Imagine a world where the sight of abandoned cats and dogs is all too common‚ a heartbreaking reality that’s hard to ignore. Yet‚ in the U.S.‚ we’re fortunate to have incredible rescue services at our disposal‚ a luxury not available worldwide due to funding constraints. The Greek Islands‚ known for their breathtaking beauty‚ face a... The post Small puppy abandoned outside supermarket huddles in box and calls out for help appeared first on Animal Channel.

Does anyone remember back when the 25th Amendment could suddenly become a hot topic of discussion on the airwaves for pretty much any reason whatsoever? It was back between about 2017 and 2020‚ coincidentally around the same time that the media’s least favorite person ever was president of the United States. Now that there’s a Democrat in office‚ there seems to exist no possible combination of incompetence and overt senility that could force anyone in the corporate TV news world to suggest invoking the 25th. Most readers will at least vaguely remember the 25th Amendment being brought up with relative frequency back during the Trump years. But it’s hard to emphasize just how in love with it the corporate media really were. As one of just two procedural tools that could be used to remove a sitting president from office‚ liberal journalists clung to it like a security blanket. We’ve put together a compilation to demonstrate the extent of the media’s love for the 25th Amendment under Trump. Just for the added challenge‚ we left out clips from 2017‚ which was far and away the year most heavily laden with talk of using it.     Admittedly‚ we were even surprised at just how much it was actually invoked; we found over 600 search results for “25th amendment” on Nexis alone‚ and that’s TV transcripts only. Former West Wing writer and current MSNBC conspiracy theorist Lawrence O’Donnell deserves a special mention here. This man was talking about the 25th Amendment within less than a month of Trump taking office‚ and he spent the next three and a half years bragging about how early he’d brought it up. In O’Donnell’s mind‚ basically‚ everything was 25th Amendment territory. He brought on multiple deeply political psychologists to diagnose the President with all manner of neuroses that supposedly rendered him incapable of serving. That particularly ugly brand of credentialism ended up catching on‚ and soon both O’Donnell’s colleagues and various CNN hosts were wheeling doctors in front of cameras to wring their hands and gravely opine about Trump’s disturbed cognitive state. Fast forward to 2024‚ and we’ve got Robert Hur’s report telling us what most Americans already knew: President Joe Biden was extremely old‚ and maybe kind of senile. Yet oddly‚ the only mentions of the 25th Amendment we can find on SnapStream or Nexis are in the form of “Republicans Pounce!” stories. On the February 9 edition of CNN News Central during the 11 a.m. Eastern hour‚ host Sara Sidner said of Hur’s report: Now the GOP lawmakers are using this as a springboard to call for Biden’s removal from office under the 25th Amendment. The House GOP leadership saying‚ quote‚ “He is certainly unfit for the Oval Office.” The following day on that same network‚ host Chris Wallace remarked that Congressional Republicans were “piling on” in calling for the President’s removal. Where are all the mercenary psychiatrists with their politically-motivated armchair diagnoses? Where are all the excited conversations about the President “losing it?” Why isn’t Lawrence O’Donnell out there chanting “25th Amendment” every third sentence? That’s all rhetorical‚ of course. Obviously‚ it’s because Biden was a Democrat‚ and that means it’s the media’s job to protect him‚ not go after him. Admittedly‚ the odds of Biden being removed from office under the 25th Amendment are no higher than the odds were that it would be used against Trump. But boy‚ is the corporate media coverage different.

MSNBC’s Joy Reid and Katie Phang were not happy on the Thursday edition of The ReidOut that Fulton County D.A. Fani Willis has had to defend herself against accusations that hiring Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor in the RICO-election case against Donald Trump represents a conflict of interest. The two played both the race and sexism cards against Willis’s critics‚ but the only thing they proved was that identity politics turns your brain into mush‚ as Phang‚ a lawyer‚ couldn’t understand the difference between the prosecution and the defense. Reid took the opportunity to do a little self-promotion‚ “Well‚ and the thing is‚ Katie‚ you‚ as a woman of color‚ who have to stand in a courtroom‚ you know this all too well. Yeah‚ look‚ I have a book about this‚ about the way they did this to Myrlie Evers-Williams: be pretty‚ but not too pretty. Be forceful‚ but not too forceful. Don't be loud‚ don't be angry.”     Defending Willis in a way she never defended Brett Kavanaugh‚ Reid continued: Excuse me‚ if you're questioning my integrity and accusing me of hiring somebody that I was having an affair with when I'm telling you the timeline and then asking did my kids live at my house? You want to know how much money I have? Is he giving me cash? She was insulted and rightfully so. This idea that women of color have to sit there and be demure and take it‚ there were people on social media saying "oh‚ she's coming in too hot." No‚ she wasn't. She was offended and she had a right to be offended.  Phang began by claiming‚ “Yeah‚ so you know‚ there is something to be said about decorum and professionalism‚ but you didn't hear anything that wasn't decorum and professionalism from Fani Willis. I'm glad you bring about the example of being a woman of color‚ especially in a courtroom.” Also reaching for the identity politics bag of tricks‚ Phang added‚ “There are more women that are in law school than there ever was when I was in law school‚ but the problem is when it comes to women of color‚ we're so sorely‚ sorely underrepresented when it comes to court. Especially‚ especially‚ Joy‚ when it comes to trials. When it comes to trial lawyers and so for a woman to have to defend the fact that she makes her own money‚ the fact her daddy told her to make sure she had money stashed away. My mom told me the same damn thing.” Later‚ she ranted‚ “In fact‚ in this case‚ you have lawyers on the defense side that are married to each other. You have lawyers on the defense side that are dating each other‚ and yet nobody has made a big stink about that. It is only the defense making a big stink about that for Fani Willis.” Yes‚ because the prosecution has the power of the state and the defense‚ by definition‚ does not initiate cases. Wasn’t Phang supposed to be the legal expert? Still‚ Phang concluded by urging people to remember‚ “The important thing that everybody has to remember what Fani Willis said today is this: she's not on trial. It's the people that tried to steal an election in the state of Georgia that are on trial. This is a sad‚ sorry side show that needs to end.” Maybe Willis should’ve considered that before bringing Wade onboard. Here is a transcript for the February 15 show: MSNBC The ReidOut 2/15/2024 7:11 PM ET JOY REID: Well‚ and the thing is‚ Katie‚ you‚ as a woman of color‚ who have to stand in a courtroom‚ you know this all too well. Yeah‚ look‚ I have a book about this‚ about the way they did this to Myrlie Evers-Williams: be pretty‚ but not too pretty. Be forceful‚ but not too forceful. Don't be loud‚ don't be angry.  Excuse me‚ if you're questioning my integrity and accusing me of hiring somebody that I was having an affair with when I'm telling you the timeline and then asking did my kids live at my house? You want to know how much money I have? Is he giving me cash? She was insulted and rightfully so. This idea that women of color have to sit there and be demure and take it‚ there were people on social media saying "oh‚ she's coming in too hot." No‚ she wasn't. She was offended and she had a right to be offended.  KATIE PHANG: Yeah‚ so you know‚ there is something to be said about decorum and professionalism‚ but you didn't hear anything that wasn't decorum and professionalism from Fani Willis. I'm glad you bring about the example of being a woman of color‚ especially in a courtroom. There are more women that are in law school than there ever was when I was in law school‚ but the problem is when it comes to women of color‚ we're so sorely‚ sorely underrepresented when it comes to court.  Especially‚ especially‚ Joy‚ when it comes to trials. When it comes to trial lawyers and so for a woman to have to defend the fact that she makes her own money‚ the fact her daddy told her to make sure she had money stashed away.  My mom told me the same damn thing. REID: Same. PHANG: Make sure that you have money stashed away to take care of yourself because you shouldn't count on someone else‚ right Errin? And that's the thing. Why should anybody have to defend this? But under the law‚ unfortunately‚ because the other side made these representations that met this threshold that forced this evidentiary hearing to have to come to pass‚ that is the reason why Fani Willis and Nathan Wade got dragged into court‚ but I will remind our viewers too‚ Joy‚ under Georgia law‚ you do not disqualify a prosecutor simply because there is a personal relationship. In fact‚ in this case‚ you have lawyers on the defense side that are married to each other. You have lawyers on the defense side that are dating each other‚ and yet nobody has made a big stink about that. It is only the defense making a big stink about that for Fani Willis.  The important thing that everybody has to remember what Fani Willis said today is this: she's not on trial. It's the people that tried to steal an election in the state of Georgia that are on trial. This is a sad‚ sorry side show that needs to end.

A group of cops with an Atlantic Coast police department in Central Florida tried to lighten the mood on Valentine's Day with a satirical social media post‚ filled with chocolates and jokes. But sadly‚ not everyone was laughing.On Wednesday‚ the Port Orange Police Department took to Facebook and offered to rescue area singles from loneliness on the lovers' holiday by spending the day with them. All interested bachelors and bachelorettes had to do to win some special one-on-one time with a local police officer was complete one simple task: "Commit a crime.""We know you're lonely on Valentine's Day‚" the post said‚ "but don't worry‚ we have a way! Just commit a crime and we'll come to you‚ we'll bring the chocolates and the handcuffs too."Lest anyone mistake the humorous intent of the message‚ the post also included white and pink heart emojis. A picture of five smiling officers‚ four males and one female‚ holding various Valentine's Day sweets‚ including a box of chocolates and a box of doughnuts‚ was included for good measure.Despite the post's clear levity‚ some Facebook users insisted on taking it seriously. Very seriously."I would think you would be encouraging people not to commit crimes‚" one user wrote."That's cute. Police encouraging people to break the law‚ so they can make an arrest? Why not just make something up?" another wrote in part."While the creativity is noted‚ let’s aim to keep our community space positive and supportive‚ especially on days like Valentine’s Day‚" said yet another Facebook marm. "Instead of encouraging actions like 'just commit a crime and we’ll come to you‚' let’s spread love and kindness instead."The post also received a lot of positive reactions from those with a sense of humor. Not only did hundreds of people like‚ love‚ or laugh at it‚ but some even decided play along. "Careful.... Some people will do anything for a donut‚" one user quipped with a winking emoji."Only if you guys use the fluffy pink cuffs‚" joked another."Officer Vasquez I've been bad!" claimed one female user.There have been no reports of otherwise law-abiding citizens in Port Orange committing a criminal offense in the hopes of finding true love with a member of law enforcement after reading that Facebook message. POPD did not respond to the Daytona Beach News-Journal's request 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!

Popular video game franchise Tomb Raider received an in-game content warning for "offensive depictions" and "racial" prejudices for a recent remastered release‚ but it was not censored.Tomb Raider I-III Remastered‚ released on February 14‚ 2024‚ was a re-release of classic Lara Croft video games that have historically had massive sales. In fact‚ 2013‚ 2015‚ and 2018 iterations of the game were more successful than their predecessors‚ with the franchise having sold a total of over 75 million units throughout its life span.The games even spawned movies starring Angelina Jolie in the early 2000s‚ with another version released in 2018.While production house Crystal Dynamics chose not to censor or delete any portions for the remastered version‚ the art did come accompanied by an in-game warning about its content from the ancient times of 1996-1998."The games in this collection contain offensive depictions of people and cultures rooted in racial and ethnic prejudices. These stereotypes are deeply harmful‚ inexcusable‚ and do not align with our values at Crystal Dynamics‚" a prompt in the game read."Rather than removing this content‚ we have chosen to present it here in its original form‚ unaltered‚ in the hopes that we may acknowledge its harmful impact and learn from it‚" the warning concluded. What\u2019s going on with the Tomb Raider Remastered Collecti\u2026.oh. — (@) Although the developers did not provide details as to which specific portions of any of the three games were deemed offensive‚ fans and outlets such as Bounding into Comics have pointed to some educated guesses.One such guess was an enemy called a "tribesman" from the third game. The characters purported to be from Polynesia and "shoot poison darts from blowguns" and killed and ate explorers on multiple occasions.Apparently the controversy is not that the Tomb Raider remasters include dated racial stereotypes‚ but that they put the warning there for no reasonidk I mean I am pretty woke but uhhhhh https://t.co/eqzsGF4RUP— Celwynvian 🏳️🌈 (@Celwynvian) February 14‚ 2024 Another pixelated tribesman is depicted with a strong accent in a cutscene. However‚ the harsh polygonal character modeling of the mid-1990s makes it hard to imagine that any person was particularly offended.The character is described killing and eating a "white fella" who brought him a "magic stone."Tomb Raider wasn't the only remaster of note to receive a warning in its new version. Capcom's Mega Man Battle Network warned players that the company "values diversity and inclusivity within its games.""Please be aware the games in this collection may contain some cases of insensitive cultural depictions and are presented as originally created to preserve their authenticity‚" the warning added.While such warnings would likely be fit to serve a newer‚ more sensitive audience‚ it is indeed a strange move for gaming companies to criticize their own material that is likely being replayed by those who enjoyed the titles originally. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) learned on Thursday that he should be better prepared the next time he wants to interrogate a former judge.At a House Oversight subcommittee hearing on "The Consequences of Catch and Release at the Border‚" Goldman challenged Matt O'Brien‚ a former immigration judge in Virginia‚ on his assertion that President Joe Biden has the authority to shut down the border. Democrats‚ in an effort to protect Biden‚ have said this is not true."Under what authority do you refer to?" Goldman challenged."As I said‚ Section 1182(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act‚ which was the statutory provision that was at issue in Trump v. Hawaii‚" O'Brien answered. "It's a provision that allows the president by proclamation to temporarily suspend the admission of certain classes of aliens into the United States."Indeed‚ Section 1182(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act is clear:Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States‚ he may by proclamation‚ and for such period as he shall deem necessary‚ suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants‚ or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Not addressing the substance of O'Brien's response‚ Goldman then targeted Donald Trump."So why didn't Donald Trump use that?" Goldman asked."He did — that's why the Trump v. Hawaii case went all the way to the Supreme Court‚" O'Brien explained. — (@) The Supreme Court‚ in fact‚ ruled in Trump's favor in 2018. The court agreed that Section 1182(f) "grants the president broad discretion to suspend the entry of aliens into the United States."In a follow-up question‚ Goldman asked why Trump relied on Title 42 for mass deportations. O'Brien explained that happened during the COVID-19 pandemic because Title 42 is designed for a "public health crisis‚" whereas 1182(f) is "a general power to manage the border in confrontation of a crisis."Not surprisingly‚ Goldman chose to ask O'Brien no further questions.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Despite what you might think‚ “there are good people out there‚” says Dave Rubin. Thankfully‚ there was more than one Good Samaritan attending the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl parade. When more than one shooter opened fire on the crowd‚ resulting in one death and over twenty injuries‚ a couple of attendees took it upon themselves to detain one of the perpetrators. Dave plays the footage of the exact moment bystanders tackled one of the shooters. One of the main civilians involved in the gunman’s takedown was Paul Contreras‚ whom Dave calls “a true American hero.” When interviewed‚ Contreras said that he “didn’t think about it” and just reacted. “As I'm tackling him‚ I see his weapon either fall out of his hand or out of his sleeve‚” he said. That’s when he knew he had “to take this guy down.” “Just a good man who saw something and did something‚” says Dave. Unfortunately‚ “the media and the Democrats and everybody else will say‚ ‘We need to get rid of guns … we need more gun laws‚’” he says. To see the footage‚ watch the clip below. Want more from Dave Rubin?To enjoy more honest conversations‚ free speech‚ and big ideas with Dave Rubin‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

You’re dead now‚ but don’t worry. We all are. The civil war began a few weeks ago‚ and it absolutely murdered us all. As Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Will Bunch explained on January 25‚ “Eagle Pass is today’s Fort Sumter‚” the place where the war starts. The first shots of a national conflagration were imminent last month. Texas Governor Greg Abbott‚ Bunch wrote‚ was “channeling the Confederate spirit‚” and Joe Biden had “only two choices‚” immediate military confrontation or sniveling weakness. The president must seize control of the Texas National Guard and “order Abbott’s confederates to retreat‚” Bunch concluded. We live in state of inflicted hysteria‚ with a news media that has no setting “but diaper-soiling panic.” Posting on the site formerly known as Twitter the very next day‚ the important Pentagon-funded scholar Caroline Orr Bueno added terrifying new information: Trump’s deadly army of personal stormtroopers was on the march‚ locked and loaded and headed for the border. “They heeded Trump’s call to start an insurrection on Jan. 6th‚” she wrote. “If you think they won’t heed his call to arms in Texas‚ you’re not understanding what’s happening here.” So‚ you know‚ insurrection and civil war are obviously well under way now‚ and the federal government is fighting on the battlefield for the total control of Texas‚ because the only other option is to conclude that a bunch of journalists and scholars are hysterical ninnies who are always wrong. We live in state of inflicted hysteria‚ with a news media that has no setting “but diaper-soiling panic‚” which is one past 10 on the amplifier volume dial. Orange Man Bad is obsolete. We’re now in the time of Orange Man Literally Hitler Mass Slaughter Civil War Insurrection Putin Putin Putin. Be sure to scream that last non-sentence‚ by the way‚ while punching yourself in the face‚ urine trickling down your pantleg. Do it just right and you may get hired as a mainstream journalist. In a recent speech‚ Donald Trump said that he told the leaders of NATO countries that he wouldn’t bother to defend them if they don’t spend more money on their militaries to defend themselves. Forbes explained his comments under a headline about babies being murdered‚ then went on to explain that Trump means he wants Europeans to be raped and to have their genitals mutilated while their infants are slaughtered. Think I’m exaggerating? See for yourself. I propose four explanations. First‚ this caterwauling is the noise people make when they know no one is listening. They’re shouting because you’re walking away. Every major news media organization is in crisis‚ descending into mass layoffs. If things get worse‚ they may have to stop subsidizing reportorial prescriptions for anti-anxiety medications‚ which is the end of the road for professional mainstream journalism. Second‚ the manufactured hysteria also gives journalists cover to escape self-examination over the trajectory of their business. The Los Angeles Times lost nearly a quarter of its newsroom to layoffs in January‚ then ran a post-layoff opinion piece about the deep importance of throwing soup on paintings to stop climate change. They scream to stop themselves from thinking. About themselves. Third‚ it’s a covering noise‚ a hysteria to shift your attention‚ because real things are happening that merit close engagement. The liberal journalists Michael Shellenberger‚ Matt Taibbi‚ and Alex Gutentag have been breaking one important story after another on Public‚ a Substack newsletter. Sample headline and a must-read story: “CIA Had Foreign Allies Spy On Trump Team‚ Triggering Russia Collusion Hoax‚ Sources Say.” And so … Oh no! Look over there! “Insurrection” is a shiny object flashed at you‚ with considerable desperation‚ to divert your eye. And finally‚ hysterical news is a product of hysterical minds‚ a natural tendency based in personal psychology. There is‚ let’s put this very gently‚ a certain kind of mind that catastrophizes as a matter of habit. I find myself frequently thinking lately about the former Ottawa City Council Member Diane Deans‚ who famously exploded in a rage over police failures to crush the Freedom Convoy — and expressed particular fury over the convoy’s use of “that damn bouncy castle.” Many ragey killjoys go into politics and journalism. Dehystericize. Get manufactured panic out of your life. Look‚ in particular‚ for news that pretends to tell you what’s going to happen: We’re going to have a civil war over Eagle Pass! News about the future isn’t invariably written in bad faith‚ but news about things that have really happened has the advantage of being grounded in provable reality rather than speculation. We have too many real problems to fix to spend time on made-up future hypothetical media emergencies. Find some reality to deal with‚ and for crying out loud don’t ever read anything from Will Bunch. You’ll thank me for that sentence. DURING THE WORST DAYS OF THE UPCOMING CIVIL WAR‚ I mean.

A recent report on the impact of gun violence on black Americans is yet another reminder that the main problem with Black Lives Matter is its ideology‚ not its shady financial practices. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence found that black people account for 61% of firearm homicide victims despite being 14% of the population. Homicide is the leading cause of death for young black men and second leading cause of incarceration among black inmates in state prisons‚ but BLM has consistently ignored both. Here are 10 principles that would power a movement that is serious about the value of black lives. Another fundamental problem with BLM is rarely addressed. A true Black Lives Matter movement would speak to — not about — black people. It would make the case for the value of black life to the people who most need to hear it today.The slogans and signage of a true BLM movement would have been posted in neighborhoods where young black men are shot and killed by their peers. It would have been drawn in chalk in front of every Planned Parenthood location where black babies are aborted every day. Here are 10 principles that would power a movement that is serious about the value of black lives. 1. Black people are created in the image of God and therefore have inherent dignity and worth. Like all human beings‚ our lives matter because of our Creator‚ not our skin color‚ income‚ political views‚ or history. We will never fully appreciate who we are until we acknowledge whose we are. 2. There are only two sexes: male and female. Switching is not allowed. We believe men and women are equal in dignity and worth but different in form and function. We need one another and refuse to give in to the temptation to vilify each other because of the current condition of our lives‚ relationships‚ families‚ and communities. 3. The family is the most important social unit in every culture‚ and marriage — one man joined to one woman for one lifetime — is its cornerstone. We reject any attempts to redefine sex or marriage based on political pressure or changing social norms. 4. Children have a right to the affection and protection of the man and woman who created them. The best environment for them to exercise that right is in a loving‚ low-conflict home with their married biological mother and father. When it comes to family formation‚ the needs of children should always trump the desires of adults. 5. We refuse to kill our offspring to achieve a twisted definition of “liberation.” We believe children are a gift from God‚ and we refuse to send them back to Him unopened and destroyed. 6. We do not promote‚ defend‚ or excuse any cultural content that glorifies violence between black men‚ degrades black women‚ or promotes drug abuse among black youth. The fact that a small number of black people profit from cultural pollution is not a valid excuse for allowing entertainers to promote ideas and lifestyles to our children that they wouldn’t to their own. 7. We honor our past by respecting our elders and refusing to appropriate their struggle for personal or political gain. We also endeavor to spend our time‚ talent‚ and treasure building families‚ communities‚ and institutions for our descendants. 8. We believe in redemption and mercy‚ but we refuse to treat criminals who inflict pain on innocent people as an oppressed group. We believe that the victims of violent crime‚ as well as their families‚ deserve far more sympathy and media coverage than the people who terrorize their own neighborhoods. 9. Political views are not a litmus test of racial authenticity or communal concern. We refuse to allow political parties to tell us we aren’t really “black” if we don’t vote for them. Like all other American citizens‚ our involvement in politics should begin with an assessment of our values‚ principles‚ and interests‚ not the candidates on the ballot. 10. We refuse to value the thoughts‚ words‚ and deeds of white people more than we value our own. We acknowledge that white people can’t be both the cause of all our problems and the source of our solutions. We reject the notion that carrying ourselves with dignity is an attempt to appeal to the “white gaze.” It doesn’t take much effort to show how drastically different a true BLM movement would have been from the one founded by Alicia Garza‚ Patrisse Cullors‚ and Ayo (Opal) Tometi. Those three women want to destroy the nuclear family and believe black women are divine. They think men can become pregnant but didn’t mention the words “husband” or “father” a single time while talking about black families. The women who started Black Lives Matter‚ much like the broader black leadership class‚ are obsessed with getting validated and affirmed by the people they think really matter. This is why they are typically nowhere to be found at murder scenes in the inner city. Activists in 2020 preferred to spend their time trying to get white diners to raise their fists in solidarity and parrot their slogans. These acts of performative activism might help assuage the guilt of white liberals and pay for the homes of black radicals‚ but the black community will never progress as long as we demand that other people value our lives more than we do.

No matter where you drive in America‚ be it the California freeways‚ West Texas straightaways‚ or the winding switchbacks of Appalachia‚ you'll find them. Or rather‚ they'll find you‚ the way they always seem to. Just when you're ready to open it up a little bit‚ there they are. Blithely puttering along in front of you‚ unconcerned that they're the only thing between you and the freedom of the open road. I'm talking about the dreaded LLBs: the left-lane blockers. You are Captain Kirk‚ itching to put the USS Enterprise's warp drive through its paces. The left-lane blocker‚ on other hand‚ is all Spock: "I'm going the posted speed limit." If this doesn't ring a bell‚ I'm afraid there's a good chance you're one of them. Here's a quick quiz to help you figure it out. When you enter a multiple-lane highway‚ do you find yourself instinctively‚ mysteriously drawn in a specific direction‚ like some kind of migrating bird? Irresistibly drifting left‚ more left‚ and ever lefterer until you're hugging the shoulder of the leftmost lane? Does this lane‚ for gut-level reasons you can't quite explain‚ feel like home? A sanctuary that not even the phalanx of vehicles stacking up behind you‚ with their honking horns‚ flashing lights‚ and middle-digit-extending motorists‚ can disturb? No? Good. Let's talk about how to solve this problem. The mind of an LLB is quite legalistic. It does not respond to emotion. You are Captain Kirk‚ itching to put the USS Enterprise's warp drive through its paces. The LLB‚ on other hand‚ is all Spock: "I'm going the posted speed limit. I've paid my registration fees‚ as well as the taxes that help fund this road. Therefore‚ I'm entitled to use any part of it — and I choose here. Your frustration that I'm in front of you is highly illogical." Now‚ there is a legal solution to this. State troopers in my home state‚ the People’s Republic of Illinois‚ do have the power to issue tickets to LLBs‚ but they rarely do. I did the math: The most recent annual numbers I got from the state showed a total of 117‚953 speeding citations and 84‚257 written warnings. In contrast‚ LLBs (which are classified as “reckless driving”) reached — are you ready? — 287 in total. Remember‚ not all reckless driving citations are for left-lane blocking‚ so it’s an even smaller percentage of the total mix. If the stick doesn't work‚ it's time to try a carrot. Working for the Milan-based Alfa Romeo racing program has led me to log a decent number of hours on the Italian Autostrada. What I’m going to suggest is quite commonplace there‚ as it is on Germany's Autobahn and the French Autoroute (where they have specific lanes for cars with only one forward and six reverse gears). If a car is in the left lane and you’re overtaking it‚ you simply put on your left-lane turn signal‚ and voila‚ in a miracle worthy of Fatima‚ they move over and let you go by. Quaint? Perhaps. Civilized? To be sure. A lot better than what we do here in the States? By orders of magnitude. As we've established‚ the average LLB has no hate in his heart. He just enjoys following the rules. Consulting that speed limit sign and ensuring that it matches the number on his speedometer fills him with civic pride. We simply need to make heeding the command of the left turn signal equally as satisfying and automatic. "It appears the motorist behind me has activated his left turn indicator. As we are already in the leftmost lane‚ any attempt to 'switch lanes' in that direction would likely result in a negative outcome. Therefore I can only conclude that the motorist is employing the agreed-upon signal that I am to vacate said lane. Makes sense." So may I suggest‚ gentle reader‚ that we start spreading the word in the simplest terms possible? Something catchy. Maybe‚ "Don't think‚ heed the blink"? OK‚ I'm open to other ideas. The important thing is to help LLBs realize their proper place — anywhere but our passing lane!