The United States has vetoed a United Nations resolution demanding an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza.

Americans can’t afford to buy homes and they struggle to pay rent. Most of the problem is due to bad government policies‚ and some is due to Vanguard and BlackRock buying up real estate for profit. There is a new bill to cure all our problems. Along comes Rep. Adam Smith and Sen. Jeff Merkley […] The post New Feel-Good Bill to Get Wall St Out of Our Housing Market appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Academy Award-winning filmmaker James Cameron recently revealed some secrets from making his epic historical drama “Titanic‚” including the reason he intentionally cast short extras. The Canadian-born director explained his thought process during an interview with the Los Angeles Times for the film’s 4K remastering home video release. “The scale of everything was beyond anything we could imagine in terms of our prior experience. At the time we thought‚ wow‚ there’s no way this movie could ever make its money back. It’s just impossible. Well‚ guess what?” Cameron told the outlet. “Titanic” cost a whopping $210 million to produce ($337 million adjusted for inflation)‚ making it the most expensive film ever made at the time of its release in 1997. This causes a lot of concern in the industry‚ with many insiders calling the filmmaker crazy for spending so much. But even with the massive budget‚ Cameron said they did cut costs where they could.  CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP “We only cast short extras so it made our set look bigger‚” Cameron explained. “Anybody above five foot eight‚ we didn’t cast them. It’s like we got an extra million dollars of value out of casting.” The “Titanic” gamble did pay off in a big way. Over its lifetime‚ the movie made $2.2 billion‚ making it the highest-earning film of all time until Cameron’s “Avatar” was released in 2009. The director said he stands by putting in the funds to make the movie‚ which is what made it so successful. “If the studio had had their way‚ they would have cut the entire ship sinking‚” Cameron told the LA Times. “The smartest thing we did was do the sinking last. It wasn’t because of strategy — it was simply because you sink the set last because otherwise it doesn’t look so good the next morning when you bring it back up.” Cameron had previously weighed in on the infamous door controversy. Fans have been speculating for decades whether there was enough room on the floating door to save both Jack (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Rose (Kate Winslet). He assured movie fans that while there may have been enough physical room‚ the door would not have stayed afloat with both adults on it.  “We have done a scientific study to put this whole thing to rest and drive a stake through its heart once and for all‚” Cameron told The Toronto Sun in 2022. “We have since done a thorough forensic analysis with a hypothermia expert who reproduced the raft from the movie‚” he continued. “We took two stunt people who were the same body mass of Kate and Leo and we put sensors all over them and inside them and we put them in ice water. We tested to see whether they could have survived through a variety of methods and the answer was‚ there was no way they both could have survived. Only one could survive.”

The ground is shifting rapidly beneath elite universities. Once-generous donors have rescinded almost a billion dollars in donations‚ and this may be only the beginning after the disastrous performance of several Ivy League presidents in a recent congressional hearing. The University of Pennsylvania’s president Liz Magill has already been forced to resign‚ and Harvard’s Claudine Gay‚ who is facing charges of plagiarism‚ is likely next. The House Committee on Education and the Workforce has announced a full investigation of Harvard‚ MIT‚ and UPenn‚ which could expand to other schools. It seems that disgust with elite universities is felt almost universally‚ as everyone from billionaire hedge-funders like Bill Ackman to grandstanding politicians to Elon Musk pile on.  But it is important to remember that the most significant problems with academia have existed for decades and permeate nearly all universities — elite or not — in the U.S.  The recent extreme political zealotry of Ivy League campuses should be no surprise to anyone who has spent even a modicum of time at one of these schools‚ much less so if one has attended a class there. The only surprise in all of this is that it has taken so long for donors to notice there is something seriously‚ alarmingly amiss at modern American universities. Even putting aside the current Israel-Palestine controversy‚ academia has over the past several decades undergone a profound transformation from a classical institution of learning to a laboratory for all manner of “woke” political activism and extremism. Far too many professors and college administrators see themselves as progressive frontline fighters in an ideological war‚ indoctrinating the young to transform society with radical but empty notions of Critical Race Theory and “DEI”; a victim-focused‚ infantilizing new MeToo feminism; a naïve Marxism; and an inexplicable hyper-focus on fringe issues like transsexuality. Sit in a modern college class where these sorts of topics are discussed and you will see they are often non-negotiable orthodoxies‚ not up for actual debate. It is long past time for the ivory tower’s benefactors to awaken to the reality of what the modern university has become and the effects that experimental‚ faddish cultural theories floated in university classrooms and campus-wide policies have on society when widely disseminated. As students graduate and attempt to carry those theories into the real world‚ a kind of woke “Children of the Corn” dynamic occurs in which the adults reap what they thoughtlessly sowed to the youth‚ as those youth now make unreasonable and counterproductive demands on nearly every major societal institution. Another problem with academia that is now being exposed is its illegal hiring practices. Nearly all college departments discriminate against whites‚ men‚ and heterosexuals in favor of those from “marginalized” groups. Ackman recently reported that Harvard President Claudine Gay was selected in a process in which white male candidates were automatically screened out of contention. This happens for nearly all faculty and staff positions now and has been going on for decades‚ but in recent years the situation has worsened considerably.  Often those on hiring committees are told not to document these illegal practices in writing‚ but in their meetings and deliberations the hiring committee members openly discuss the need to choose a candidate from a marginalized group‚ and everyone on these committees understands they will bend over backward not to select a straight white man. Yes‚ straight white men are hired sometimes‚ but only in cases in which they are so far ahead of the other candidates as to make any other choice blatantly absurd. (And even in some of these absurd cases the lesser-qualified candidate is still chosen‚ as we see with Harvard’s president.)  Another issue to underscore here is the political significance of dissertation preferences in faculty hiring. Most hiring committees — particularly in the liberal arts — select candidates based on how fashionable and politically correct their subjects of study are‚ and this is discerned from their dissertation and publications. Certain topics that are politically incorrect are automatically dismissed. So do not believe for one minute that politics is not a significant factor in hiring decisions.  CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP The problems with academia extend way beyond the campus climate and hiring practices. For example‚ at most universities half the courses are taught by poorly-paid‚ part-time adjunct instructors or grad students‚ nearly all of whom make less money than restaurant waiters. Even at Ivy League schools like Harvard‚ an unacceptable percentage of courses are not taught by full-time top-tier professors.  Even more confounding is the administrative bloat in nearly all universities. Over the last two decades the number of administrative positions in academia have exploded — including thousands of new DEI positions‚ many enjoying salaries in the six figures. Most tuition money‚ student loans‚ and donations pay for administrators and buildings‚ most of these largely superfluous and even counterproductive to real education.  Shockingly‚ the deterioration and ideological zealotry of academia did not have a negative effect on its fundraising until now. The money rolled in without slowing‚ often from staunch capitalists‚ traditional families‚ religious individuals‚ and successful businesspeople who should have been more skeptical of an institution that increasingly generated a distaste for all of those very things. It is often surprising how ill-informed (and uninterested) most donors are about the deterioration of the academy and the degree to which extreme orthodoxies have infected nearly every aspect of the university‚ from the classroom to the administration. Sure‚ there’s still a lot of legitimate learning taking place and some value to the college experience‚ but it is mixed with considerably more nonsense than it once was and permeated with an ideological agenda that‚ even when subtle‚ is almost palpable. And it’s often not very subtle. If this recent controversy serves as an ideological wake-up call to the ivory tower and to those who pay its bills‚ that will be a good thing. Kristen Lacefield is a former lecturer of English and film at TCU and holds a PhD in English literature and media studies from the University of North Carolina. She also produces videos and podcasts for YouTube as “Colonel Kurtz.” The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and not necessarily those of The Daily Wire.