Adam and Will take a trip to Eerie, Indiana to explore the strange happenings in this unique early 90’s TV series that would not die. Plus discussions of local supernatural lore, bizarre celebrity rumors, teen CONTINUE READING... The post Remember That Show? Ep. 23: Eerie, Indiana appeared first on The Retro Network.

“Free Speech defines us, and that is the awakening that we all have to try to work towards,” George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley says.  Turley made his remarks on this week’s episode of “The Kevin Roberts Show” podcast.  In his recent book, published in June, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” Turley explored why people need free speech to be fully human.   “But, most importantly, what this book tries to say is that we’ve gone through ages of rage, perhaps not as rageful as this one, but we’ve survived,” he said. “But what we’ve learned is that rage doesn’t define us.”  Although governments can reduce people’s appetite for free speech, they can never kill people’s taste for it, Turley said.  “The most revolutionary part of the American Revolution was the First Amendment,” the law professor said. “No nation had ever stated the protection of free speech as succinctly and absolutely as we did, saying that you simply could not abridge [freedom of speech], period.”  But freedom of speech is under attack by many Americans in academia, said Turley, a frequent guest commentator on the Fox News Channel.  “I have a colleague who is leading an effort to amend the First Amendment, because she says that it’s too aggressively individualistic,” he said. “And these are popular views today in academia, and the result is an alliance that we’ve never seen before.”  Every generation thinks they have a unique reason to silence others, Turley said in the podcast.  “In the history of humanity, no censorship system has ever worked,” he said. “It’s never stopped a single idea or a single movement.”  You can hear more of what Turley has to say about America’s periods of rage, the preservation of free speech, and what Americans can do to stand up for their rights here: The post The First Amendment Was ‘the Most Revolutionary Part of the American Revolution,’ Law Professor Turley Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Voters in three Western states will consider ballot measures this November to repeal marriage amendments previously approved by voters. These measures would add redundant legal fortifications to same-sex marriage in anticipation of the day when the current cultural juggernaut consumes its final momentum. The state ballot measures would have no immediate effect on policy, due to the double-layered federal protection that same-sex marriage currently enjoys. The Supreme Court rendered state constitutional provisions defining marriage as one man and one woman unenforceable when its Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) decision unilaterally legalized same-sex marriage. Then in 2022, the U.S. Congress passed the so-called Respect for Marriage Act, which requires all states to recognize any marriage recognized in any other state. However, pro-LGBTQ+ activists want to remove the offending language from state constitutions anyway. The three states where voters will face ballot measures this November are California, Colorado, and Hawaii. California In the 2008 election, 52.3% of California voters approved Proposition 8. According to the official ballot summary, the proposition “changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California” and “provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The proposition responded to the California Supreme Court’s ruling on May 15, 2008, (In re Marriage Cases) that legalized same-sex marriage. The proposition amended the California Constitution by adding Article I, Section 7.5, which states, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The amendment survived a constitutional challenge in state court on June 17, 2009, (Strauss v. Horton) but was ruled unconstitutional under the federal constitution in the Northern District of California on Aug. 4, 2010, (Perry v. Schwarzenegger), five years before the Obergefell decision. In the 2024 election, California voters will consider Proposition 3, which “amends California Constitution to recognize fundamental right to marry, regardless of sex or race” and “removes language in California Constitution stating that marriage is only between a man and a woman.” Colorado In the 2006 election, 55% of Colorado voters approved Amendment 43. The ballot question authorized “an amendment to the Colorado constitution … specifying that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Colorado.” As a result, Section 31 was added to the Colorado Constitution, stating that “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.” In the 2024 election, Colorado’s Amendment J asks voters, “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution removing the ban on same-sex marriages?” Hawaii In the 1998 election, 69.2% of Hawaii voters approved Amendment 2, which asked, “Shall the Constitution of the state of Hawaii be amended to specify that the Legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples?” The amendment added Article I, Section 23 to the Hawaii Constitution, which states, “The legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.” In the 2024 election, Hawaii’s Ballot Question #1 asks voters, “Shall the state constitution be amended to repeal the legislature’s authority to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples?” Status in Other States One other state has previously repealed a marriage amendment. In the 2020 election, 62.43% of Nevada voters approved Ballot Question 2. The measure repealed “an existing provision that only a marriage between a male person and a female person may be recognized and given effect in Nevada” and required that state entities “must recognize marriages of and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender” with a narrowly constructed conscience protection for “religious organizations and members of the clergy.” According to Ballotpedia, 26 other states still have constitutional amendments on record that define “marriage as between one male and one female.” Polling Changes These attempts to establish same-sex marriage in state constitutions may reflect fears that support for same-sex marriage has peaked. While a supermajority (69%) of Americans still believe same-sex marriage should be legal, support among Republicans has slipped below 50%, according to a Gallup survey released in June 2024. Support for same-sex marriage among Republicans dropped from 55% in 2021 and 2022 to 49% in 2023 and 46% in 2024, a 9-percentage-point fall over two years. Such a sudden and precipitous drop may have spooked same-sex marriage activists into action by suggesting that future support for same-sex marriage is not guaranteed. If they are to establish a constitutional endorsement of same-sex marriage, their best chance is now, while they have strong support. Future Implications But ballot measures like California’s have the potential to go much further. “Rather than simply repealing the definition of marriage as one man and one woman, Proposition 3 would have consequences far beyond the legal realm,” Jonathan Keller, president and CEO of the California Family Council, told The Washington Stand. The California Family Council argued that the proposition “opens the door to potentially enshrining … other non-traditional relationships into state law … paving the way for the normalization of polygamy, child marriage, and even incestuous relationships.” “It would send a powerful message about the nature of marriage and the values that underpin our society,” said Keller. “For centuries, marriage has been rooted in the biological realities of procreation and child-rearing. By redefining marriage as a purely individual right, Proposition 3 would sever the connection between marriage and these fundamental purposes and endanger families, children, and society as a whole.” Originally published by The Washington Stand The post Voters in California, Colorado, Hawaii to Consider Ballot Measures Repealing Marriage Amendments appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you are in search of a new chicken recipe to try out then you’ve come to the right place. My Brown Sugar Chicken recipe is full of flavor that the whole family will crave. You can bake, pan-fry, and even grill this recipe but I prefer baked or pan-fried myself. You may want to take a quick inventory of your spice rack because for this recipe you’re going to need 11 tasty herbs, spices, and seasonings which include the brown sugar. Did I mention that all of the seasonings and spices used contain really great health benefits? Brown Sugar Chicken Recipe When it comes to the cooking, if you are pan-frying the chicken I suggest using something like coconut oil for the fry, you can also use a little coconut oil in the pan if you bake it or you can just line your pan with a little bit of water. So here it goes: Ingredients: 4 – 6 Organic Chicken Leg Quarters ¼ Teaspoon Sea Salt ¼ Teaspoon Black Pepper ¼ Teaspoon Ground Ginger ½ Teaspoon Crushed Basil ½ Teaspoon Finely Ground Marjoram ½ Teaspoon Dried Cilantro ½ Teaspoon Paprika ½ Teaspoon Parsley Flakes A very light sprinkle of Rubbed Sage Little less than a ½ Teaspoon Cinnamon 1 ½ Teaspoons Brown Sugar Directions: Preheat your oven to 365 degrees Fahrenheit. Rinse your chicken using cold water before placing in the oil/water lined cast iron skillet or baking pan. I cook using cast irons and it produces a nice even cook. Place your legs into the pan and get your seasonings ready. I literally spice the chicken in the order the ingredients are listed. Try to avoid getting any brown sugar into the bottom of the pan because it can cause sticking. Once the chicken is well-seasoned toss it into the oven for about 1 hour 15 minutes. It’s good to check on the chicken about every half hour to move it around to avoid sticking or overcooking. Some ovens cook differently so it might take more or less time. The cinnamon can cause a little bit of a dark color on top of the chicken – don’t worry it’s not burnt. Another thing about the cinnamon is that it is an appetite stimulant so for those who might not have been hungry when dinner started preparing the chicken are more than likely to be ready to eat once they smell it cooking. This chicken goes well with so many different sides but my favorite are Jasmine Rice and Steamed Veggies. I hope you try this recipe and please feel free to let us know how it turned out for you. I hope you enjoy it as much as we do. Happy Cooking! Up Next: 15 Healing Herbs And Spices To Grow In Your Garden Follow us on facebook, instagram, pinterest, and twitter!

Who Would Have Guessed a Pre-Election Round of Student Debt Dumping Was Imminent?

Kamala's Catholic Problem II: Al Smith Dinner Boogaloo

CBS is turning more Orwellian by the day. Last month, the network reprimanded their own journalist for being a journalist. This week, they’re re-defining gender. To celebrate “Trans Empowerment Month,” "CBS Mornings" invited leaders of the “support” group, “Stand with Trans” on their show to air their gender delusions. The group's founder is a mother who transitioned her 13-year-old biological daughter. Joining her on the panel was her “non-binary” “trans-empowerment month program coordinator.” The program’s trio of hosts began their segment by asking the mother, Roz Keith, “what” she was “looking for back then” in 2013, when her daughter “came out as transgender.” “Some validation for me as a parent,” admitted Keith. That’s where the trouble always begins. To “validate” herself, she therefore validated her daughter’s identity crisis. After “hitting a brick wall” calling up medical professionals who all thought she was crazy, Keith said she had finally found a “doctor” who agreed to Frankenstein her daughter, what CBS host Vladimir Duthiers described as “gender affirming care.” Then the cameras panned over to her co-panelist Dubbs Weinblatt, a “nonbinary trans person." “For folks who don’t know what that is… When I was born, I was assigned female at birth,” said Weinblatt, donning a beard and a T-shirt that reads “Protect Trans Kids.” “As I grew up and I understood myself more and more, I realized that my gender identity, how I knew myself on the inside, did not align,” she insisted. Weinblatt says she came to this conclusion because her crushes “were not heterosexual.” In other words… she’s actually just a Lesbian.  She complained she grew up in the 1980’s where there were “no resources,” meaning adults weren’t forced yet to go along with the delusions of the mentally ill.  Now, 40 years later, Weinblatt’s distortion of reality landed her a prime TV spot with three virtue-signaling hosts tripping over themselves to praise her.  Nodding along was co-host Tony Dokoupil, fresh out of the re-education session CBS recently forced him to attend. It seems he learned his lesson not to ask any questions, after the network punished him for questioning a Hamas supporter in September. 

Former Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was interviewed by journalist Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday’s PBS edition of Amanpour & Co (after airing on CNN International). The hook was Pelosi’s book The Art of Power, and together they hated on Israel, Israel’s conservative leader Benjamin Netanyahu, and America’s former Republican president Donald Trump: Amanpour asked Pelosi, "...do you think this country can survive another term?" Christiane Amanpour: Let me ask you first before we get to your book about current affairs. We've just had this terrible report about the Israeli strikes on Gaza and Lebanon. Now, as they continue their counteroffensives, we've seen an attack on U.N. peacekeepers in Lebanon, and we've seen over the weekend some pretty dire attacks on refugee camp, on various areas that dozens have been killed including children. I just wonder your response to that, given America is the most important ally. Pelosi offered a few seconds of boilerplate toughness, then pivoted to the left-wing line on innocent Gaza civilians being assaulted by Israel. Nancy Pelosi: The fact is that we just a few days ago observed a one-year anniversary of a terrible assault on Israel by Hamas, a terrorist group dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Sadly, since then, we've seen many casualties of noncombatants, children and families in Gaza, and now some elsewhere in the region, and it's just intolerable….We've all been talking about a two-state solution for a long time, for Israel and for the Palestinians. The current leader in Israel does not agree to that, even though for about 30 years, since like '93, we had been talking about that. I don't know if Netanyahu wants peace. I don't know if he's capable of peace…. Amanpour: He actually came to the Congress not so long ago. What did you make of that invitation and the way he spoke against your party and your administration? After Pelosi raged against Netanyahu’s speech to Congress, Amanpour brought up her book. Amanpour: You have said in your book, “I know Donald Trump's mental imbalance. I had seen it up close. His denial and then delays when the COVID pandemic struck. His penchant for repeatedly stomping out of meetings. His foul mouth. His pounding on tables, his temper tantrums, his disrespect for our nation's patriots, and his total separation from reality and actual events.” How did you deal with that? And do you think this country, your country, can survive another term? Pelosi: Well, I've said it over and over again, one term, our country is strong enough to withstand. But when you see what -- he's even gotten worse since I wrote that. He's saying in this campaign that he will criminalize any comments that are criticizing his actions. He'll criminalize freedom of speech…. PBS eagerly accepts anti-Trump conspiracy theories. Amanpour made a bit of news when she prodded Pelosi into admitting she had not spoken to President Biden since July after moving to force him to drop his re-election bid. Pelosi: I haven't spoken to him since July, but of course, we've been out of session for a while, and I've been on the campaign trail constantly. I have great respect for the president…. Amanpour aired a segment of Trump’s comments to Fox News journalist Maria Bartiromo about “the enemy from within….radical left lunatics” that could be handled “if really necessary by the military.” Amanpour: He probably includes you in the radical left and probably includes you as an enemy from within. National Guard, military? Amanpour teed up a leading question about “Trump Derangement Syndrome” for Pelosi to smack. Amanpour: ….Trump, his supporters in his campaign would say, people like yourself or whoever says the kind of things you're saying about him and warning about, the authoritarianism, the threat to democracy, they say, quote/unquote, "Trump Derangement Syndrome." That everybody's just hysterical, things were great under his presidency, and there's no need to fear. Pelosi showed her true liberal colors in her anti-GOP response rant, in which the former speaker out-deplored Hillary Clinton’s notorious “deplorables” comment. Pelosi: ….some people are just very anti-, anti-woman, anti-newcomer, anti-LGBTQ, anti-diversity, and the rest, and we’ll never get their vote. And then, very rich people, billionaires, they don't want to pay taxes, they don't want any regulation of clean air, clean water, any of that, they just wanted not to pay taxes….

Co-host Joy Behar went on an unhinged rant on "The View" and misrepresented statements from former President Donald Trump to panic her audience into voting for his opponent.'I think that to say that he's a fascist is completely accurate. I mean, it does fit the definition.' Behar repeated a popular narrative that claimed Trump said that he plans to use the military to attack his political opponents once he gets into office if elected again. "Let's talk about fascism for second, because that came up also," said Behar. “This is the definition. It’s defined as a political movement that embraces the far-right nationalism and the forceful suppression of any opposition, all overseen by an authoritarian government. That definition has Trump's picture next to it in the dictionary,” she said to light laughter from the audience. "I mean, he wants to send the military to attack liberals if he gets in. That is basically ... and the king of fascism is Mussolini who spoke better English than he does, by the way," she continued. "And so, I think that to say that he's a fascist is completely accurate. I mean, it does fit the definition. He wants to send the military in to attack his opponents. I mean, what more do you need to hear?" Behar was likely referring to comments Trump made while speaking with Fox News. Trump, however, made the statements while responding to a question about possible unrest at the U.S. Capitol from protesters on Election Day. "I think the bigger problem is the enemy within. Not even the people who have come in and destroyed our country," Trump responded. "I don't think we have a problem in terms of Election Day. I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people; we have some sick people, radical left lunatics," he continued. "And it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by [the] National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can't let that happen." The misrepresentation was repeated by Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris during an interview with Bret Baier of Fox News. Baier corrected Harris, but she nevertheless persisted in her error. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Biden-Harris administration continues to coddle Iran despite being labeled a State Sponsor of Terrorism since 1984 — and Mark Levin is absolutely disturbed. “The behavior of the Harris-Biden-Blinken administration — this isn’t normal. One of Blinken’s boyhood best friends is a guy named Robert Malley. Robert Malley is under criminal investigation,” Levin of “LevinTV” explains. Malley is under criminal investigation because classified information was passed from his operation to the Iranians. “He was the envoy to Iran. Picked by Blinken, approved by Biden to negotiate the nuclear deal. He’s an Iranian sympathizer or worse. Under him, there was a little beehive of spies who are also providing information and exchanging emails with the foreign minister of Iran,” Levin says. However, the Biden administration has been attempting to cover up from Congress and from the press the extent to which Malley and others were involved in releasing classified information with the Iranians. “Now, ladies and gentlemen, in most normal countries, this would be a massive scandal,” Levin says. “This is an unparalleled scandal in American history.” “You want to know why Iran gets hundreds of billions of dollars? You want to know why they hate Netanyahu at this White House more than they hate the Islamo-Nazi who runs Iran? You want to know why they won’t defend our soldiers? They won’t defend our ships?” he asks. “I think what’s going on here is our relationships, some could be financial, some could be ideological. Maybe it’s something else. Maybe it’s all the above between actors in our government and at the highest level of the Iranian regime. Otherwise, none of this makes sense to me.” “What’s being done is against America’s best interest; it’s against the best interest, obviously, of Israel,” he continues, adding, “I believe treason is taking place.” Want more from Mark Levin?To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.