The legacy of this great progressive rock band began in Nyack, New York, in 1995. Known initially as Shabütie before adopting their current name in 2001. Over the course of their career, they’ve released eleven studio albums, three live albums, and various special editions, with six of their releases reaching the Billboard Top 10. Known for their ambitious concept albums based on Claudio Sanchez’s science fiction saga “The Amory Wars,” the band has built a unique musical identity by blending progressive rock, pop, heavy metal, and post-hardcore elements. Their only non-conceptual album was 2015’s “The Color Before the Sun,” with The post Complete List Of Coheed And Cambria Band Members appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

The Supreme Court declined Monday to hear a former Kentucky county clerk’s case that could have potentially challenged the 2015 decision Obergefell v. Hodges, which nationalized same-sex marriage. “This was completely predictable,” Thomas Jipping, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. “It was not the right case to raise the issue of the constitutionality of gay marriage.” Kim Davis, the former Rowan County clerk, had refused to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple. The couple sued, and a lower court ruled against Davis, awarding the couple $100,000 in emotional damages and another $260,000 in attorney’s fees. Davis asked the Supreme Court to consider her case in August. She claimed the lower court ruling violated her right to the free exercise of religion as protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects her from personal liability for the denial of marriage licenses, she argued. Davis’ petition also condemned the Obergefell decision as a “legal fiction.” The Supreme Court did not explain its decision not to consider her case. Davis gained national attention in 2015 after she was jailed for six days for refusing to sign off on a marriage license for a gay couple.  Jipping, the Heritage scholar, told The Daily Signal that it is unlikely a case would come forward to challenge same-sex marriage. If such a case arose, it would do so at the state level, similar to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) case that overturned the Roe v. Wade abortion decision.  “No state is trying to ban gay marriage, and there has been a significant shift in public opinion on the issue,” Jipping explained. Further, in 2022, Congress passed and President Joe Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act, which largely codified Obergefell. The post Why the Supreme Court May Never Review Gay Marriage appeared first on The Daily Signal.

It's True That Nobody Wants to Fix Obamacare

Some animals really do look too cool to be real.

A bunch of notches and lasers have never sounded so good.

A new study has an explanation for the unusual chemical makeup of our interstellar visitor. If true, it's not the best news we've ever heard.

Leftists like CNN’s chief media analyst Brian Stelter feel terrible about two top executives at the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) tendering their resignations over a really bad edit of Donald Trump’s speech to supporters on January 6, 2021. Those right-wingers are ruining things again by focusing on aggressive media mangling of the facts. In a video on X, Stelter lamented that this edit shouldn’t have forced resignations, but the BBC “exists in an incredibly politically charged environment, even as it tries to be apolitical and impartial.” Wrong. Nobody believes they’re “trying” to be apolitical. They want to be perceived as impartial even as they’re extremely partial. As Stelter notes, the BBC has faced relentless criticism over its relentless bias against Israel and in favor of Hamas in its reporting from Gaza. In a vacuum, a more-than-a-year-old editing misstep by unnamed producers would not cause the very top heads of the BBC to roll. But... pic.twitter.com/en62ptNFCQ — Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) November 10, 2025 Last year, after a study found the BBC overwhelmingly favored Hamas spin after the attacks of October 7, BBC's Jeremy Bowen claimed “Searching for some kind of spurious balance is entirely wrong, the truth is the objective.” Bowen also said Hamas is a “good” source of information on Gaza casualty figures during a closed-doors “masterclass” on reporting war impartially -- their numbers are "pretty accurate" -- and objected to the word "terrorist" to describe Hamas. In his "Reliable Sources" newsletter, Stelter employed a similar spin to his video: "the BBC is positioned as an apolitical brand, yet operates in a politically poisonous atmosphere." This is much like our domestic dispute over PBS and NPR. They pose as apolitical, but their content makes a mockery of the claim. Stelter channeled the leftist tilt of BBC backers on social media [bold text in the original]:  "The BBC is facing a coordinated, politically motivated attack," BBC veteran John Simpson wrote on X last night. He praised Davie and Turness and said, "We've now got a real fight on our hands to defend public service broadcasting, because that's under threat too." Simpson, like other BBC staffers I know, co-signed Nick Robinson's framing: "It's clear that there is a genuine concern about editorial standards and mistakes. There is also a political campaign by people who want to destroy the organization… Both things are happening at the same time." Stelter included the view from the right:  Former UK prime minister Liz Truss writes, "I'm glad the US President and the rest of the world are seeing the BBC for what it is. Its failure to tell the truth on everything from transgender ideology to economics to Gaza has done huge damage to politics and government in this country. This should be the end of nationalised broadcasting." The lefties are also concerned about the re-evaluation of the BBC's license-fee system of funding "public" media. British households pay £174.50 ($230) a year for BBC shows and services, which leads to conservative complaints about involuntarily supporting anti-conservative media. No one probably fears for the BBC under a Labour Party government, but the BBC's brand is definitely struggling, just like aggressive bias caused a funding problem for PBS and NPR.

The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal that was thought to be the only case that had standing to challenge the landmark 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges that legalized so-called same-sex marriage.On Monday, Supreme Court justices denied a petition for a writ of certiorari for the case Kim Davis v. David Ermold, et al., according to court documents. 'If ever a case deserved review, the first individual who was thrown in jail post-Obergefell for seeking accommodation for her religious beliefs should be it.'There were no notable dissents in the order, and no justices recused themselves. RELATED: 'Like the abortion decision'? Supreme Court will hear arguments in challenge to same-sex marriage ruling Photo by Ty Wright/Getty ImagesThe appeal was brought by Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk who was briefly jailed after refusing to issue marriage licenses for a homosexual couple who are party to the suit.Davis was also ordered to pay $100,000 in damages plus another $260,000 in legal fees, according to her attorneys. Her refusal to issue the marriage license was on religious grounds, raising serious First Amendment questions. Davis' appeal opens: "If ever a case deserved review, the first individual who was thrown in jail post-Obergefell for seeking accommodation for her religious beliefs should be it."Of the three questions presented in the petition, the last reads: "Whether Obergefell v. Hodges ... and the legal fiction of substantive due process, should be overturned."Although Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas have previously indicated a willingness to reconsider Obergefell, Davis' case was always considered to be an uphill battle since four justices would need to assent to hearing it.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Last Tuesday, Zohran Mamdani — a Muslim Democrat socialist — won the New York City mayoral election in a landslide victory over disgraced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Like all socialists, he seduced the city’s financially crushed population, which is nearly everyone in tax-choked NYC, with a mountain of “free” promises: free buses, free childcare, rent freezes, and city-run grocery stores.Of course, anyone with half a brain knows socialism bleeds cities dry every time. It’s death by a thousand tax hikes, crime waves, and empty storefronts.The fiscal meltdown has dominated headlines since Mamdani’s win — but is economic suicide really the Big Apple’s most pressing threat?Lomez, in the debut episode of BlazeTV’s “Rufo and Lomez,” says no. It’s what the radical symbolizes that should really scare us. While Lomez “[doesn’t] like him at all,” he doesn’t think Mamdani’s economic reform or his other progressive policies will be as revolutionary as people are saying.“If I'm looking for the sort of policy daylight between what he might do in New York City versus [former mayor] de Blasio, I think it's pretty thin,” he says.“Do I think Zohran Mamdani is going to impose a kind of communist authoritarianism on New York City? No, I don't. I think things will just kind of get incrementally worse in ways that aren't good,” he predicts.The “key thing” that makes Mamdani scary, he says, is what the radical symbolizes.“Mamdani represents above all else a kind of post-Americanness, a post-white Americanness in particular. I think that's really important,” he says.Lomez points to a clip of Mamdani’s victory speech on election night as evidence of this. In this segment that’s gone viral, he repeatedly thanked not Americans but immigrants for powering his campaign. — (@) “Thank you to those so often forgotten by the politics of our city, who made this movement their own. I speak of Yemeni bodega owners and Mexican abuelas! Senegalese taxi drivers and Uzbek nurses! Trinidadian line cooks and Ethiopian aunties!” he boomed from the podium.“He’s praising the Mexican abuelas and the Senegalese Door Dash drivers ... not Mexican-American, not Senegalese-American, just those things without the hyphen at all,” says Lomez, reminding listeners that “Zohran Mamdani made explicitly anti-white statements during his campaign,” like pitching taxes for white people specifically.“I think that kind of normalization, which is something we've seen from the Democratic Party sort of escalating over the last decade, is the most important part of this, and it's the thing that gives me the most concern.”To hear more, watch the full episode above.Want more from Rufo & Lomez?To enjoy more of the news through the anthropological lens of Christopher Rufo and Lomez, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Graham Platner, the oyster farmer running for the U.S. Senate in Maine, was exposed last month for making a number of damning comments on social media — including posts where he apparently identified as a communist, branded rural white Americans as racists, suggested that service members worried about being raped should buy "Kevlar underwear," and smeared all police officers as "bastards."Although he has since covered it up, Platner was also outed for having a tattoo of a skull image similar to that popularized by Adolf Hitler's SS elite Nazi guard.It appears that Platner, who enjoys the continued support from lawmakers including Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), is far from the most radical candidate seeking election as a Democrat in 2026.The homosexual socialist running as a Democrat to represent Michigan's 7th district in Congress has engaged in bloodthirsty and inflammatory rhetoric that makes Platner's remarks seem tame by comparison.'Radical far-left lunatics like Samuel Smeltzer expose the liberal brain rot that is now the current state of the Democrat Party.'Samuel Smeltzer, a 36-year-old IT contractor who calls himself Elyon Badger and dresses up in an anthropomorphic "furry" costume, has not only stated that "America deserved 9/11," called Jesus "a communist," recommended killing billionaires, labeled Israel as "an enemy of the United States," advocated the imprisonment of all U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, and repeatedly celebrated Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk's assassination, calling him a "massive loser."Within an hour of Kirk's passing, Smeltzer wrote on the liberal X knockoff Bluesky, "Good things can happen." Days later, he shared an image of the murdered father of two with the caption, "How can we defeat evil, if evil is mourned when it's defeated?"RELATED: The left isn’t collapsing — it’s consolidating power Photo by Trent Nelson/The Salt Lake Tribune/Getty ImagesTo ensure there was no mistaking his antipathy for the murder victim, the Democratic candidate smeared Kirk as a "white supremacist who preached stochastic terrorism" in an official campaign statement, blaming the shooting on "gun loving Conservative Christians."The National Republican Congressional Committee called Smeltzer's remarks about Kirk both "dangerous and disgusting" but noted they were unsurprising when only 38% of Democrats think it's always unacceptable to feel joy about the death of a public figure they oppose.Despite his website promising "compassionate leadership for a just future," Smeltzer vowed in a recent post to "round up EVER [sic] SINGLE red hat wearing MAGA and put them in hard labor camps for the rest of their lives."While locking up those with whom he disagrees appears to be one of his key objectives, Smeltzer told the Washington Free Beacon that he is running a "health care and tax-the-rich campaign" and would use a role in Congress to advocate for his fellow "furry" fetishists."The furry community is the ultimate form of freedom in America, and that's why conservatives hate it and the queer community so much," he told the Beacon.Smeltzer recently told the LGBT magazine Between the Lines, "The reason I'm leaning into the furry side of things is the Heritage Foundation has targeted the furry community.""They're going after the queer spaces and organizations where we are allowed to express creative freedom," the self-identified Democratic socialist added.Smeltzer claimed that other candidates in the Democratic primary like former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Bridget Brink "can only trudge along and drag this broken cart through the mud; they can't fix it."Brink reportedly did not respond to the Beacon's request for comment.NRCC spokesman Zach Bannon noted earlier this year, "Radical far-left lunatics like Samuel Smeltzer expose the liberal brain rot that is now the current state of the Democrat Party."Blaze News has reached out to the Michigan Democratic Party as well as Rep. Tom Barrett, the Republican who presently represents Michigan's 7th congressional district and is running for a second term, for comment.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!