Perhaps you’ve heard of Lent and thought it was simply an exercise in self-denial‚ a time when we’re supposed to give up something we really love‚ like chocolate‚ to embrace the suffering Jesus experienced on the cross. But Lent is about far more than self-denial.

In 1977‚ the London music scene witnessed the formation of Dire Straits‚ a band that would leave a lasting impact on rock music. The group was spearheaded by Mark Knopfler‚ who handled lead guitar and vocals‚ along with his brother David Knopfler on rhythm guitar and vocals‚ John Illsley on bass and vocals‚ and Pick Withers handling the drums. The band’s journey spanned from their inception through to 1988‚ and they saw a resurgence from 1990 until their final curtain in 1995. Launching their career with the hit “Sultans of Swing” from their self-titled debut in 1978‚ Dire Straits quickly The post Complete List Of Dire Straits Band Members appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

Never call PolitiFact an “independent fact-checker.” They are every bit as liberal and biased as their fans in the liberal media. Recently‚ they announced they had published their 1000th “fact check” of Donald Trump. “American fact-checkers have never encountered a politician who shares Trump’s disregard for factual accuracy‚” they proclaimed. “Ever since he descended the escalator at Trump Tower in 2015‚ we have encountered a firehose of claims.” In those 1‚000 checks‚ PolitiFact tagged Trump on their “Truth-O-Meter” as “Mostly False‚” “False‚” or “Pants on Fire” in 757 of them (75.7 percent). Trump was found “True” or “Mostly True” in only 121 checks (12.1 percent). Barack Obama is currently in second in the “fact check” count with 603. PolitiFact was founded in 2007‚ when Obama was running for president. Donald Trump was a real-estate developer until 2015. But look at the difference in “Truth” ratings. Almost half of Obama’s “checks” were “True” or “Mostly True” – 289 of them (48 percent). Only 143 (or 25 percent) were “Mostly False” or worse. Obama has been rated “Pants on Fire” nine times. Trump’s been found flammable 184 times. Hillary Clinton came in third with 301 checks. She has an even better “True” side percentage – 148 out of 301 (49.1 percent). Only 83 (26.5 percent) landed on the “False” side‚ and only nine “Pants on Fire” warnings. Joe Biden is fourth with 286 checks. He hasn’t been blessed with the magic that the other two top Democrats have. Since 2007‚ he was on the “True” side on 80 occasions (33.2 percent) and on the “False” side in 121 articles (42.3 percent). He has only seven “Pants on Fire” ratings over more than 16 years‚ and just one as president. Trump has drawn seven “Pants on Fire” ratings since last June. So it was comical when Molly Olmstead at the leftist website Slate.com celebrated the Trump 1000 by wondering how a team “so diligently committed to the cause of fighting misinformation with data and passionless expertise‚ how it feels to operate in a world where objective truth seems to matter so little.” Objective? Passionless? That’s not what the numbers say. The numbers strongly suggest “selection bias.” PolitiFact senior correspondent Louis Jacobson deserves a “Mostly False” for claiming: “We’re not trying to push any kind of agenda. We just want to provide people who are open-minded enough with information that we think can be helpful for understanding politics.” When pressed‚ Jacobson will say their Truth-O-Meter isn’t like a scientific instrument. It runs on human opinion. He told the Texas Standard “we do check things that we find significant‚ notable‚ interesting to us.” On that scale‚ Trump’s almost four times more “interesting” than Biden. The conservatives and Republicans are far more “interesting” than Democrats. Joe Biden can say the Republicans are “Jim Crow 2.0” segregationists‚ and PolitiFact naps. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas can pronounce “the border is secure‚” and it’s crickets. MSNBC host Ali Velshi can say Trump and the Republicans “want to let fewer brown people in‚” they want immigration to be “the most painful process possible.” Free pass! Nothing "notable" in these statements. But when Elon Musk speculates Biden’s border strategy is to “get as many illegals in the country as possible” and “legalize them to create a permanent majority‚” he gets flagged as “False.”  PolitiFact's archives easily undermine their claims that they're just here to help give citizens the "information they need to govern themselves in a democracy." It's more like they dole out the information Democrats need to stay in charge of the government. 

I wrote last week about what I would be watching for in Tucker Carlson’s interview with Vladimir Putin and how I would deal with Putin had I been in Tucker’s seat. I warned that people on the right are looking for an American dictator to swoop in and save them from all the problems created by the elites. On the left‚ they’re already imposing a kind of dictatorship through the administrative state. I also warned you about Aleksandr Dugin‚ often called “Putin’s brain‚” and how he would push Putin to talk about our immorality‚ transgenderism‚ and loss of faith. I said Tucker could maybe let Putin get away with it one time‚ but then he would need to cut him off and say‚ “This isn't about America and her people. If you want to talk about the American war machine‚ the president‚ or Congress‚ go ahead‚ and we’ll listen.” I was expecting Putin to spin the conversation toward that angle‚ but he didn’t. I think part of that is because Tucker Carlson did a really good job. When Dugin says “we’re fighting liberalism‚” he means something very different from what comes into our American minds. Putin didn’t say anything new. Maybe to some people he did‚ but I have been describing what Putin was talking about for years: the fact that we created this Ukrainian problem. I outlined it on my giant chalkboard about Ukraine during President Trump’s first impeachment. What Putin said about Russia’s historical claims are true. I don’t like it‚ but we need to recognize it as true so that we don't get wrapped up in yet another war. At least we know the truth of why we’re probably in this war. That doesn't make Putin correct on the war. What does concern me is how Tucker Carlson’s interview is being spun in Russia‚ particularly by Dugin‚ and I’m afraid that many Americans will fall for it. Dugin last week published an essay titled‚ “Tucker‚ Putin‚ and the Apocalypse.” At first‚ it sounds benign. But read on‚ and it gets worse and worse and worse. Dugin begins by describing Carlson’s interview as “pivotal for both the West and Russia.” I would agree‚ but not for the same reasons as Dugin. He says “Tucker Carlson is becoming a focal point of two polar opposites within the Russian society" whom he calls the “ideological patriots and elite Westernizers.” Dugin is describing the dynamic in Russia between those who think‚ “Let’s just become part of the West‚” and those who say‚ “No‚ we’re Russian.” "For patriots‚” Dugin asserts‚ “Tucker Carlson is simply ‘one of us.’ He’s a traditionalist.” I’ve warned my audience in the past about “traditionalism.” It means something different when people like Dugin invoke it. Dugin also says that Carlson is “a right-wing conservative‚ a staunch opponent to liberalism.” Well‚ yes‚ he is‚ but not in the way that Dugin means. Dugin is for the end of all modernity. Understand what that means. The end of all modernity. He believes the world should be pushed back to the way it was before the Enlightenment. I don't think Tucker Carlson is for that. I encourage you to read the entire essay. It will give you valuable insight into the Russian perspective and the narrative Dugin is spinning about Tucker’s interview. However‚ I want to draw your attention to the part of the op-ed where Dugin describes something deeply troubling that is always dismissed. I urge you to dismiss him at your own peril. Dismiss him just like you've dismissed the leadership of Iran at your own peril. Here’s what he has to say: Tucker Carlson conducts a reality check: Does the West understand what it is doing‚ pushing the world towards the apocalypse? ... Look what the globalists have done and how close we are to it! It is not about the content of the interview with Putin. It is the fact that a person like Tucker Carlson is visiting a country like Russia to meet a political figure like Putin at such a critical time. Tucker Carlson’s trip to Moscow might be the last chance to stop the disappearance of humanity. The world can only be saved by stopping right now. The world can only be saved by stopping now. For that‚ America must choose Trump. And Tucker Carlson. And Elon Musk. And [Texas Governor Greg] Abbott. Then we get a chance to pause on the brink of the abyss. Compared to this‚ everything else is secondary. Liberalism and its agenda have led humanity to a dead end. Now the choice is this: either liberals or humanity. Tucker Carlson chooses humanity‚ which is why he came to Moscow to meet Putin. The whole world understood why he came and how important it is. I would not want Dugin writing something like that about me‚ and I doubt Tucker Carlson did anything to deserve that. Remember‚ when Dugin says “we’re fighting liberalism‚” he means something very different from what comes into our American minds. I am a classical liberal. That means that I am for the Bill of Rights. I want a small government. I believe I should answer for my own actions and that you should answer for your own actions. That’s classic liberalism in a nutshell. When Dugin refers to the West’s “liberalism‚” that’s what he actually means. He doesn't mean “leftists” when he talks about liberals like we do. He’s an enemy of classical liberalism. He’s against freedom of choice. He’s against individual liberty. What is Dugin for? He is a doomsday prophet who believes that the apocalypse must come to wash the world in blood. He also is the man who opened the door to the key relationship between the Iranian Twelvers and Russia. They have one thing in common: They both believe chaos leads to the rebirth of the world. One thinks the 12th Imam will call it forth. The other‚ Dugin‚ believes it is Christ who will bring it about. Dugin believes that is the way that Russia will control: through bringing about its end. That's the kind of man we're dealing with here. He's very dangerous‚ and he's no friend of America and the principles that you and I hold dear. If I were Tucker Carlson‚ I would respond to Dugin immediately. Don’t be fooled by Dugin’s attempt to lure Tucker Carlson and‚ consequently‚ you and me into becoming his allies. We are no allies of Dugin. And Dugin is no friend of the principles of freedom and liberty that we cherish. Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights‚ top stories‚ show prep and more delivered to your inbox.

Here are the opening lines of a Washington Post article: How much information about a presidential candidate’s health does the public have a right to know? A secretive president is mounting a lackluster reelection bid while self-isolating within a small circle of family members and advisers. A global crisis and a life-threatening medical condition haunt his campaign. His doctors mislead the public‚ his political party keeps silent‚ and Americans hear rumors rather than accurate medical information. If you’re confused by this tough talk from the Post‚ that’s understandable. It makes more sense in context. The story appeared in October 2020‚ under a picture of Donald Trump. The author let us know those words were really about Franklin D. Roosevelt‚ crafted as a warning to Trump: “... uncertainty about a candidate’s health can also doom a campaign ... exactly what we may be witnessing today as Trump’s polls sink.” The media did its best to stoke those fears in 2020. Remember the media frenzy over Trump’s cautious descent after he spoke to graduating cadets at West Point? The liberal cable outlets played it on a loop‚ and the New York Times headlined: “Trump’s Halting Walk Down Ramp Raises New Health Questions.” Trump had tweeted‚ "The ramp that I descended after my West Point Commencement speech was very long &; steep‚ had no handrail and‚ most importantly‚ was very slippery.” The Times countered: "There was no evidence that the ramp was slippery‚ and the skies were clear during the ceremony.” Left unsaid was what evidence the newspaper would require to determine the slipperiness of a steel ramp in dress shoes. The incident particularly alarmed the press‚ given that it happened after Trump used two hands to drink a glass of water. He was‚ we were reminded‚ nearly 74 years old‚ “the oldest a president has been in his first term.” Fast-forward to 2024‚ and here we are‚ watching our current president shuffle to the podium‚ his speech peppered with senior moments. We have a leader who appears in worse health than anyone since FDR in 1944. Then‚ as now‚ we had a press rooting for a president’s re-election. For FDR‚ the press had for more than a decade propped up a false image of his health‚ never showing him in the wheelchair he used every day. UPI columnist Marquis Childs called the health rumors about Roosevelt a “wicked business. It is the vilest kind of fear campaign.” Roosevelt died 82 days after his fourth inauguration. We shouldn’t be surprised when the president’s advisers lie about his health‚ since they have every incentive to do just that. Their proximity to power rests on their boss continuing in the world’s most powerful position. What's glaringly absent today is a press corps that lives up to its self-proclaimed role as a referee in political disputes. Claiming to evaluate and expose the partisan players‚ the media have become as biased as those they aim to call out. Decked in their referee stripes‚ they've joined the game. Today‚ the “conservative media” will declare that the president is clearly unfit to serve his term‚ while the “liberal media” will do their best to obfuscate and change the subject. We’ve been handed the whistle‚ and simply consuming news without question isn't enough. For this and other pressing issues‚ sadly‚ it’s up to us to investigate the evidence from every angle and make our own calls.

The latest report shows that the U.S. still isn’t out of the woods.

The Palace lights up the darkness.

Why it’s good for our politics and our legal system that the Supreme Court looks poised to strike down Colorado’s dubious legal theory of Trump disqualification.

The president should pursue all options in his power to solve the border crisis.

Instead of endorsing the European plan‚ Congress should double down on America’s successful tax cuts by further cutting business rates and simplifying other tax rules.