I have many thoughts on the Nikole Hannah-Jones story, especially having attended the kind of schools she sent her daughter to, but if we're looking for takeaways, here's a simple one. When an expert in education so thoroughly demonstrates a jarring and near complete lack of expertise in the act of getting an education for her own daughter, we should stop taking advice from her on curriculum, instruction, and all other fads disguised as wisdom she offers. That seems like the least we could do. Her daughter's personal struggle, which is indeed sympathetic, wasn't much of a teachable moment for her, as she doesn't seem to have updated any of her priors (and actually fudges funding facts, so as not to disrupt the narrative of under-resourced schools). But it should be a teachable moment for us, about the outsized influence of a scholar who claims to know better than anyone what her daughter would be up against in the school to which she chose to send her, but was inexplicably surprised and left her daughter completely unprepared for it.

For penning her mea culpa, Hannah-Jones has received a good deal of praise. Well, you can count me out of all that. Her actions were morally indefensible and analytically ignorant, and her supposed metamorphosis remains invisible to the naked eye. nationalreview.com/2026/09/w…

Sydney Sweeney Is the Epitome of What Modern Feminists Fight For nationalreview.com/corner/sy…

At this point, I think AI should start worrying that people are going to kill everybody.

If true, this might be the main problem for millennials on down who can't seem to crack the market.

Obviously doesn't speak to every situation, but I find the general point refreshing.

For those of you keeping track: 1. 1958 New York Times: Ice-free Arctic within 70 years. 2. 1967 Salt Lake City Tribute, quoting Paul Ehrlich: Global famine by AD 1975. Involuntary mass sterilization needed to curtail population growth. 3. 1970 Boston Globe, quoting James Lodge: Ice Age by the 21st Century. 4. 1971 Washington Post, quoting NASA: Ice Age within 50 years. 5. 1972 Brown University: Global climate deterioration due to Global Cooling. 6. 1974 Guardian: Ice Age coming fast. 7. 1974 Time Magazine: New Ice Age. 8. 1978 New York Times: No end in sight to cooling trend. A year later, the same paper with the same somber urgency, was reporting the opposite. 9. 1979 New York Times: Global climate catastrophe. Ice-free Arctic within 70 years. 10. 1982 New York Times, quoting UN: Environmental catastrophe by AD 2000. 11. 1988 AP: Global Warming: Maldives drowned by rising sealevel within 30 years (AD 2019). 12. 1989 San Jose Mercury, quoting UN: Global Warming: nations drowned AD 2000. 13. 2000 Independent: Snowfalls a ‘thing of the past’ in England within ‘a few years’. 14. 2001 Albuquerque Journal, quoting George Hurt: Climate-change to kill New England maple syrup industry. 15. 2004 Guardian, quoting secret Pentagon report: Climate change will trigger nuclear war, submerge major European cities, Britain ‘Siberian’ by AD 2020. 16. 2006 AP, quoting Al Gore: Greenhouse gas. Point of no return in 10 years (AD 2016). 17. 2007 New York Times, quoting UN: Point of no return by 2012. 18. 2007 Canwest News: Ice-free Arctic by AD 2010 or 2015. 19. 2007 AP, quoting NASA: Ice-free Arctic by AD 2012. 20. 2007 BBC: Ice-free Arctic before AD 2013. 21. 2008 Xinhua (Chinese News), quoting Norwegian official: Ice-free Arctic. 22. 2008 New Scientist Magazine, quoting director National Snow and Ice Data Center: Ice-Free Artic by AD 2008 (that year). 23. 2008 National Geographic, quoting scientist: Ice-Free Artic by AD 2008 (that year). 24. 2008 AP, quoting NASA: Ice-Free Artic by AD 2013 to 2018. 25. 2009 USA Today, quoting Al Gore: Ice-Free Artic by AD 2014. Note that on or about this time, circa 2010, the Glacial National Park erected signs warning that all glaciers would be melted entirely away by AD 2020 26. 2012 Australian: Snow gone by AD 2020. 27. 2013 Guardian: Ice-Free Artic by 2015, will trigger methane catastrophe. 28. 2017 Sydney Morning Herald: Climate Changes to curtail Australia’s ski industry. 29. 2018 Forbes, quoting Harvard University: Ice-Free Artic by AD 2022. Chance of any permanent ice remaining is “essentially zero.” (Despite these odds, 5.6 million square miles remain.) 30. 2018 Greta Thunberg, autistic schoolgirl, quoting ‘Top Climate Scientist’: Humans to go extinct if Climate Change not fixed by AD 2023. All humanity to perish unless fossil fuel use stopped within five years. 31. 2021 LA Times: No Snow in California by “sooner than you think.” 32. 2022 Bloomberg: End of Snow threatens to upend 76 million American lives. Please note that in AD 2020, Glacial National Park (see above) removed the signs predicting the glaciers clearly looming above the sightseers were to have had vanished by now.

What was Woke? A megathread documenting the most deranged era of our time 🧵🧵🧵 When AOC declared woke over and dismissively laughed that "Woke 1 was crazzzy", she was sending a calculated signal to the Leftist rank & file that "Woke" was now more of a political liability than a help and it was time to pivot from "its not happening" to "ok it was happening but it wasnt that bad, can we just move on now?" The online hordes clearly understood the assignment, as the online space is full of ppl either dismissing Woke as "just some online kooks " and pretending not to understand what Woke even was (thus making discourse impossible). They will adopt a "gotcha" strategy where they will demand to know on the spot exactly what was so bad about Woke and when you dont have an itemized list in bullet points at the ready, will dismiss your entire argument that Woke was bad. So here I'm creating a thread so you can all bookmark it and use it anytime says "Woke wasnt that big a deal", "it was just online kooks", or "it was just about having empathy and being kind". You will notice not one of the examples in this thread are "online kooks". Almost every single one is a major media company. Despite the catastrophic reputational loss of the last two decades, these companies are still very powerful and influential, and since most of the public still mindlessly outsources their thinking to the media, they play a key role in shaping public opinion. Keep that in mind as you read some to the deranged things these psychopaths were pushing on us. If in the future, someone wants to study how, when and why the mainstream media pivoted from Neutral Arbiter of Truth to Culture Warrior, Narrative Shaper and Social Engineer, this thread would be a valuable resource. So without further ado, what IS Woke?

My oped in today's WSJ: Despite what you’ve heard, the world isn’t on fire Contrary to recent fire coverage’s apocalyptic tone, the globe is on trend for record-low burned area nitter.net/BjornLomborg/status/20… archive.ph/1BLhT

Wild that @DouthatNYT 's quest to charitably interview every villain from C.S. Lewis' Space Trilogy has already come to an end. Such a great podcast.

Stanford Prof. Andy Hall on why every AI model tells Japanese voters to vote for the Communist Party: "We've been auditing the models on how they make voting recommendations, and in Japan they love the Communist Party. The Communist Party is a complete fringe party in Japan." "It's not because the models actually like the Communist Party. It's that they don't know very much about Japanese politics." When they go to search for information about Japanese politics to bring back to the user, they hit not only paywalls but robots.txt exclusions where the Japanese media companies don't want AI taking their content. "The Japanese Communist Party runs a fully open newspaper, so the AI pulls from them, not from the higher quality newspapers." @ahall_research @StanfordGSB

Tucker Carlson preaches that debt is slavery, that lending at interest is the sin of usury, and that a society organized around debt "enslaves people." He then reads an ad for a mortgage lender and personally endorses it: "We recommend American Financing. They're called America's home for home loans for a reason."

The DSA Wants to Abolish America nationalreview.com/2026/07/t… "It would, indeed, be preferable if we did not have to deal with communists in the United States, but we do not have that luxury at present. We need not wait for the chains before objecting to the forge."

Sad and tiresome: nytimes.com/2026/07/29/podca…

A new poll finds 40% of respondents believe in a baseless conspiracy theory that the coronavirus was created in a lab in China. There is zero evidence for this. Scientists say the virus was transmitted to humans from another species. trib.al/m0pJe4b

Hello Mrs. Owens, You told millions of people that Tyler Robinson "wasn't even there." That you felt "confident stating that Tyler Robinson did not kill murder Charlie Kirk." He was on camera. Prone on the Losi rooftop at 12:22. Shot at 12:23:28. DNA on the screwdriver at 30 quintillion to one. DNA on the rifle at 1.7 octillion to one. He told his family what he did. His parents helped him surrender. He texted his roommate: "I am, I'm sorry." He engraved "Hey Fascist! Catch!" on the ammunition a month before he used it. You said police "didn't even question" Lance Twiggs. He was interviewed twice. FBI the morning after. Joint state-federal team seven months later. His own attorney. Voluntary phone surrender. You laughed when you said it. You told Shawn Ryan a shaped charge killed Charlie. That PETN was in his microphone. The medical examiner says gunshot wound. Bullet fragments were recovered from his body. A .30-06 Mauser with Robinson's DNA was found in the woods. Neither side — not prosecution, not defense — has mentioned explosives. Not once in four days. You said the shot came from below. The Losi building is above the amphitheater. You called Erika Kirk a "clinical psychopath" to an audience of millions. You said the assassination was "an occult ritual." You said Charlie was "sitting in a pentagram." You told people Israel killed him because he refused Netanyahu. You made over a hundred episodes. You built a franchise on a dead man's name. And the hardest fact of all: Tyler Robinson's own defense lawyers — the people whose entire career is on the line to get him acquitted — have refused to make a single one of your arguments. Not one. They're challenging DNA methodology. They are doing their jobs. You were doing something else entirely. Charlie Kirk changed my life. He platformed my work when nobody knew who I was. He had my back when I was doxxed. I was the ten-thousandth most important person in his world and I will never be able to repay him. So I did what I know how to do. I read every transcript. I watched every hour of testimony. I cataloged your claims and I held them up against what was said under oath. Every single one failed. I don't know why you did this. I'm not going to speculate on your motives, because that would make me exactly the kind of analyst I've spent my career refusing to be. But I know what you did. You told people confident lies about a dead man's murder, and millions of them believed you, and some of them turned that belief into threats against his widow. The trial continues. And every day of sworn testimony is another day your words get tested against reality... under oath, on the record, where it counts. I'll be here for all of it... because just as Charlie defended me, I will do what little I can to defend his legacy and @TPUSA and @MrsErikaKirk from evil.

The Man Who Saved the Declaration of Independence nationalreview.com/2026/06/t…

This is a 2 minute video about taxing the wealthy. There is no mention of programs it will fund. Or why the tax dollars are needed. Or what the money would be used for. Or how those less fortunate could be supported to themselves become wealthy. The benefits are no longer the point. The implicit message is about punishment. Punishing those doing well is now good politics. Sign of the times —

Karl’s Dad was cool