about this crap” and sat down to laughs and thunderous applause. It’s worth watching to get a feel for what the man was like and why he was beloved throughout the Pittsburgh region. The working-class Polish kid was as loved as other local legends who made their home here — folks like Fred “Mister” Rogers (who lived in a neighborhood down the street from where I’m writing right now.) William Stanley Mazeroski passed away this past weekend at his home far removed from the wall of Forbes Field where he launched that baseball on October 13, 1960. Like the wall that remains on the Oakland campus today, Maz will always remain in the hearts of the people of the Pittsburgh region. READ MORE from Paul Kengor: The Best and Worst Presidents — the PragerU Survey Our Don, Our Paisan Confederate Liberals

C.S. Lewis coined the term “Chronological Snobbery” to describe the condition of “uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate common to our own age and the assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that account discredited. The chronological snob forgets that he too lives in a finite time period that will pass away with its assumptions and illusions. The attitude breeds blindness to one’s own flaws and an overly critical approach towards those of other time periods. Turned to history, the snob sits astride his high horse passing judgment on the past with a self-congratulatory note. As time has moved on from bygone eras, the people and ideas of those eras become inherently inferior to those of the present age. The Chronological Snob draws satisfaction in looking down on his predecessors, and the American Snob of the 21st century especially delights in highlighting the failures of the American Founders. The goal of studying the American Founding by college professors and students oftentimes carries the stated purpose of showing them to be mere humans like all the rest of us. Fair enough. They were men with clay feet. It is worthwhile to remember that heroes of the past were not perfect and should not be objects of worship. The assumed corollary in a college classroom though is that not only are the heroes of the past merely humans, but that with centuries of progress, we are actually better than them. When encountering the great generations of the American past, however, particularly the Founding Fathers, the appropriate response is humility, not self-adulation. This humility should derive from a consideration of what those men achieved despite being no less flawed than any other human on the planet. The lesson is that in spite of their frail humanity, they reached heights unparalleled in the course of human events. The British Empire of the 18th century was the foremost superpower of its day. Its American colonies were an insignificant cluster of thirteen communities clinging to the edge of the North American continent. They were neither England’s wealthiest, nor most populous, nor most powerful colonies. The colonists had the geographical advantage of separation from the mother country by a vast ocean. Besides that, the colonists had no other advantage against the might of the British Empire. Add to all this what your friendly neighborhood faculty member will be all too glad to remind you: the leaders of the colonial cause were deeply flawed human beings. This fact should add to the wonder of the Revolution, though, not detract. In spite of their flawed humanity, the Founders achieved something marvelous. By overthrowing their imperial overlords the men who were just like everyone else accomplished what no one else could. This ought to evoke a deeper spirit of admiration, not condescension. Revolutions in history have a dubious past, at best. The Ancient Greek Historian Thucydides, describing a savage revolution in the city-state of Corcyra, wrote that such barbarism will always be the pattern of revolution so long as human nature remains the same. Edmund Burke called the French Revolution the consequence of “losing, in the splendor of these triumphs of the rights of men, all natural sense of right and wrong.” The American Revolutionaries, however, as Alexis de Tocqueville wrote, were driven by the “love of order” and a “thoughtful taste for freedom.” Their revolution ended not in the savagery of the movements, but in the world’s most stable democratic republic and the oldest active written constitution. The Founding Fathers were sinful humans just like the Greeks and the French. The fact that they succeeded where others failed despite all the same common human limitations makes them even more remarkable. The 250th anniversary affords more opportunity than typical to revisit the Founding. It is, therefore, more important than ever that Americans approach the date with the proper frame of mind. This approach should start with humility, not condescension. Acting in this light should deepen appreciation for the Fathers of the country. No, the Founders were not “demigods,” as Thomas Jefferson once labeled the members of the Constitutional Convention. They were flawed men like everyone else. They had their vices, bigotries, and indiscretions too. The significant lesson on the Founding Fathers should not be that they were flawed. That much is obvious. The lesson is that in spite of their frail humanity, they reached heights unparalleled in the course of human events. The question should not be “were the Founders as flawed as we are?” Rather, the question ought to be, “since they were just as flawed as we are and still achieved so much more than we have, what’s our excuse?” READ MORE: A Republic, If We Can Keep It A Nation That Can’t Explain 1776 Urgently Needs a Civic Education Revival When Common Sense Went Viral Nate Weiland teaches Humanities in the Upper School at Heritage Classical Academy near Cleveland, Ohio. He is a graduate of Grove City College and the University of Pittsburgh.