正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

🎯 Off Target: Randi Weingarten’s Fight With Target Isn’t Remotely About Education Randi Weingarten is not even pretending her job is for teachers anymore. On a recent movement call with Sunrise, YDSA, and the AAUP, she bragged that she pressured Target to make a public political statement against ICE... and laid out what AFT leadership wants next. She starts by “disclosing” something she says she has not yet told her own executive council. “I wrote to Target on February 1st… on behalf of all of the shareholders of teacher retirement systems… about 7 million shares of stock.” That’s teachers’ retirement money being leveraged as a political cudgel. AFT leadership is now speaking as shareholders, consumers, and activist enforcers, not as a union focused on classrooms. Then she admits she prioritized a meeting with Target over an active strike in San Francisco, and her demand to the company’s leadership wasn’t subtle. “Why can’t you simply say, as a corporation, ‘ICE out of Minnesota?’ Why can’t you say that publicly?” When Target says it prefers handling things privately, she escalates immediately: “My history tells me that many corporations said that to other autocrats too…” Then she spells out the real objective. “We need to untether their relationships with this administration, which will require more and more and deeper and deeper corporate campaigns.” “We need to do both schools and engage in these corporate campaigns…” That’s total mission drift. Teachers’ time and attention are finite, and classrooms have bigger fires right now: staffing shortages, disorder, burnout, special ed overload, and contracts that lag reality. None of that requires Target’s CEO to issue a statement.show more

Stu Smith

56,207 subscribers

91,245 次观看 • 4 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Yung Miami reveals to Charlamagne that men should be some type of support and that is why she want a man with a $100,000,000, and she is not bringing the number down because she wants to go up as she wants a vacation, she has kid and she is trying to live her best life👀🫩🥀 “If i know we that gonna have s6x, we gon have s6x but you have to do something for me and it’s not pr6st!tut!on, it’s just i am a woman and you gotta add value to me, i gotta leave this relationships, situationships with something because if not we f6cking and we not things, that’s what you do in your 20’s, i am 30 now”

Sensitive content

Yung Miami reveals to Charlamagne that men should be some type of support and that is why she want a man with a $100,000,000, and she is not bringing the number down because she wants to go up as she wants a vacation, she has kid and she is trying to live her best life👀🫩🥀 “If i know we that gonna have s6x, we gon have s6x but you have to do something for me and it’s not pr6st!tut!on, it’s just i am a woman and you gotta add value to me, i gotta leave this relationships, situationships with something because if not we f6cking and we not things, that’s what you do in your 20’s, i am 30 now”

flame⛧

38,012 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨BREAKING: ICE/Border Patrol agents illegally demand a woman prove her citizenship, then lie about having a warrant for someone connected to her home, and refuse to show it, in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. In the video, ICE agents confront a woman outside her home and demand she hand over her ID to “prove” she is a U.S. citizen, something they have no legal authority to require without reasonable suspicion of a specific crime. She asks why they need her ID. They tell her they have a “target” who lives at the address. So she asks, “Who is the target?” An agent responds, “We have to make sure you aren’t our target,” then immediately asks, “Do you live at this address?” She says yes. The person filming points out the obvious and tells her she should call 911, because she already stated she’s a citizen and ICE has no jurisdiction over U.S. citizens. That’s when the agent says, “She never said she was a citizen. Calm down.” The woman corrects him. She clearly states she is a citizen, and explains they never asked her about her status, they just demanded ID, which again, is not legal. The agent repeats himself, claiming they have a target connected to the home and want to make sure she isn’t that person. She then asks the only question that matters: “Do you have a warrant?” An agent says, “Yes, we have a warrant for their arrest.” She asks to see it. They refuse. Instead, the agent says, “I’ve got to make sure you are the person.” That’s still not how warrants work. If ICE actually had a valid warrant, they would already know who they were looking for, would not be guessing, and would be legally required to present it on request. Standing outside a home doesn’t change that. You don’t have to identify yourself just so federal agents can decide whether their claimed warrant applies to you. This is a textbook ICE intimidation tactic… demand ID, lie about warrants, deny proof, and hope people don’t know their rights. ICE/Border Patrol agents are harassing U.S. citizens in their own neighborhood, fishing for consent they are not entitled to. And this is how rights get erased, not all at once, but slowly, through lies, pressure, and people being told to “calm down.”

🚨BREAKING: ICE/Border Patrol agents illegally demand a woman prove her citizenship, then lie about having a warrant for someone connected to her home, and refuse to show it, in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. In the video, ICE agents confront a woman outside her home and demand she hand over her ID to “prove” she is a U.S. citizen, something they have no legal authority to require without reasonable suspicion of a specific crime. She asks why they need her ID. They tell her they have a “target” who lives at the address. So she asks, “Who is the target?” An agent responds, “We have to make sure you aren’t our target,” then immediately asks, “Do you live at this address?” She says yes. The person filming points out the obvious and tells her she should call 911, because she already stated she’s a citizen and ICE has no jurisdiction over U.S. citizens. That’s when the agent says, “She never said she was a citizen. Calm down.” The woman corrects him. She clearly states she is a citizen, and explains they never asked her about her status, they just demanded ID, which again, is not legal. The agent repeats himself, claiming they have a target connected to the home and want to make sure she isn’t that person. She then asks the only question that matters: “Do you have a warrant?” An agent says, “Yes, we have a warrant for their arrest.” She asks to see it. They refuse. Instead, the agent says, “I’ve got to make sure you are the person.” That’s still not how warrants work. If ICE actually had a valid warrant, they would already know who they were looking for, would not be guessing, and would be legally required to present it on request. Standing outside a home doesn’t change that. You don’t have to identify yourself just so federal agents can decide whether their claimed warrant applies to you. This is a textbook ICE intimidation tactic… demand ID, lie about warrants, deny proof, and hope people don’t know their rights. ICE/Border Patrol agents are harassing U.S. citizens in their own neighborhood, fishing for consent they are not entitled to. And this is how rights get erased, not all at once, but slowly, through lies, pressure, and people being told to “calm down.”

Jesus Freakin Congress

443,289 次观看 • 5 个月前

“I made that statement, and the White House hasn’t disputed it!” “The silence on things that are just so easy to respond to. Like if someone messaged me and said, ‘hey Candace, we heard that back when you were working in New York City that you had keys to a white house and you were ushering in models,’ I’d be like, ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about. This is not true.’ Erika’s not doing that!” One thing Candace hates more than anything else—even more than people laughing at or making jokes about her—is when big-name people ignore her. She CANNOT STAND that Erika is currently ignoring her and won’t respond to questions any longer, just like she has never been able to stand that the White House didn’t make a statement on her allegations that the Macrons took a hit out on her life as well as the fact that Trump hasn’t said anything about the Macrons suing her She can’t stand it. She tries to paint their silence as evidence of their guilt (because that’s just how dishonest and manipulative she is), but you can tell it’s eating her up inside by the way she references it over and over and over again for weeks and months now.

“I made that statement, and the White House hasn’t disputed it!” “The silence on things that are just so easy to respond to. Like if someone messaged me and said, ‘hey Candace, we heard that back when you were working in New York City that you had keys to a white house and you were ushering in models,’ I’d be like, ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about. This is not true.’ Erika’s not doing that!” One thing Candace hates more than anything else—even more than people laughing at or making jokes about her—is when big-name people ignore her. She CANNOT STAND that Erika is currently ignoring her and won’t respond to questions any longer, just like she has never been able to stand that the White House didn’t make a statement on her allegations that the Macrons took a hit out on her life as well as the fact that Trump hasn’t said anything about the Macrons suing her She can’t stand it. She tries to paint their silence as evidence of their guilt (because that’s just how dishonest and manipulative she is), but you can tell it’s eating her up inside by the way she references it over and over and over again for weeks and months now.

Natalie Jean Beisner

29,735 次观看 • 4 个月前

Tamika Mallory has finally decided to address the controversy surrounding Jay-Z’s continued relationship with Target during the boycott. I’ve already shared my own thoughts on the situation, but I wanted to highlight her explanation because, in my opinion, it perfectly illustrates why I believe many activists and public figures apply different standards depending on who they’re talking about. Take a listen. Key Takeaways from Tamika Mallory: • She said she didn’t initially see the criticism because she has been busy organizing activism efforts, events, and work in Washington, D.C. According to her, her son eventually brought the online criticism to her attention after people began saying she wouldn’t speak on the issue because it involved Jay-Z. • She stated that no one can silence or muzzle her and that she has never had relationships requiring her to stay quiet in exchange for support. She said people at Roc Nation, including executives like Desiree Perez, know she speaks her mind and has never been afraid to disagree with them. • She explained that Jay-Z’s relationship with Target was already established long before the boycott began. According to her, the boycott was aimed at discouraging new partnerships with Target, not requiring existing partners to end longstanding business relationships. • She contrasted that with pastors and others who entered into new partnerships with Target after the boycott began, saying those were the types of deals she believed undermined the movement. My Thoughts: In my opinion, this explanation raises more questions than it answers. If the boycott made exceptions for longstanding business relationships, where were those guidelines communicated publicly? This is the first time I’ve heard that distinction being made. More importantly, why does that same grace not extend to everyday people? What about elderly individuals whose closest store is Target? Parents with young children who rely on the nearest Target for medicine, diapers, groceries, or other necessities? Many people were criticized simply for shopping there out of convenience or necessity. Why is Jay Z’s longstanding corporate relationship viewed as an acceptable exception, while ordinary people trying to care for their families were often judged more harshly? Toward the end of the discussion, Tamika said she wished wealthy people had voluntarily chosen not to continue doing business with Target during the boycott. But after spending much of the conversation explaining why his existing relationship made the situation different, that statement felt contradictory to me. What I find most interesting is that Tamika says she was so busy organizing and doing activism work that she didn’t initially see the criticism. Yet, when it comes to other people exercising their own freedom of speech, freedom of expression, or making decisions she disagrees with, she always seems to find the time to weigh in, criticize, and even chastise them. Now that the criticism is directed at someone she has a relationship with, we’re hearing explanation after explanation and exception after exception. In my opinion, that’s the hypocrisy. My issue isn’t whether people choose to boycott Target or not. Everyone’s circumstances are different, and people should make the decisions that are best for themselves and their families. My issue is the apparent double standard. Fair Use Notice: This video contains excerpts used for purposes of commentary, criticism, news reporting, and discussion. The clips are presented in accordance with the principles of fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107. All rights to the original content remain with their respective owners. Source: TMI Podcast (Tamika Mallory & Mysonne) Referenced Timestamp: Approximately 25:00

Tamika Mallory has finally decided to address the controversy surrounding Jay-Z’s continued relationship with Target during the boycott. I’ve already shared my own thoughts on the situation, but I wanted to highlight her explanation because, in my opinion, it perfectly illustrates why I believe many activists and public figures apply different standards depending on who they’re talking about. Take a listen. Key Takeaways from Tamika Mallory: • She said she didn’t initially see the criticism because she has been busy organizing activism efforts, events, and work in Washington, D.C. According to her, her son eventually brought the online criticism to her attention after people began saying she wouldn’t speak on the issue because it involved Jay-Z. • She stated that no one can silence or muzzle her and that she has never had relationships requiring her to stay quiet in exchange for support. She said people at Roc Nation, including executives like Desiree Perez, know she speaks her mind and has never been afraid to disagree with them. • She explained that Jay-Z’s relationship with Target was already established long before the boycott began. According to her, the boycott was aimed at discouraging new partnerships with Target, not requiring existing partners to end longstanding business relationships. • She contrasted that with pastors and others who entered into new partnerships with Target after the boycott began, saying those were the types of deals she believed undermined the movement. My Thoughts: In my opinion, this explanation raises more questions than it answers. If the boycott made exceptions for longstanding business relationships, where were those guidelines communicated publicly? This is the first time I’ve heard that distinction being made. More importantly, why does that same grace not extend to everyday people? What about elderly individuals whose closest store is Target? Parents with young children who rely on the nearest Target for medicine, diapers, groceries, or other necessities? Many people were criticized simply for shopping there out of convenience or necessity. Why is Jay Z’s longstanding corporate relationship viewed as an acceptable exception, while ordinary people trying to care for their families were often judged more harshly? Toward the end of the discussion, Tamika said she wished wealthy people had voluntarily chosen not to continue doing business with Target during the boycott. But after spending much of the conversation explaining why his existing relationship made the situation different, that statement felt contradictory to me. What I find most interesting is that Tamika says she was so busy organizing and doing activism work that she didn’t initially see the criticism. Yet, when it comes to other people exercising their own freedom of speech, freedom of expression, or making decisions she disagrees with, she always seems to find the time to weigh in, criticize, and even chastise them. Now that the criticism is directed at someone she has a relationship with, we’re hearing explanation after explanation and exception after exception. In my opinion, that’s the hypocrisy. My issue isn’t whether people choose to boycott Target or not. Everyone’s circumstances are different, and people should make the decisions that are best for themselves and their families. My issue is the apparent double standard. Fair Use Notice: This video contains excerpts used for purposes of commentary, criticism, news reporting, and discussion. The clips are presented in accordance with the principles of fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107. All rights to the original content remain with their respective owners. Source: TMI Podcast (Tamika Mallory & Mysonne) Referenced Timestamp: Approximately 25:00

ComeWithFacts

17,625 次观看 • 20 天前

I genuinely cannot understand how someone can watch this story and still stand there, looking at two women, and somehow decide that the wrong one is the victim. On one side, you have a girl (Yıldız) who has been mistreated her entire life. Since the moment she was born, she was treated like a sacrifice for a conflict she was never even part of and later we find out that this conflict never even existed. Her right to study was taken from her. She was pushed into a marriage at a very young age just imagine being six, seven, eight years old, living in fear of being tied to someone you don’t even know. She was treated like a servant in her own home, by the very people she thought were her family. And just when she gets close to the happiness she dreamed of, the man she was engaged to shows up with another wife. She gets mistreated by that wife, by his family, and even (unintentionally) by him, because he was trying to run away from his own feelings, and that only caused her more heartbreak. The whole world was literally against her. She fought through all of that, only to find out in the end that everything she suffered for was based on something that wasn’t even real. Her entire life was built on a lie. That she isn’t even part of that family that she has literally no one in this world. Now on the other side… You have a girl (Melek) who, yes, was taken from her biological mother but she was raised by loving parents. She had everything anyone could wish for: education, freedom, a happy childhood, a healthy environment. She lived her life, fell in love, went out, made choices and no one questioned her, no one controlled her. And then what did she do? She found out that her man was engaged to another woman before marrying her (and even saw him marry her) and instead of holding on to her dignity, she chose to stay, to fight for a man who lied to her, to hold onto a marriage he tried to end multiple times. She used her unborn child to keep him tied to her. She lied constantly, and her excuse was that she was “protecting her marriage” a marriage that was already broken from the moment Serhat removed that ring at the airport in episode one. She tried to hand Yıldız (a woman who had already suffered enough) over to dangerous people. Then she found out the truth about her own birth (that her father ra*ped her mother.)And still no empathy. No moment of humanity toward her own mother. All she cared about was herself. And even though none of this had anything to do with Yıldız, she still found a way to blame it on her. Instead of holding her father accountable, she went and made a deal with him to get rid of Yıldız. She literally made a deal with the devil just to hurt Yıldız one more time. And after all of that… you want me to feel sorry for her? You want me to call her a victim? I honestly cannot believe we are living on the same planet with people who see this and still say, “she’s the victim.” Not morally. Not logically. Not emotionally. There is no world where this makes sense. It’s like watching someone clearly cause harm, and still calling them the victim and actually BELIEVING it. #HalefKöklerinÇağrısı

I genuinely cannot understand how someone can watch this story and still stand there, looking at two women, and somehow decide that the wrong one is the victim. On one side, you have a girl (Yıldız) who has been mistreated her entire life. Since the moment she was born, she was treated like a sacrifice for a conflict she was never even part of and later we find out that this conflict never even existed. Her right to study was taken from her. She was pushed into a marriage at a very young age just imagine being six, seven, eight years old, living in fear of being tied to someone you don’t even know. She was treated like a servant in her own home, by the very people she thought were her family. And just when she gets close to the happiness she dreamed of, the man she was engaged to shows up with another wife. She gets mistreated by that wife, by his family, and even (unintentionally) by him, because he was trying to run away from his own feelings, and that only caused her more heartbreak. The whole world was literally against her. She fought through all of that, only to find out in the end that everything she suffered for was based on something that wasn’t even real. Her entire life was built on a lie. That she isn’t even part of that family that she has literally no one in this world. Now on the other side… You have a girl (Melek) who, yes, was taken from her biological mother but she was raised by loving parents. She had everything anyone could wish for: education, freedom, a happy childhood, a healthy environment. She lived her life, fell in love, went out, made choices and no one questioned her, no one controlled her. And then what did she do? She found out that her man was engaged to another woman before marrying her (and even saw him marry her) and instead of holding on to her dignity, she chose to stay, to fight for a man who lied to her, to hold onto a marriage he tried to end multiple times. She used her unborn child to keep him tied to her. She lied constantly, and her excuse was that she was “protecting her marriage” a marriage that was already broken from the moment Serhat removed that ring at the airport in episode one. She tried to hand Yıldız (a woman who had already suffered enough) over to dangerous people. Then she found out the truth about her own birth (that her father ra*ped her mother.)And still no empathy. No moment of humanity toward her own mother. All she cared about was herself. And even though none of this had anything to do with Yıldız, she still found a way to blame it on her. Instead of holding her father accountable, she went and made a deal with him to get rid of Yıldız. She literally made a deal with the devil just to hurt Yıldız one more time. And after all of that… you want me to feel sorry for her? You want me to call her a victim? I honestly cannot believe we are living on the same planet with people who see this and still say, “she’s the victim.” Not morally. Not logically. Not emotionally. There is no world where this makes sense. It’s like watching someone clearly cause harm, and still calling them the victim and actually BELIEVING it. #HalefKöklerinÇağrısı

Maurora🫦

10,530 次观看 • 3 个月前

This woman purchased a window seat on an airplane months in advance, and she did so because she sometimes gets Air sick and looking out the window helps with that. A family comes to sit on the other side of the aisle from her.. A mom and dad and small baby girl . The baby starts crying as she wants the window seat. The father asks this passenger. Would she mind getting up? She explains. I don’t want to do that because I do get Air sick and I specifically purchased the seat for that reason.. She held her ground and did not give up her seat. Of course the family was aggravated and giving her dirty looks, and had some things to say about her as they were leaving the plane.. My question is do you think she was right to hold her ground? I do I think it’s very insensitive of parents to put out other people because their child is not well behaved.

This woman purchased a window seat on an airplane months in advance, and she did so because she sometimes gets Air sick and looking out the window helps with that. A family comes to sit on the other side of the aisle from her.. A mom and dad and small baby girl . The baby starts crying as she wants the window seat. The father asks this passenger. Would she mind getting up? She explains. I don’t want to do that because I do get Air sick and I specifically purchased the seat for that reason.. She held her ground and did not give up her seat. Of course the family was aggravated and giving her dirty looks, and had some things to say about her as they were leaving the plane.. My question is do you think she was right to hold her ground? I do I think it’s very insensitive of parents to put out other people because their child is not well behaved.

Leah Rain ✝️🇺🇸🎸🏝️

2,276,014 次观看 • 2 个月前

Lue Elizondo speaks publicly about Amy Eskridge for the first time “Regarding Amy Eskridge. I had the privilege of meeting her back in Huntsville, Alabama back in 2019. Her and her father had been working on a project. Apparently that involved anti-gravitics. She did provide me and a couple of my colleagues a briefing on it, I am not an anti-gravitics expert. I really don't know what to say about it, whether it was legitimate or not. She did complain that she was on a quote target list. I don't know if it was the same target list that I myself and folks like Dave Grusch were on or if it was someone something else, but she did reveal that to us and she did say that she was fearful for her life.”

Lue Elizondo speaks publicly about Amy Eskridge for the first time “Regarding Amy Eskridge. I had the privilege of meeting her back in Huntsville, Alabama back in 2019. Her and her father had been working on a project. Apparently that involved anti-gravitics. She did provide me and a couple of my colleagues a briefing on it, I am not an anti-gravitics expert. I really don't know what to say about it, whether it was legitimate or not. She did complain that she was on a quote target list. I don't know if it was the same target list that I myself and folks like Dave Grusch were on or if it was someone something else, but she did reveal that to us and she did say that she was fearful for her life.”

Red Panda Koala

115,999 次观看 • 2 个月前

Eva Marcille told Jason Lee that she’s not the type of wife that will sit with her hubby in the bathroom and take a coffe with him while he’s taking a shit because it’s not real love, she also says morning s-x is the best and she has different anatomy when it comes to kissing as that same mouth is going down to the other lips💀😭 She also reveals that oral s-x is mandatory to her and she can’t be with a man that says he’s not eating it because a man that isn’t eating the v-g!n- isn’t her man, jason then asked her if she will be dating a Blueface type now that she’s done with the politicians👀

Sensitive content

Eva Marcille told Jason Lee that she’s not the type of wife that will sit with her hubby in the bathroom and take a coffe with him while he’s taking a shit because it’s not real love, she also says morning s-x is the best and she has different anatomy when it comes to kissing as that same mouth is going down to the other lips💀😭 She also reveals that oral s-x is mandatory to her and she can’t be with a man that says he’s not eating it because a man that isn’t eating the v-g!n- isn’t her man, jason then asked her if she will be dating a Blueface type now that she’s done with the politicians👀

flame⛧

275,942 次观看 • 1 个月前

Flanagan: Tom Emmer is pretty ignorant and has said horrific things about immigrants in Minnesota, and Somali immigrants in particular, just last week. He is not anyone I am interested in hugging, frankly. Congresswoman Craig, up until she decided to run for the U.S. Senate, had on her website that she was proud of the fact that she voted with Tom Emmer 45% of the time. That is nothing to be proud of. And I think she gets that now, since she took it off her website, but that is her history. She has voted with Donald Trump more than any other Minnesota Democrat. We deserve a real Democrat to represent us in the Senate, not someone who cosplays as a Democrat when it’s convenient for her.

Flanagan: Tom Emmer is pretty ignorant and has said horrific things about immigrants in Minnesota, and Somali immigrants in particular, just last week. He is not anyone I am interested in hugging, frankly. Congresswoman Craig, up until she decided to run for the U.S. Senate, had on her website that she was proud of the fact that she voted with Tom Emmer 45% of the time. That is nothing to be proud of. And I think she gets that now, since she took it off her website, but that is her history. She has voted with Donald Trump more than any other Minnesota Democrat. We deserve a real Democrat to represent us in the Senate, not someone who cosplays as a Democrat when it’s convenient for her.

Acyn

118,595 次观看 • 12 天前

One of the most moving moments in Red Deer was talking to a kindly older woman standing on a busy street, waving an Alberta flag alongside a crowd of hundreds, and explaining exactly why she was there. She said she was doing it for her kids and her grandkids. She wants them to live free, be able to buy a house, get educated, and have a good life. That is what made the moment so powerful. This was not politics as a hobby. This was a grandmother looking at the direction of the country and deciding that if she wants a better future for the next generation, she has to step out into public and stand for it. That is deeply symbolic. Because when you see an older woman on the side of a major road waving a flag for Alberta independence, you are not looking at extremism. You are looking at concern, love, memory, and hope. You are looking at someone who has lived long enough to compare the Canada she remembers with the Canada we have now, and who no longer believes the current path will deliver a decent life for her family. She says very plainly that Canada has betrayed Alberta, that Ottawa wants Alberta’s money and resources but will not help Alberta prosper, and that this is why she now believes Alberta has to take care of itself. That matters because it shows what is driving this movement at a human level. A lot of people outside Alberta still try to frame support for independence as anger or protest alone. But conversations like this show something deeper. Many people are being motivated by love of family and a desire to leave their children and grandchildren something better than debt, housing insecurity, declining affordability, and a political system that seems to take Alberta for granted. She says her kids may never buy a home the way things are now, and that some cannot even afford food. That is not abstract ideology. That is a moral alarm bell. She also makes the case many Albertans now make instinctively: if Alberta kept more of its own money, managed its own affairs, and stopped endlessly subsidizing a system that does not serve it, families here would have a real chance to get ahead again. More opportunity. Less tax burden. More control. More ability to build a future in our own province. Whether people agree with every detail or not, the emotional truth behind it is clear: she sees independence not as destruction, but as rescue. And maybe that is the most significant thing about the whole exchange. For her, Alberta independence is not mainly about grievance. It is about hope. Hope that her grandkids might still buy a home. Hope that they might live free. Hope that Alberta might finally start working for Albertans again. When a grandmother is standing on the roadside saying that out loud, people should pay attention.

One of the most moving moments in Red Deer was talking to a kindly older woman standing on a busy street, waving an Alberta flag alongside a crowd of hundreds, and explaining exactly why she was there. She said she was doing it for her kids and her grandkids. She wants them to live free, be able to buy a house, get educated, and have a good life. That is what made the moment so powerful. This was not politics as a hobby. This was a grandmother looking at the direction of the country and deciding that if she wants a better future for the next generation, she has to step out into public and stand for it. That is deeply symbolic. Because when you see an older woman on the side of a major road waving a flag for Alberta independence, you are not looking at extremism. You are looking at concern, love, memory, and hope. You are looking at someone who has lived long enough to compare the Canada she remembers with the Canada we have now, and who no longer believes the current path will deliver a decent life for her family. She says very plainly that Canada has betrayed Alberta, that Ottawa wants Alberta’s money and resources but will not help Alberta prosper, and that this is why she now believes Alberta has to take care of itself. That matters because it shows what is driving this movement at a human level. A lot of people outside Alberta still try to frame support for independence as anger or protest alone. But conversations like this show something deeper. Many people are being motivated by love of family and a desire to leave their children and grandchildren something better than debt, housing insecurity, declining affordability, and a political system that seems to take Alberta for granted. She says her kids may never buy a home the way things are now, and that some cannot even afford food. That is not abstract ideology. That is a moral alarm bell. She also makes the case many Albertans now make instinctively: if Alberta kept more of its own money, managed its own affairs, and stopped endlessly subsidizing a system that does not serve it, families here would have a real chance to get ahead again. More opportunity. Less tax burden. More control. More ability to build a future in our own province. Whether people agree with every detail or not, the emotional truth behind it is clear: she sees independence not as destruction, but as rescue. And maybe that is the most significant thing about the whole exchange. For her, Alberta independence is not mainly about grievance. It is about hope. Hope that her grandkids might still buy a home. Hope that they might live free. Hope that Alberta might finally start working for Albertans again. When a grandmother is standing on the roadside saying that out loud, people should pay attention.

Jon Alberta Patriot

15,154 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨 Erika Kirk Just Said She DOESN'T Care About What People Say About Her Online — She Cares So LITTLE That She's Sent Me Not One But TWO Cease And Desist Letters 🤣 We just caught Erika Kirk in yet another lie. She sat down for a softball interview and claimed she "really does not care" what people online say about her because she's "too busy" playing with Magna Tiles. She wants you to believe she's a traditional Christian, above-it-all mother, tuning out the "noise." But actions speak louder than words, and her actions prove she is CRACKING under the pressure. If she "really does not care," then why has she unleashed a fleet of high dollar lawyers to try to bully journalists and investigators into silence? Here's the REAL truth, I have personally received not one, but TWO cease and desist letters from her lawyers for reporting on her. And I'm not the only one. She has targeted. She's also sent cease and desist letters to both Candace Owens and WolvesAndFinance And they've threatened many others as well who dare to ask questions. The fact that I've received TWO tells you everything you need to know. She is watching. She is scared. And she is desperately trying to control the narrative by threatening anyone who gets too close to the truth. You don't send out multiple threatening legal letters to people you "don't care" about. You do that when the truth is a mortal threat to the carefully constructed facade you're selling to the world. She isn't busy playing with Magna Tiles. She's busy watching her every move get exposed, and her only response is to try to legally bully the truth into silence with lawfare. It's not working. Every cease and desist letter is just another piece of evidence that we are over the target. She cares so little she had her lawyers write to me twice. Share this if you see through the lies!💪 🇺🇸 FROM: Shadow of Ezra FOLLOW Him!

🚨 Erika Kirk Just Said She DOESN'T Care About What People Say About Her Online — She Cares So LITTLE That She's Sent Me Not One But TWO Cease And Desist Letters 🤣 We just caught Erika Kirk in yet another lie. She sat down for a softball interview and claimed she "really does not care" what people online say about her because she's "too busy" playing with Magna Tiles. She wants you to believe she's a traditional Christian, above-it-all mother, tuning out the "noise." But actions speak louder than words, and her actions prove she is CRACKING under the pressure. If she "really does not care," then why has she unleashed a fleet of high dollar lawyers to try to bully journalists and investigators into silence? Here's the REAL truth, I have personally received not one, but TWO cease and desist letters from her lawyers for reporting on her. And I'm not the only one. She has targeted. She's also sent cease and desist letters to both Candace Owens and WolvesAndFinance And they've threatened many others as well who dare to ask questions. The fact that I've received TWO tells you everything you need to know. She is watching. She is scared. And she is desperately trying to control the narrative by threatening anyone who gets too close to the truth. You don't send out multiple threatening legal letters to people you "don't care" about. You do that when the truth is a mortal threat to the carefully constructed facade you're selling to the world. She isn't busy playing with Magna Tiles. She's busy watching her every move get exposed, and her only response is to try to legally bully the truth into silence with lawfare. It's not working. Every cease and desist letter is just another piece of evidence that we are over the target. She cares so little she had her lawyers write to me twice. Share this if you see through the lies!💪 🇺🇸 FROM: Shadow of Ezra FOLLOW Him!

Project Constitution

347,794 次观看 • 3 个月前

Today is Kayoko's birthday! She does not talk much, and she tends to act as if she already knows everything before it even needs to be said. It is not that she has no emotions — she simply has no particular interest in letting them show, and at some point, the teacher has probably come to understand that. She does not mind being misunderstood, moves when she needs to, says what she has to say in as few words as possible, and considers that enough. When the teacher reaches out to her first, she does not push them away, but she does not exactly welcome them either — and somehow, that careful, precise distance she keeps is the part that tends to stay with you. Maybe today is a good day to close that distance, just a little. #BlueArchive

Today is Kayoko's birthday! She does not talk much, and she tends to act as if she already knows everything before it even needs to be said. It is not that she has no emotions — she simply has no particular interest in letting them show, and at some point, the teacher has probably come to understand that. She does not mind being misunderstood, moves when she needs to, says what she has to say in as few words as possible, and considers that enough. When the teacher reaches out to her first, she does not push them away, but she does not exactly welcome them either — and somehow, that careful, precise distance she keeps is the part that tends to stay with you. Maybe today is a good day to close that distance, just a little. #BlueArchive

BlueArchive

64,367 次观看 • 4 个月前

Tamra and Teddi say Rachel Zoe “knows what she’s doing,” with Teddi adding that she likes her more and more as she watches the show. Tamra says Rachel gets straight to the point and asks the right questions. She also notes that Rachel calls out how annoying Amanda is, which not everyone is willing to do. Tamra agrees with Erika and Rachel that Amanda is performative, but admits she needs Erika “to do a little bit more” on the show. Tamra says she misses Erika getting involved and feels like Erika has taken on more of a shoulder to cry on or mediator role. “We need [Erika] more activated,” Tamra says. Teddi hints that we will see that later in the season. Tamra adds that Amanda needs to be less obnoxious. #RHOBH Podcast: Two Ts in a Pod

Tamra and Teddi say Rachel Zoe “knows what she’s doing,” with Teddi adding that she likes her more and more as she watches the show. Tamra says Rachel gets straight to the point and asks the right questions. She also notes that Rachel calls out how annoying Amanda is, which not everyone is willing to do. Tamra agrees with Erika and Rachel that Amanda is performative, but admits she needs Erika “to do a little bit more” on the show. Tamra says she misses Erika getting involved and feels like Erika has taken on more of a shoulder to cry on or mediator role. “We need [Erika] more activated,” Tamra says. Teddi hints that we will see that later in the season. Tamra adds that Amanda needs to be less obnoxious. #RHOBH Podcast: Two Ts in a Pod

Bye Wig Hello Drama

63,895 次观看 • 5 个月前

The amnesty bill Rep. María Elvira Salazar is proposing is Dead On Arrival. She can try to put lipstick on that pig all she wants, but Americans won’t fall for it. As a matter of fact, she’s used that lipstick many times before. One time on herself when she ran for Congress… and the other time? She interviewed Fidel Castro. Nothing wrong with a controversial interview. But she decided to use the honorific of “Mi Comandante.” And she didn’t use it as respect. She used it as a sign of adoration for the murderous dictator of Cuba. That’s not journalism…That’s infatuation. Still not convinced? In the video below, she sits down with the nephew of Che Guevara, ANOTHER murderous communist. She says she is PRIVILEGED and HONORED to be in the VERY presence of the DNA of Che Guevara. She’s deifying the embodiment of evil. These are but two examples of many I warned the constituents of FL-27 about when I ran against her in 2020. We could have had a NET ZERO Congressman. A proven fighter who can’t be bought and who would have focused on policies that put America First. But now we have this communist spy walking the halls of Congress and promoting mass migration. Miami deserves better.

The amnesty bill Rep. María Elvira Salazar is proposing is Dead On Arrival. She can try to put lipstick on that pig all she wants, but Americans won’t fall for it. As a matter of fact, she’s used that lipstick many times before. One time on herself when she ran for Congress… and the other time? She interviewed Fidel Castro. Nothing wrong with a controversial interview. But she decided to use the honorific of “Mi Comandante.” And she didn’t use it as respect. She used it as a sign of adoration for the murderous dictator of Cuba. That’s not journalism…That’s infatuation. Still not convinced? In the video below, she sits down with the nephew of Che Guevara, ANOTHER murderous communist. She says she is PRIVILEGED and HONORED to be in the VERY presence of the DNA of Che Guevara. She’s deifying the embodiment of evil. These are but two examples of many I warned the constituents of FL-27 about when I ran against her in 2020. We could have had a NET ZERO Congressman. A proven fighter who can’t be bought and who would have focused on policies that put America First. But now we have this communist spy walking the halls of Congress and promoting mass migration. Miami deserves better.

Enrique Tarrio

21,912 次观看 • 3 个月前

I have a question. Ana Kasparian sat down with Candace Owens in her home and said, “I wouldn’t say that I’m like a full-blown Christian…I’m not really big into religious doctrine per se.” And Candace—who professes the name of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior—didn’t stop to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with her, the love of Jesus Christ with her, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ with her. …why is that, do you think? Candace instead goes on to say Ana’s not being a “full-blown Christian” (whatever that is) is “amazing;” she also goes on to to talk about a “spiritual awakening” and that the “answers are not going to be found in these fickle conversations.” But she doesn’t tell Ana where the answers are found. She doesn’t pray over and with her. She doesn’t invite her to church. …Nothing. Why is that, do you think?

I have a question. Ana Kasparian sat down with Candace Owens in her home and said, “I wouldn’t say that I’m like a full-blown Christian…I’m not really big into religious doctrine per se.” And Candace—who professes the name of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior—didn’t stop to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with her, the love of Jesus Christ with her, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ with her. …why is that, do you think? Candace instead goes on to say Ana’s not being a “full-blown Christian” (whatever that is) is “amazing;” she also goes on to to talk about a “spiritual awakening” and that the “answers are not going to be found in these fickle conversations.” But she doesn’t tell Ana where the answers are found. She doesn’t pray over and with her. She doesn’t invite her to church. …Nothing. Why is that, do you think?

Natalie Jean Beisner

22,428 次观看 • 13 天前

This chick is doing her best to explain an important phenomenon to men. Unfortunately she is using 2020s chick-speak about ‘boundaries’ and ‘respecting yourself’ and other such buzzwords, which make the message nigh incomprehensible. So here is how I would put it to you, as a man: ➡️ No girl wants to be with a dude who is going to make pleasing her his life mission. The behavior screams ‘simp’ and makes her feel like you are beneath her, which makes her not want you. No chick wants to be with a man who is beneath her. ➡️ No girl wants to be with a dude who will let her run all over him in conversation, talking about things that he doesn’t want to hear about, controlling the flow of the conversation. That screams ‘weak dude’, who is either afraid to take control or does not know how. What should you do instead? ✅ If you are hooking up with a girl and she says, “I’m not looking for a relationship right now,” you say, “AWESOME. ME TOO.” And now all of a sudden she is confused and beguiled because you are not chasing her for the relationship. Why aren’t you chasing her for the relationship? Do you not WANT her? It will drive her crazy, she will start thinking about it over and over again, and she will desperately work to try to get you to want the relationship with her. If you keep just banging her while acting like you don’t care, eventually she will want the relationship with you so bad herself it will drive her crazy. ✅ If you are talking to a girl and she is talking about some other dude she was dating, then unless you are actually curious about that (and if she is a girl you are sleeping with, it is worth getting to know some about her prior relationships… you will learn her behavior patterns, why she broke up with exes, plus any obvious red flags that can let you hit the eject button before you get in too deep), all you have to say to get off that topic is, “Yeah, that’s cool and all,” and act really bored and start looking around. (If she can’t take a hint then you just tell her, “Don’t you have a girlfriend or someone you can tell this to?”) The basic frame is “I’M JUST HERE TO BANG YOU AND HAVE FUN.” It doesn’t matter if you secretly want marriage with her and 15 babies. You want to let HER chase the relationship and fall into YOUR frame. If she starts going off on conversation you don’t want to hear about, act bored or change the topic. If she starts trying to say she doesn’t want a relationship, get out ahead of that frame and own it yourself (“Me neither, we’re in accord”). Women want your attention. Women who are sleeping with you IN PARTICULAR want it. If she feels she is losing your attention, that your interest in or commitment to her is waning, it will cause her to go nuts trying to get it back. And, in so doing, she becomes more invested, and falls in love. The peculiar ways of women!

This chick is doing her best to explain an important phenomenon to men. Unfortunately she is using 2020s chick-speak about ‘boundaries’ and ‘respecting yourself’ and other such buzzwords, which make the message nigh incomprehensible. So here is how I would put it to you, as a man: ➡️ No girl wants to be with a dude who is going to make pleasing her his life mission. The behavior screams ‘simp’ and makes her feel like you are beneath her, which makes her not want you. No chick wants to be with a man who is beneath her. ➡️ No girl wants to be with a dude who will let her run all over him in conversation, talking about things that he doesn’t want to hear about, controlling the flow of the conversation. That screams ‘weak dude’, who is either afraid to take control or does not know how. What should you do instead? ✅ If you are hooking up with a girl and she says, “I’m not looking for a relationship right now,” you say, “AWESOME. ME TOO.” And now all of a sudden she is confused and beguiled because you are not chasing her for the relationship. Why aren’t you chasing her for the relationship? Do you not WANT her? It will drive her crazy, she will start thinking about it over and over again, and she will desperately work to try to get you to want the relationship with her. If you keep just banging her while acting like you don’t care, eventually she will want the relationship with you so bad herself it will drive her crazy. ✅ If you are talking to a girl and she is talking about some other dude she was dating, then unless you are actually curious about that (and if she is a girl you are sleeping with, it is worth getting to know some about her prior relationships… you will learn her behavior patterns, why she broke up with exes, plus any obvious red flags that can let you hit the eject button before you get in too deep), all you have to say to get off that topic is, “Yeah, that’s cool and all,” and act really bored and start looking around. (If she can’t take a hint then you just tell her, “Don’t you have a girlfriend or someone you can tell this to?”) The basic frame is “I’M JUST HERE TO BANG YOU AND HAVE FUN.” It doesn’t matter if you secretly want marriage with her and 15 babies. You want to let HER chase the relationship and fall into YOUR frame. If she starts going off on conversation you don’t want to hear about, act bored or change the topic. If she starts trying to say she doesn’t want a relationship, get out ahead of that frame and own it yourself (“Me neither, we’re in accord”). Women want your attention. Women who are sleeping with you IN PARTICULAR want it. If she feels she is losing your attention, that your interest in or commitment to her is waning, it will cause her to go nuts trying to get it back. And, in so doing, she becomes more invested, and falls in love. The peculiar ways of women!

Girls Chase 🏃‍♀️💨

39,530 次观看 • 7 个月前

Michael Mann on the pivotal scene in Heat when Ashley Judd’s character Charlene chooses to warn Chris instead of giving him up to the police - despite knowing what it’s going to cost her: “In this scene, I confess I’m stunned with how wonderful Ashley Judd is; the expressions on her face as she processes all her options and what she has to do - and then she waves them off. She’s established early in the film as a practical, emotionally mature adult trying to put together a small family. And those are her values. They are family values. She knows that she ought to cooperate with the police and she ought to let Chris (Val Kilmer) fall. That would protect her child, and no instinct is more profound or powerful than the maternal instinct she has right there. And she’s set up for us to expect that she will do exactly that- even though the anguish would be intense, she would give up Chris to protect the family unit that remains. But when she goes to do that on the porch, she sees him and can’t help herself. She’s in love with the guy. You can see her face processing those choices, the endearment she feels for him, and then she does the irrational act and waves them off. In that moment, we see a look on Ashley’s face, we see a sense of what her future is going to be — which is going to be grim. And it’s there again when she closes her eyes as Drucker tells Vincent that the man was not Chris. But of course - it was. And then this is the final moment of Ashley Judd/Charlene Shiherlis in the film: an awareness of the separation from her man, an awareness of what her future holds for her. And with Chris, there’s a parallel moment of realization.” From the director’s commentary track off the Heat Blu-ray

Michael Mann on the pivotal scene in Heat when Ashley Judd’s character Charlene chooses to warn Chris instead of giving him up to the police - despite knowing what it’s going to cost her: “In this scene, I confess I’m stunned with how wonderful Ashley Judd is; the expressions on her face as she processes all her options and what she has to do - and then she waves them off. She’s established early in the film as a practical, emotionally mature adult trying to put together a small family. And those are her values. They are family values. She knows that she ought to cooperate with the police and she ought to let Chris (Val Kilmer) fall. That would protect her child, and no instinct is more profound or powerful than the maternal instinct she has right there. And she’s set up for us to expect that she will do exactly that- even though the anguish would be intense, she would give up Chris to protect the family unit that remains. But when she goes to do that on the porch, she sees him and can’t help herself. She’s in love with the guy. You can see her face processing those choices, the endearment she feels for him, and then she does the irrational act and waves them off. In that moment, we see a look on Ashley’s face, we see a sense of what her future is going to be — which is going to be grim. And it’s there again when she closes her eyes as Drucker tells Vincent that the man was not Chris. But of course - it was. And then this is the final moment of Ashley Judd/Charlene Shiherlis in the film: an awareness of the separation from her man, an awareness of what her future holds for her. And with Chris, there’s a parallel moment of realization.” From the director’s commentary track off the Heat Blu-ray

Gangster Cinema Central

92,421 次观看 • 25 天前

The Becker Schools in Minnesota released a statement about the incident where a teacher politically berated one of her students for not agreeing with her political gaslighting. Thankfully, the incident was filmed so it wouldn’t become a ‘he said/she said’ situation that the school system would sweep under the rug. But hey … they may still do just that. In a statement made by the school … Dr Jeremy Schmidt said a lot of contradictory things, while clearing up nothing. “We are maintaining a safe, structured learning environment (blah blah blah) …” —- make that make sense … how is it safe for a student when a teacher SHUTS THEM DOWN for having a different view or opinion than the teachers?! Is that considered part of their ‘structured learning environment’?! No one ever asked the school to PUNISH their entire community of teachers … WeThePeople simply asked that the particular teacher in question be suspended or fired for not providing a safe and respectful environment for her students. As far as ‘truth-seeking’ … she is on video, those are her words and actions … you can’t get anymore truthful than that. So don’t call our eyes or ears deceitful. Without those of us on social media bringing situations like this to the forefront … our schools will continue to get away with indoctrination and we parents are sick of it. All we ask is that our kids be taught: reading, writing, math, real science (not the ‘because I feel’ science), real history (not revisionist history to fit a narrative), civics and respect for our country. Leave activism, teacher’s opinions, teacher’s private life choices OUT OF OUR SCHOOLS. Even professors, from the mostly leftist universities, are beginning to complain that students entering college now can’t even read or have a basic understanding of things. THAT is the failure of our current education system and their activist staff!

The Becker Schools in Minnesota released a statement about the incident where a teacher politically berated one of her students for not agreeing with her political gaslighting. Thankfully, the incident was filmed so it wouldn’t become a ‘he said/she said’ situation that the school system would sweep under the rug. But hey … they may still do just that. In a statement made by the school … Dr Jeremy Schmidt said a lot of contradictory things, while clearing up nothing. “We are maintaining a safe, structured learning environment (blah blah blah) …” —- make that make sense … how is it safe for a student when a teacher SHUTS THEM DOWN for having a different view or opinion than the teachers?! Is that considered part of their ‘structured learning environment’?! No one ever asked the school to PUNISH their entire community of teachers … WeThePeople simply asked that the particular teacher in question be suspended or fired for not providing a safe and respectful environment for her students. As far as ‘truth-seeking’ … she is on video, those are her words and actions … you can’t get anymore truthful than that. So don’t call our eyes or ears deceitful. Without those of us on social media bringing situations like this to the forefront … our schools will continue to get away with indoctrination and we parents are sick of it. All we ask is that our kids be taught: reading, writing, math, real science (not the ‘because I feel’ science), real history (not revisionist history to fit a narrative), civics and respect for our country. Leave activism, teacher’s opinions, teacher’s private life choices OUT OF OUR SCHOOLS. Even professors, from the mostly leftist universities, are beginning to complain that students entering college now can’t even read or have a basic understanding of things. THAT is the failure of our current education system and their activist staff!

C-Reason🇺🇸

140,012 次观看 • 5 个月前

Indica Flower revealed that when performing boy-girl scenes, she does not necessarily feel attraction toward her male scene partners because she identifies as a l3sbian. She explained that, from her perspective, filming scenes is a professional job, and the focus is on delivering a good performance rather than personal attraction. According to her, both performers are there to do their work efficiently, and she believes that being turned on is not what determines the quality of a scene. “It’s our job right. So me and the male performer are on set, We are both there to do a job, We are both there to get it done as quickly and efficiently as possible. So it’s not about getting turned on, that’s not what makes the scene good.”

Sensitive content

Indica Flower revealed that when performing boy-girl scenes, she does not necessarily feel attraction toward her male scene partners because she identifies as a l3sbian. She explained that, from her perspective, filming scenes is a professional job, and the focus is on delivering a good performance rather than personal attraction. According to her, both performers are there to do their work efficiently, and she believes that being turned on is not what determines the quality of a scene. “It’s our job right. So me and the male performer are on set, We are both there to do a job, We are both there to get it done as quickly and efficiently as possible. So it’s not about getting turned on, that’s not what makes the scene good.”

ZAN

4,405,944 次观看 • 1 个月前

This woman lives in an HOA. The back of her yard backs up into an easement that is owned by the HOA. The trees back there are on the easement. She points out that there are fallen branches all over her neighbors yard because of the trees and there were many in her yard as well. So she and her children went and picked up all the branches and sticks in her yard and then she piled them up under the tree. She said since the tree is on the HOA easement, it’s their problem. She wants to know if she is the bad guy in all this. If it were me, I’d maintain my yard and put the branches and sticks out for the trash pickup. Do you think she is in the right and it’s the HOA’s problem? Or do you think she is wrong and is making a mountain out of a molehill and there are better hills to plant your flag on?

This woman lives in an HOA. The back of her yard backs up into an easement that is owned by the HOA. The trees back there are on the easement. She points out that there are fallen branches all over her neighbors yard because of the trees and there were many in her yard as well. So she and her children went and picked up all the branches and sticks in her yard and then she piled them up under the tree. She said since the tree is on the HOA easement, it’s their problem. She wants to know if she is the bad guy in all this. If it were me, I’d maintain my yard and put the branches and sticks out for the trash pickup. Do you think she is in the right and it’s the HOA’s problem? Or do you think she is wrong and is making a mountain out of a molehill and there are better hills to plant your flag on?

👉M-Û-R-Č-H👈

129,659 次观看 • 3 个月前