Aggregator
On the precipice of a title, these Knicks are a proud NBA contradiction
USA vs Paraguay World Cup Match at SoFi brings Hollywood’s biggest stars with Paris Hilton, Jamie Foxx and more
Crazed homeless Penn Station slasher stabbed one of his victims through head, pierced brain during rampage: DA
Public Schools Are In A Downward Spiral
Authored by Larry Sand via Heartland.org,
After decades of steady growth, attendance in U.S. K-12 public schools has shifted drastically. Over the past five years, registration has fallen by 2.3 percent, or 1.18 million students, and schools show no signs of rebounding. Lower birth rates are the primary driver of the downturn. The number of births has decreased steadily in recent years, with 690,000 fewer children born in 2024 than in 2007.
California lost nearly 75,000 K-12 students as of the 2025-26 school year, a slide more than twice as steep as the previous year.
Since 2017-2018, the Golden State has seen a 10 percent decline.
New York City has also been hard hit.
As of the 2025–26 school year, 793,300 students are enrolled in K-12 schools, down nearly 10 percent from 2020.
The loss of enrolled students has prompted some desperate measures. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is offering “free” childcare for 2-year-olds regardless of their parents’ income. In 2024, parents of toddlers spent an average of more than $23,000 on center-based childcare, according to the NYC Comptroller.
For those still attending public schools, chronic absence—the percentage of students missing 10 percent or more of a school year—is a growing problem. As of January 20, the latest data show that chronic absenteeism, which surged from 15 percent pre-COVID to 28 percent in 2022, remains elevated at 24 percent.
Nat Malkus, American Enterprise Institute’s director of education policy, notes that the surge in absenteeism affects districts of all sizes, racial backgrounds, and income levels. However, the data reveal significant racial and ethnic disparities, with 39 percent of black students, 36 percent of Hispanic students, 24 percent of white students, and 15 percent of Asian students chronically absent.
A major factor behind rising absenteeism is that many students lack motivation to attend school. In 2024, Gallup and the Walton Family Foundation surveyed more than 1,000 Gen Z students ages 12 to 18 and found that only 48 percent of those enrolled in middle or high school feel motivated to attend. Only half said they do something interesting in school every day. Similarly, a 2024 EdChoice poll found that 64 percent of teens said school is boring, and 30 percent view it as a waste of time.
Additionally, a 2024 survey revealed that nearly 64 percent of school parents say K-12 education is headed in the wrong direction, up 8 points from 2023.
Marc Oestreich, an education policy consultant and strategist, writes that in many cases, students are responding to schools that fail to teach them to read, fail to adapt to their needs, and fail to demonstrate that another day in the building is worth their time.
Oestreich asserts, “The honest version of the absenteeism story is not that American parents have suddenly become uniquely irresponsible, or that students have collectively misplaced their work ethic somewhere between TikTok and the bus stop. The honest story is that a substantial number of families, concentrated among the poor, the male, and the badly served, have concluded from direct experience that what their local public school offers is not worth the time.”
While public schools are struggling, private school attendance has remained steady. However, as more parental choice bills advance, the number of children attending private schools will very likely increase. There are currently 75 private school choice programs in 34 states, serving more than 1.5 million students.
Also, the Federal Tax Credit Scholarship Program, which takes effect on January 1, 2027, is likely to substantially increase the number of students leaving public schools for private schools.
Through the program, individual taxpayers will be eligible for a dollar-for-dollar tax credit of up to $1,700 for contributions to approved scholarship-granting organizations (SGOs). In turn, the SGOs will be required to use these contributions to grant scholarships to students at private and public elementary and secondary schools within their states. Students who are eligible to attend public school and whose family income is below 300 percent of the gross area median income will be eligible for the scholarships. The scholarships can be used for qualified expenses such as tuition, fees, books, supplies, room and board, uniforms, transportation, computer technology, equipment, and internet access.
The program is especially popular among black and Hispanic communities, groups most likely to experience chronic absenteeism. A recent poll found that 63 percent of Hispanics and 68 percent of blacks—groups most in need of choice—support a private option.
Thus far, 31 states have opted into the federal scholarship program, and two governors (in Minnesota and Wisconsin) have said their states won’t participate. The remaining states and the District of Columbia have not yet formally decided or announced their decisions.
In states without a private choice program, the best option for parents is to educate their children at home. In fact, homeschooling continued to grow across the United States during the 2024-2025 school year, with an average increase of 5.4 percent, nearly three times the pre-pandemic growth rate of about 2 percent.
Micro-schools, where classes typically have fewer than 15 students of varying ages and schedules, and curricula are tailored to each class’s needs, are growing in popularity and currently educate about 2 percent of the U.S. student population—roughly 750,000 students. Most micro-schools are independently run by parents, though some are part of a formal network that provides paid, in-person teachers. Lessons take place in various settings, including homes, libraries, community centers, etc.
Micro-schools today are less “micro” than they were, according to the latest analysis of the sector from the National Microschooling Center. In 2024, the median number of students in a typical micro-school was 16. That figure has since risen to 22, reflecting the increased experience of school operators, reports Don Soifer, the center’s CEO. However, some now serve as many as 100 students.
In sum, except in the case of declining birth rates, government-run schools are shedding students because many are not offering a worthy product.
Tyler Durden Fri, 06/12/2026 - 20:55Myles Garrett’s girlfriend Chloe Kim turns heads in all-white gym outfit
US Homeland Security boss Markwayne Mullin holds emotional meeting with families of loved ones murdered by illegal immigrants
CC Sabathia doesn’t hold back, calls Shohei Ohtani the GOAT over Barry Bonds
Longtime ‘Today’ show movie critic Gene Shalit dies ‘peacefully’ at 100
Globe And Mail Caught Pushing Anti-Musk "Hate" Propaganda, Then Quietly Alters Headline To ...
Summary:
- Globe And Mail Changes Headline After X post Ratioed
- "Reckless Propaganda": Globe And Mail Op-Ed Tells Readers "How To Properly Hate" Elon Musk Ahead Of SpaceX IPO
The hostile, juvenile, and editorially reckless propaganda, amplified by The Globe and Mail in the form of a Thursday op-ed just before the SpaceX IPO earlier today, had to be walked back after viral blowback.
That headline, which no sane editor would ever publish, and we really thought we were past the period of spreading hate by the lefty community, but apparently not at The Globe and Mail, came after the outlet published an op-ed titled: "Opinion: SpaceX IPO makes Elon Musk the first trillionaire. Here's how to properly hate him."
"The previous headline on this article did not meet The Globe's editorial standard. It has been replaced," the Canadian outlet wrote. Yet the outlet has yet to delete the X post and instead changed the headline to: "SpaceX is set to make Elon Musk the first trillionaire. Is that a bad look for capitalism?"
X user Enguerrand VII de Coucy, featured in the Community Notes section on The Globe and Mail's X post, wrote:
They changed "Here's how to properly hate him" to "Is that a bad look for capitalism?" which a) doesn't even make sense and b) isn't fooling anybody. They said what they meant with the original headline, it just "didn't meet their standards" because they usually try to hide their actual feelings she motives more carefully.
They changed “Here’s how to properly hate him” to “Is that a bad look for capitalism?” which a) doesn’t even make sense and b) isn’t fooling anybody. They said what they meant with the original headline, it just “didn’t meet their standards” because they usually try to hide their… https://t.co/SUTk1Y4Lhe pic.twitter.com/QzyewRjLWt
— Enguerrand VII de Coucy (@ingelramdecoucy) June 12, 2026"The important thing to remember when reading hostile Canadian media attacks on American individuals or causes is that the Globe and Mail, CBC, etc. are all funded by their government," X user Overton Defenestration said.
The important thing to remember when reading hostile Canadian media attacks on American individuals or causes is that the Globe and Mail, CBC, etc. are all funded by their government. pic.twitter.com/fqclLsEij2
— Overton Defenestration (@Ov__De) June 12, 2026"Fomenting hate was not accidental. Your publication continues to trash its reputation," X user Rowan said.
Fomenting hate was not accidental. Your publication continues to trash its reputation. pic.twitter.com/Y4wUm2i9r0
— Rowan (@canmericanized) June 12, 2026The Canadian newspaper's anti-Musk propaganda echoed similar rhetoric from unhinged Democrats, left-wing unions, and dark-money-funded NGOs, all of whom now see Musk's trillionaire status as a threat to their power because he will likely divert some of that wealth to fund pro-America movements challenging their progressive empire, which is built on a house of socialist cards.
"Reckless Propaganda": Globe And Mail Op-Ed Tells Readers "How To Properly Hate" Elon Musk Ahead Of SpaceX IPOWhether it is Elizabeth Warren, left-leaning unions, or Democrat-aligned NGOs funded by dark money, the common pattern here has been an information campaign aimed at Elon Musk to derail the SpaceX IPO. Their motives are very simple: if the game is about power and money, then Musk potentially becoming the world's first trillionaire on Friday morning represents a direct threat to the progressive empire they have built.
Just as with President Trump, the left has mounted a permanent pressure campaign of 'useful idiots' against Elon Musk because he has poured tens of millions of dollars into political campaigns for pro-America candidates - something Democrats, socialists, and Marxists despise. Then, Musk headed up DOGE in early 2025, which resulted in the defunding of USAID - another move by Musk that caused unhinged left-wing NGOs and Democrats to lose their minds.
The anti-Musk crowd was at it again on Thursday, one day before the SpaceX IPO was set to kick off, when a former Wall Street Journal reporter published an opinion piece in The Globe and Mail titled, "SpaceX is set to make Elon Musk the first trillionaire. Here's how to properly hate him."
Chris Gay, who appears to have a lot of pent-up hatred for Musk, began the op-ed: "Now that the SpaceX initial public offering is making Elon Musk all but officially the world's first trillionaire, is it okay to despise him just for being one? To broaden the question: are the billionaires associated with widening inequality a bad look for capitalism?"
The op-ed is less about wealth itself and more of a political framing exercise that uses the SpaceX IPO as the catalyst to recast Musk's soaring fortune as a governance risk. Gay attempts to launder what appears to be hatred toward Musk, centering his argument on democracy, inequality, and political capture. In other words, the target is not simply Musk becoming the world's first trillionaire, but the perceived threat that his capital, influence, and political alignment pose to the progressive establishment's grip on institutional power.
Gay wrote, "By donating at least US$250-million to the Trump campaign in 2024, this private citizen positioned himself to kill a congressional budget deal more or less single-handedly, and then to create a bogus federal agency: the "Department" of Government Efficiency. He staffed it with college-age technobrats who among other things effectively dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development, which millions of people depended upon for life-critical assistance."
Gay's op-ed, which The Globe and Mail posted on X, was heavily ratioed and had a Community Note ...
Here's what X users said in response:
This is classless and dangerous.
You’re a disgrace @globeandmail
How dare he create hundreds of thousands of jobs, trillions in wealth for others, accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy, help paralyzed/disabled people to become more independent and connect poor/low income areas to the internet!
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 12, 2026Imagine hating a guy whose rap sheet is:
-jobs
-wealth creation
-clean energy
-self driving cars for mobility for the elderly
-helping paralyzed people walk again
-internet for the poor
Sounds like an absolute MONSTER 😂😂😂
Reckless biased propaganda. You should be grateful instead.
— Linda Yaccarino (@lindayaX) June 12, 2026I thought we were supposed to stop spreading hate
— Eric Balchunas (@EricBalchunas) June 12, 2026Elon has created thousands of millionaires through his endeavors. What have you done outside of yapping about better humans? pic.twitter.com/21dRG3AlYB
— The Rabbit Hole (@TheRabbitHole) June 12, 2026The fact that you are focusing on envy and hate instead of how to innovate and be successful like Elon speaks volumes about your writers and your sad little entity.
Pathetic.
It's not just Globe And Mail, the globalist Financial Times pushes the information operation to paint Musk as 'evil' ...
Opinion: You might have thought the world’s richest man had enough on his plate teeing up history’s biggest IPO. Yet he has been devoting many of his waking hours to stoking up racial hatred in Britain on his social media site. https://t.co/1C09ebAgPg pic.twitter.com/sFFtPM3RVx
— Financial Times (@FT) June 12, 2026The left is losing its mind as the nation progresses forward with pro-American innovation and wokeness dies in darkness.
Tyler Durden Fri, 06/12/2026 - 20:43OG Anunoby soaking in historic Knicks moment as NBA title chance awaits
Russia Is Single-Handedly Standing Against The West: Putin
"It was they who carried out the coup d'etat in Ukraine, which forced us to take the people of Crimea under protection. When they started the war, they started bombing Donetsk using warplanes" - Putin in a fresh address to Russian service members came out swinging, giving a familiar lesson in recent history.
And quite provocatively, he emphasized that Russia is now practically fighting against the entirety of the collective West in the Ukraine conflict in the Friday remarks.
"Russia is standing against the so-called Collective West single-handedly," Putin said, state media cited, and he noted that the 'special military operation' he ordered to stave off NATO encroachment is revealing itself to be "exceedingly high-tech."
via AP"The NATO nations are all, without exception, ramping up efforts to do all they can to orchestrate actions against Russia," he added, sate media continued.
He stressed that Moscow did not initiate the Ukraine conflict, but that the Western allies and their hegemonic expansion and meddling did.
He perhaps for the first time acknowledged some pain inflicted on Russia due to Ukraine's long-range drone waves, which for months have been inflicting serious damage primarily on oil and energy sites:
Now, Western nations have set out to "inflict a strategic defeat on Russia," but "this is not something that can be done," Putin said.
"The enemy is expanding the use of [kamikaze] drones… trying to strike at our morale, trying to break up Russian society… and cause economic damage," he noted, stressing that "they will not succeed."
These drones have grown more long-range in their targeting and increasingly effective, as Russia's anti-air defense - which are set up primarily to intercept higher flying and faster inbound missiles or jets - seem powerless.
Or rather, if Ukraine sends 100 drones on Russia on any given night, at least dozens are bound to make it through, the recent pattern has shown. But Putin also seems to be strongly suggesting that Western intelligence is assisting Ukraine's drone mayhem on the Russian populace.
Images have surfaced online showing what the military-industrial plant in Cheboksary looks like after being struck by a "Flamingo" drone. The photos show that anti-drone nets had been installed around the facility, but they ultimately failed to prevent the attack. pic.twitter.com/FSK9tP96V8
— WarTranslated (@wartranslated) June 10, 2026Earlier this month, the Putin-hosted St. Petersburg Economic Forum came under significant drone attack from Ukraine. Videos revealed that international dignitaries entered the venue against the backdrop of thick black smoke from drone hits on oil and other facilities.
Tyler Durden Fri, 06/12/2026 - 20:30The Braves solved the puzzle the Mets have yet to figure out
Dodgers Post podcast: What to make of Shohei Ohtani’s knee injury
Knicks-Spurs Finals surge to ratings heights not seen since 1998
Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt’s son Knox drops dad’s last name from diploma weeks ahead of 18th birthday
Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt’s son Knox drops dad’s last name from diploma weeks ahead of 18th birthday
Ghana star facing rape charges not allowed into Canada for World Cup match
Welfare-Warfare State Reform Is Not Freedom
Authored by Jacob Hornberger via The Future of Freedom Foundation,
The libertarian movement can be divided into two basic groups: libertarians who call for reforming welfare-warfare state programs and libertarians who call for dismantling welfare-warfare state programs.
I fall within the latter group. Why? Because I want to be free. Reform doesn’t get me freedom. At best it gets me a better serfdom. That’s nice, but it’s not want I want for the rest of my life. I want to be free, and only by dismantling infringements on freedom can I attain genuine freedom.
Consider 19th-century slavery, for example. Imagine libertarian reformers in the state of Mississippi calling for slavery reform. They would say, “Slavery is here to stay. It’s in the Constitution. We have to strive for what we can get. We also need to gain the respect and credibility of the people of Mississippi. We won’t do that by being radical and calling for the end of slavery. We must settle for advocating slavery reforms, such as shorter working hours, fewer lashings, better food, improved working conditions, and a bit of education.”
Would the slaves have been happy with such reforms? Undoubtedly, because their slavery would have been improved. But there would have been one big problem with these reforms: They wouldn’t have meant freedom for the slaves. To achieve freedom would have necessitated a dismantling of slavery, not its reform. Thus, the dismantle-libertarians would be raising people’s vision to a higher level — one that showed the evil, immorality, and destructiveness of slavery itself.
The fact that calling for the dismantling of slavery wouldn’t have been a popular position among the people of Mississippi would have been considered irrelevant to dismantle-libertarians. What would have mattered to those libertarians was not what the general population felt about them but the fact that they would be advocating what was right.
The principle is no different with respect to the serfdom under which we live today.
Our way of life is not one of strict slavery, like that of 19th-century slavery. But it is quite similar in terms of the serfdom way of life under which we live.
Under our serfdom way of life, the federal government is our master, and we are its servants.
We work to support the federal government.
That is our mission in life under the welfare-warfare state political-economic system under which we have all been born and raised.
The government decides how much of our earnings we are permitted to keep, much as a parent decides how much of an allowance to give his children.
That’s what the federal income tax, which formed no part of American life for more than 100 years after the founding of the United States, is all about.
We live under a governmental system that requires us to share a part of our earnings with others.
That’s what Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, subsidies, bailouts, and other welfare-state programs are all about. We are told that this mandated sharing shows what a good, caring, and compassionate people we are, even though no one is free to opt out.
We live under a governmental system that punishes us for consuming substances that the government says are harmful to us.
It serves as our daddy to make certain that we are taking care of ourselves. It sends us to our room if we disobey. The room is in a federal penitentiary..
We live under a governmental system that forces parents to subject their children to the state’s educational system, which can easily be described as army-lite. Here children’s minds are bent and molded into conformity, regimentation, deference to authority, and blind obedience to the ruler or to the government and its official narratives. It’s here that people are indoctrinated since early childhood into believing that their serfdom way of life is freedom.
Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.
We live under a socialist (i.e., central-planning) immigration-control system that comes with a brutal immigration police state, which entails death, suffering, humiliation, and massive destruction of economic liberty, free markets, private property, civil liberties, and privacy.
We live under a national-state governmental system, one in which the military, the CIA, and the NSA wield omnipotent, totalitarian, and dictatorial powers, including assassination (i.e., murder), secret surveillance, seizures, kidnappings, torture, and incarceration for life — all without due process of law and trial by jury.
What do reform-libertarians say about this serfdom way of life?
They say, “The system needs reform.” And so they come up with all sorts of welfare-warfare state reforms to make the serfdom more palatable.
Some examples of libertarian welfare-warfare state reforms are: school vouchers, raising the Social Security retirement age, health-savings accounts, income-tax reduction and reining in the IRS, improved concentration camps for illegal immigrants who are being deported, ending civil-asset forfeiture, legalizing only marijuana, reducing military spending, limiting secret surveillance, reining in the CIA, limiting foreign interventionism to cases involving “national security,” and getting members of the “freedom movement” into public office to manage the welfare-warfare state and the regulatory departments and agencies.
Would such libertarian reforms be beneficial? Undoubtedly!
They would almost certainly improve our serfdom way of life, much like libertarian slavery reform would have improved the condition of 19th-century slaves.
But there is one great big problem with libertarian reform of the welfare-warfare state. It’s not freedom, any more than slavery reform would have meant freedom for the slaves.
In order to achieve freedom, it is necessary (1) to identify the infringements on freedom that are preventing people from being free, and then (2) dismantle, not reform, every single one of such infringements.
Is that an easy task? Of course not, especially when the vast majority of Americans are convinced that their serfdom way of life already constitutes freedom. (Goethe: “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”)
But if freedom were easy, everyone in history would have had it.
Achieving freedom is extremely difficult. It requires a critical mass of people who have come to understand what genuine freedom is and have decided to do whatever they can to achieve freedom, rather than simply settle for a warmed-over, improved serfdom.
Tyler Durden Fri, 06/12/2026 - 20:05