'OBAMA BIN LADEN'

Formed in 1975 in New York City, Talking Heads emerged from the city’s vibrant punk scene to become pioneers of new wave music. The band consisted of David Byrne (lead vocals and guitar), Chris Frantz (drums), Tina Weymouth (bass), and Jerry Harrison (keyboards and guitar). Byrne, Frantz, and Weymouth initially met as students at the Rhode Island School of Design before relocating to New York, where they recruited Harrison to complete the lineup. Their debut performance as Talking Heads took place at the renowned CBGB club, a hub for the burgeoning punk movement. Over their active years, Talking Heads released The post Complete List Of Talking Heads Songs From A to Z appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

A father in Fort Worth, Texas, was left in tears after a stranger paid for his family’s breakfast and wrote a heartfelt message on the receipt. The 41-year-old was enjoying a morning out for breakfast with his wife and three children at Mimi’s Cafe when he earned the shout-out from a secret admirer. As they […] The post Stranger Pays Family’s Breakfast Bill and Writes Heartfelt Note Praising Dad appeared first on Good News Network.

Joe Rogan knows a thing or two about Fake News. The Spotify star contracted COVID-19 in 2021 and watched media outlets spread false information about his treatment regimen. Some scribes dubbed Ivermectin “horse paste” even though it previously won a Nobel Prize for use on humans. CNN allegedly doctored footage of the ex-“Fear Factor” host to make him look more yellow and sickly. Rogan even roasted CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta to his face on “The Joe Rogan Experience” for pushing the “horse paste” narrative. Now, Rogan is setting the record straight on Kamala Harris’s failed attempt to join his podcast late in the presidential campaign. The comedian says he has the “receipts” to back it up.   ?BREAKING: Joe Rogan confirms that the Kamala Harris campaign LIED about Joe “not making time for Kamala.” He says that they refused to commit to a time, lied that he was unavailable, pretended they sent someone to view his set, and this lie was Kamala’s team covering their ass. pic.twitter.com/P8K9yBL6H4 — Autism Capital ? (@AutismCapital) February 4, 2025   The initial story came from “Fight: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House” authors Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes. Allen is a Senior National Politics Reporter for NBC News and Parnes is a Hill senior political correspondent. They allege, based on interviews with Harris campaign officials, that Rogan made it hard for the Vice President to appear on his show. the book suggests his camp misled her campaign. The unspoken reason? Team Rogan wanted Trump to win. Now, Rogan is fighting back. And he’s calling Harris’ representatives liars.     “I wanted to release both of [the interviews] on the same day. [That was] my goal. I even offered to do it late that [same] night. So the night that Trump came on, I’m like, ‘What if we do her when she’s done in [Houston], if she came here?’ But no one ever committed to doing it. This is really important, because they keep pretending that I lied.” Harris’ handlers had all sorts of restrictions on any possible Rogan interview, Rogan says. The chat had to be roughly an hour long, even though his show often runs three hours in length. They demanded a stenographer be present during the recording as well as Harris staffers. Plus, some insiders worried about the show’s lack of editing. All of the above made sure the proposed interview never happened. Now, Rogan is disputing the account from “Fight.” “We have all the receipts, by the way,” Rogan added. “Of course, I have a whole list of conversations that took place … I think it’s someone trying to cover their ass for the fact that she never did it, and if she did do it, it might have had a positive effect. [If] we got along great, and [it improved the] ‘young male vote’ things could have been different.” The most embarrassing part? Rogan says the book’s authors never bothered to contact him to get his side of the story. Now, if a reporter is working on deadline that kind of miscue is more forgivable. Time matters, and getting important news to the public fast may mean every “T” can’t be crossed. These authors had all the time a book project offers, and, according to Rogan, they didn’t reach out for his side of the story. Do they have proof that they reached out in the first place? We’ll see. “[The authors] supposedly talked to 150 different people [about] what happened with her coming on the show. They didn’t talk to us, and which is kind of crazy. They didn’t even ask. But they said things that just weren’t true.” Rogan said on his Jan. 4 episode. The Rogan kerfuffle is one more reason Harris lost to Trump on Nov. 5. Even her team couldn’t land the one interview that might have changed the campaign’s momentum.

Against the backdrop of Elon Musk’s budget-cutting initiatives, Washington Post associate editor and MSNBC host Jonathan Capehart got triggered on Friday’s PBS News Hour when the American Enterprise Institute’s Matthew Continetti reminded him that former President Joe Biden abused executive power on his student loan order. Capehart argued that comparisons were “apples and cannonballs” and claimed Biden gets a pass because “he did it to help people.” Host Geoff Bennett kicked things off by asking Continetti, “How do you view Congress really abdicating their role, ceding their power to the executive?” Continetti began by giving a much-needed history lesson, “Well, I think this process of ceding power to the executive is decades in the making, and it's bipartisan. Congress has really just become an investigatory body that delegates tremendous authority to the executive branch of government and the bureaucracy. And we now see the results when you have Trump come in his second term wanting to leave a profoundly changed government in his wake when he departs the Oval Office.”     He then recalled how, “because of acts of Congress, Congress's own denial of its role, the president has enormous power to wield. And let's remember, when President Obama said he had a pen and a phone, the first Trump administration used a lot of executive orders. Joe Biden tried to cancel student debt through executive order.” Continetti claimed that the reason why certain people are freaking out is because that power is now being used in the opposite direction, “This process we're seeing is long in the making. And I think one reason Washington is stunned is that you have an outsider in Elon Musk actually punching the delete button on some of these programs.” Bennett followed up by asking Capehart to respond, “Matthew raised the question I was going to ask you, because that's what I have heard from Republicans this past week, that Democrats can't in good faith criticize Donald Trump, when Joe Biden tried to unilaterally without Congress waive $400 billion worth of student loan debt. And when the Supreme Court said no, ‘you can't do that,’ he basically shrugged and then tried to do it via a piecemeal approach.” A displeased Capehart began, “This is like comparing apples and cannonballs. What we're seeing coming from the Trump administration is executive orders uprooting and upending the federal government. And what makes this all the more galling and terrifying for a lot of people is that he has delegated a lot of power to someone who was elected to no office, to someone who was not confirmed by the Senate.” He further worried, “you have an unelected person, who also happens to be the wealthiest person in the world, and also the wealthiest person in the world who owns a huge social media megaphone, and is able to manipulate the information that the people on that huge platform receive. That's what is so dangerous about what is happening now.” Circling back to Biden, Capehart dusted off the old argument that says whether something is legal or not depends on whether he agrees with it, “we're trying to compare President Biden's executive order on student loans and what Donald Trump is doing, Donald Trump is destroying. President Biden signed an executive order and, yeah, pushed the limits of executive action, but to the benefit of people who were drowning in student debt. He did it in order to help people, not to destroy the government that the American people depend on for a whole host, a whole host of things.” If that’s the standard, Trump and Musk think they are helping people by ensuring that their tax dollars are being spent wisely. Here is a transcript for the February 7 show: PBS News Hour 2/7/2025 7:35 PM ET GEOFF BENNETT: How do you view Congress really abdicating their role, ceding their power to the executive? MATTHEW CONTINETTI: Well, I think this process of ceding power to the executive is decades in the making, and it's bipartisan. Congress has really just become an investigatory body that delegates tremendous authority to the executive branch of government and the bureaucracy. And we now see the results when you have Trump come in his second term wanting to leave a profoundly changed government in his wake when he departs the Oval Office. And you see that, because of acts of Congress, Congress's own denial of its role, the president has enormous power to wield. And let's remember, when President Obama said he had a pen and a phone, the first Trump administration used a lot of executive orders. Joe Biden tried to cancel student debt through executive order. This process we're seeing is long in the making. And I think one reason Washington is stunned is that you have an outsider in Elon Musk actually punching the delete button on some of these programs. BENNETT: Jonathan, Matthew raised the question I was going to ask you, because that's what I have heard from Republicans this past week, that Democrats can't in good faith criticize Donald Trump, when Joe Biden tried to unilaterally, without Congress, waive $400 billion worth of student loan debt. And when the Supreme Court said, “No, you can't do that,” he basically shrugged and then tried to do it via a piecemeal approach. JONATHAN CAPEHART: This is like comparing apples and cannonballs. What we're seeing coming from the Trump administration is executive orders uprooting and upending the federal government. And what makes this all the more galling and terrifying for a lot of people is that he has delegated a lot of power to someone who was elected to no office, to someone who was not confirmed by the Senate. He is accountable to no one, except for maybe, except for maybe President Trump. And President Trump has already said, well, he will only do things that we want him to do. Well, so far, Elon Musk is doing everything that Donald Trump wants to do. That is what is so terrifying about this moment, is that you have an unelected person, who also happens to be the wealthiest person in the world, and also the wealthiest person in the world who owns a huge social media megaphone, and is able to manipulate the information that the people on that huge platform receive. That's what is so dangerous about what is happening now. And as we're trying to compare President Biden's executive order on student loans and what Donald Trump is doing, Donald Trump is destroying. President Biden signed an executive order and, yeah, pushed the limits of executive action, but to the benefit of people who were drowning in student debt. He did it in order to help people, not to destroy the government that the American people depend on for a whole host, a whole host of things.

New York magazine recently published a story called “The Cruel Kids’ Table.” The article was primarily about young right-wingers and their cultural impact as we head into Trump’s second term in 2025. But the content of the story isn’t what interests me. Or at least not right now. It’s the cover photo that accompanies the story. In 2005, it wasn’t difficult to pick out a young, educated conservative from a young, educated liberal based on their clothing and their grooming. It isn’t terribly difficult in 2025 either. A group of young, attractive, well-dressed men and women. Smiling. Laughing. Drinking. Talking. Stark light exaggerating every detail. It feels like some kind of paparazzi photo. It’s an evocative shot, and there has been no shortage of commentary on it. Online left-wingers claim the photo is ugly. The bright flash, blown-out faces, high contrast, and excited laughter are unflattering and make the individuals look menacing. If conservatives don't realize this, it's because they don't understand aesthetics. Conservatives, on the other hand, just see a bunch of well-dressed young people having fun. Anti-aesthetics For the left, the best kind of aesthetics are those that make people look vulnerable or fatalistically defiant. And if vulnerable or fatalistically defiant isn’t possible because the individual is just too attractive and confident, wonky will have to do. Weirdly slouching posture. Slightly depressed face. A rough, brutalist scene will be fine. Or a cutesy one can work too. Something that feels jarring and disorienting, weird and wacky. If pity is impossible, hidden irony is the next best thing. These are some aesthetic values of left-wingers today. Confident happiness, without any ironic subtext, is just not something in their aesthetic lexicon. Terminally online The claim that the photo makes the subjects look nefarious presupposes that you think these types of people — young, attractive men and women wearing dresses and jackets — are the bad guys. Of course terminally online left-wingers think this demographic are the bad guys. But it doesn’t mean you do. And you probably don’t, because you are not a terminally online, bitter left-winger. Still, they might argue that all that set aside, the photography is still intended to make the subjects appear less attractive by an objective measure and conservatives don’t get that the joke is on them. They don’t realize that no one cares about their silly games any more. We just don’t. Gritty photo, smoothed photo, blown-out with flash photo, underexposed photo, overexposed photo, digital camera, Instagram, Polaroid, Photoshop. Who cares? The people in the photo are living rent-free in the heads of hysterical left-wingers. Who’s winning? A new ethos? Some claim that the photo is an example of a new right ethos. Well dressed, young, confident, attractive, etc. The claim is that these things are markers of a new era. I like all these things. They are very good things. But they are not new things on the right. I know that much of society has devolved into pajama-pant world, and the problem of perpetual flip-flop-wearing street urchins is a social disease that impacts both left-wingers and right-wingers alike. But there has always been a bloc of young, well-dressed, confident, and attractive right-wingers. This cohort has been a conservative breeding ground for generations. 1985, 1995, 2005, 2015, and 2025. Take your pick. It’s not new. Dressing well in a traditional sense of the word has been a cultural value among young, successful right-wingers for generations. In 2005, it wasn’t difficult to pick out a young, educated conservative from a young, educated liberal based on their clothing and their grooming. It isn’t terribly difficult in 2025 either. It’s true that amid our cultural degeneration, there has been much neglect in terms of personal aesthetics. Some on the right have tried to distance themselves from, or downgrade the importance of, dressing well, instead joining left-wingers in a race to the bottom. Exit slop world But the truth is that dressing well never really went away. Maybe you were asleep at the wheel and didn’t want to look like a “frat guy” or a “sorority girl,” a “bro” or a “bimbo.” Maybe you decided to cut off your nose to spite your face, forgetting that aesthetics matter. That’s okay. We all make mistakes. But that doesn’t mean everyone else was right there with you. Angry left-wingers will always hate young right-wingers. Their screeching can be ignored. Those who are just now discovering the importance of personal aesthetics are very welcome. It’s a great sign, and I sincerely hope that we see a turn away from slop world and a return to positive aesthetic values. The young, attractive, well-dressed right-wingers on New York magazine’s cover are not a new phenomenon. The photo is a restatement of an important truth. Clothes matter, beauty matters. Happiness and success are winners. It was true yesterday, it’s true today, and it will be true tomorrow.

Dem Sen. Chris Coons Explains Why Funding Iraqi Sesame Street Is Vital for U.S. Nat'l Security

Chicagoans Have Had Enough of Dems' Pro-Illegals Policies: 'The People of Chicago, We Love Trump'

The US Treasury Spent HOW MUCH Illegally? Now You Know Why the Left Wants to Stop DOGE