We are now not supposed to judge people as fully-fledged human beings, which is the natural outcome of a hedonistic society in which the only thing that matters is sex.
The way we used to date is that you didn’t take your clothes off until you were married. When that was the case, you had to fully appreciate the person sitting across the table from you as a fully-fledged human being with thoughts, values, and ideas. You only got to sex after marriage. Now, you get to the sex first and everything else is lost by the wayside. Some people are making the argument that marriage is bad because women are initiating most divorces due to no-fault divorce, which means it’s risky for men to get married.
My answer to that is: Not if you marry the right woman. The way you know you’re marrying the right woman is if you date in the right way. This is why it’s very important when you are dating to avoid what has become current: jumping in bed with each other and then seeing how it goes from there. Instead, it should be precisely as it was in terms of actually appreciating the other human being as a potential life partner. Here’s one reason why: Everything is going to droop and bag as you get older anyway, so you should marry somebody who shares your values.
Modern masculinity does have a problem. More men than ever are committing suicide, more men than ever are addicted to opioids, and more men than ever are not going to college. And there’s a lot of depression. The real reason for that is, men have been deprived of their traditional roles or have deprived themselves of their traditional roles. The original roles of a male were to provide for and protect a family, which meant get married, have kids, protect, defend, provide. That’s what men did. And it gave them purpose and meaning.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-ben-shapiro-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h4>
Then we built an entire society around the idea that this was actively bad, that there was a serious problem with doing this. And thus society has fallen apart. Feminism argued in order for men to fulfill their traditional roles, women had to be tertiary or secondary or be treated as slaves, etc. But that was an idiotic assumption. Marriage was always good for women.
The New York Times has an entire article titled: <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/09/24/magazine/caitlin-moran-interview.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Modern Masculinity Is Broken. She Knows How to Fix It.</a> It is an interview with an author who is married with a couple of kids. She is a self-described feminist. The New York Times describes her as “one of her generation’s funniest and most fearless feminist voices.” I always love when people use the word “fearless,” because it usually just means they’re repeating nostrums the Left really, really likes. That’s what makes you “fearless.”
She implies men should just ditch masculinity, writing:
<blockquote>I can walk around leafy liberal North London and see boys in dresses with nail polish who are using mixed pronouns and go, “Look at the progress here.” On the other hand, as soon as I go back to my hometown, I am not seeing boys walking around in sarongs and using mixed pronouns. In those places you would be going straight in at the deep end by starting a conversation about masculinity by going, “Maybe gender shouldn’t exist.” </blockquote>
She’s wrong. The real solution for men is to live virtuously. The real solution for women is also to live virtuously.
Why are men so depressed? Because you’ve said that the only way they can be a real man is to not be a man at all.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>

Ben Shapiro Editorial Series 09

NYT ‘Fearless’ Writer Advises Men To Ditch Masculinity. But That’s Why So Many Men Are Depressed.

NYT 'Fearless' Writer Advises Men To Ditch Masculinity. But That’s Why So Many Men Are Depressed.

Ben Shapiro

Marriage

New York Times

Readers Pass

Relationships

Women

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/transgender" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Trans</a> activist Jonathan Van Ness broke down in tears when podcast host <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/celebrities" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dax Shepard</a> questioned the logic of pushing trans ideology on vulnerable teens who could change their minds later.
Their conversation took place on a recent <a href="https://armchairexpertpod.com/pods/jonathan-van-ness" target="_blank" rel="noopener">episode</a> of Shepard’s podcast, “Armchair Expert.” They were discussing whether The New York Times was really left-leaning since the outlet had allowed a handful of articles to be published that Van Ness deemed “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/lgbtq" target="_blank" rel="noopener">anti-trans</a>.”
Shepard argued that the articles were just asking “questions” and “challenging” more extreme stances, such as teens being permitted to take permanently damaging, irreversible puberty blockers. 
“Some people are very uncomfortable about teenagers transitioning. They’re challenging that. How do we know that the person’s not gonna change their mind?” Shepard said.
&#8220;This whole notion that to be critical… or to question even question it makes you an enemy. I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s the way forward,&#8221; Shepard added.
&#8220;I feel like I&#8217;m talking to my dad,&#8221; Van Ness, who <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/09/25/dax-shepard-brings-jonathan-van-ness-to-tears-while-grilling-them-on-trans-issues/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">identifies</a> as a &#8220;non-binary&#8221; trans person and demands the use of they/them pronouns, replied.
&#8220;All I&#8217;m saying is what we know about misinformation and disinformation is when you have an outsized reaction to something, there&#8217;s a good chance that you&#8217;re being exposed to misinformation and disinformation,&#8221; the activist continued. &#8220;And a lot of the rhetoric around the anti-trans backlash does have a lot of misinformation and disinformation in it.&#8221;
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-5462">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
Later in the conversation, Van Ness told Shepard, &#8220;I&#8217;m not calling you a transphobe. You can not be transphobic and still have thoughts that espouse trans misogyny and espouse transphobic ideologies and beliefs.&#8221;
Shepard said he “did not intend” to start a debate and insisted he supported trans rights in general. &#8220;I didn&#8217;t want that at all,&#8221; Shepard told the “Queer Eye” alum. &#8220;I adore you. I think that you&#8217;re hysterical and talented and I love that you&#8217;re an activist.&#8221;
Van Ness became emotional and began crying. “I wish that people were as passionate about little kids being able to be included or grow up as they were about fictitious women’s fairness in sports. I have to tell you I am very tired,” Van Ness said to Shepard, who apologized again.
Van Ness continued, “You can have racist beliefs and not know you’re racist, just like you can have transphobic beliefs and not realize you have transphobic beliefs. That doesn’t mean you’re a bad person.”

Jonathan Van Ness

Trans Activist Cries, Complains When Dax Shepard Asks About Teens Changing Their Minds Later

Celebrities

Podcast

Social Issues

Transgender

U.S.

The White House Press Office has opened a new Department of The President is Fine, according to a report from the New York Times’ new Bureau of the President is Fine in a front page story headlined “The President is Fine” which says that the White House Department of the President is Fine says the president is fine. According to the White House, the Department of the President is Fine will be tasked with explaining to the public that the president is not doing what he’s obviously doing or saying what he’s obviously saying but instead is fine.
The White House announced the new Department of the President is Fine after the president neglected to schedule an appearance at Ground Zero for the September 11th memorial because he wasn’t sure what date September 11th would fall on this year. Instead, the president went to Hanoi, the site of America&#8217;s humiliating surrender in Vietnam, where he rambled incomprehensibly about the phrase “lying dog-faced pony soldier,” from a 1953 John Wayne movie. The White House Department of the President is Fine immediately issued a clarification explaining that the president had actually intended to ramble incomprehensibly about a 1952 Tyrone Power movie, in which the phrase also does not appear. So, the president is fine. 
The Hanoi press conference ended when the president’s incomprehensible rambling became so incomprehensible that the Director of the Department of the President is Fine, Karine Jean Identity Hire, had to drown the president out by loudly playing the piano as the President-is-Fine Dancers kick-lined their way onstage to carry the president into the wings while singing their official theme song,
<blockquote>“The President is fine,
The President is fine,
They say that he’s demented,
But the charges are invented,
His condition is benign.
And though this exit is abrupt,
That doesn’t mean that he’s corrupt.
The President is Fine.”</blockquote>
The President then went on to Alaska where he did commemorate September 11th by giving the Iranian Islamist Terrorist government $6 billion in ransom for kidnapped Americans in order to ensure the Iranians won’t kidnap any more Americans unless they want $6 billion more.
The White House Department of the President is Fine clarified that the $6 billion payout to Islamist Terrorists was not intended to commemorate the slaughter of 3,000 Americans by Islamist Terrorists on September 11th, 2001, but was instead meant to mark September 11th 2021, the date of the president&#8217;s humiliating surrender to Islamist Terrorists in Afghanistan, which was also why the president went to Hanoi — because he confused it with Kabul — which is easy to do now, so the president is fine.
In response to the opening of the new White House Department of the President is Fine, not only the New York Times, a former newspaper, but also NBC, ABC, CBS News, CNN, and the Washington Post will be opening up a joint Bureau of the President is Fine and will be assigning reporters to cover the fact that the president is fine. The Washington Post says they don’t need to assign a new reporter to the Bureau of the President is Fine because they already have Philip Bump, who was described in a 1952 Tyrone Power movie starring John Wayne in 1953, according to the Bureau of the President is Fine.
The news media’s Bureau of the President is Fine will be coordinating with the White House Department of the President is Fine to report on the fact that House Republicans have opened an impeachment inquiry into the president even though the president is obviously fine. According to the news media’s Bureau of the President is Fine, the White House Department of the President is Fine says there is not a single shred of evidence that the president is corrupt aside from his repeated phone calls and visits to aid his son’s influence peddling while tens of millions of dollars were funneled from America’s foreign enemies into Biden family shell companies — all of which is fine according to the news media — or possibly the White House. I always get those two confused …  which is easy to do now, so that&#8217;s fine.
Andrew Klavan is the host of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>” at The Daily Wire. He is an award-winning novelist, Hollywood screenwriter, and popular satirist. Klavan is the author of “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/When-Christmas-Comes-Andrew-Klavan/dp/1613162405/ref=pd_bxgy_sccl_2/132-9473875-2662038?pd_rd_w=x29DZ&amp;content-id=amzn1.sym.26a5c67f-1a30-486b-bb90-b523ad38d5a0&amp;pf_rd_p=26a5c67f-1a30-486b-bb90-b523ad38d5a0&amp;pf_rd_r=X7J7YCZYPAH29407AXTY&amp;pd_rd_wg=M65Ef&amp;pd_rd_r=c2bb5bb5-dd27-434d-9ca1-f2098f486a81&amp;pd_rd_i=1613162405&amp;psc=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">When Christmas Comes</a>” and “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Strange-Habit-Mind-Cameron-Mysteries/dp/1613163517/ref=pd_bxgy_sccl_1/132-9473875-2662038?pd_rd_w=lnVGk&amp;content-id=amzn1.sym.26a5c67f-1a30-486b-bb90-b523ad38d5a0&amp;pf_rd_p=26a5c67f-1a30-486b-bb90-b523ad38d5a0&amp;pf_rd_r=13RV0285EXYKN2D57RST&amp;pd_rd_wg=jW34u&amp;pd_rd_r=e0bb3c70-62ea-4448-8be5-a7cf1bba3f5e&amp;pd_rd_i=1613163517&amp;psc=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Strange Habit of Mind,</a>” the first two novels in the USA Today best-selling Cameron Winter Mystery series. The third installment, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/House-Death-Cameron-Winter-Mysteries-ebook/dp/B0BW1ZTVP9?ref_=ast_author_dp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The House of Love and Death</a>,” releases on October 31, 2023, and is now available for <a href="https://www.amazon.com/House-Death-Cameron-Winter-Mysteries-ebook/dp/B0BW1ZTVP9?ref_=ast_author_dp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Pre-order</a>.
Follow Klavan on Twitter: @andrewklavan
This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1148-evil-failure-lies" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show.</a>”
The views expressed in this satirical article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

President Biden Delivers Remarks On Contract Negotiations Between UAW And Detroit Carmakers

White House Opens New Department Of The President Is Fine

Andrew Klavan

Iran

Joe Biden

Satire

One of the hallmarks of this new era of wokeism that we&#8217;re all living through is that we&#8217;re constantly treated to new terminology for old concepts. Race riots have gotten a makeover, they&#8217;re now known as BLM protests. Goth kids, cross-dressers and other miscellaneous groups now have all found new labels for themselves under the umbrella of “gender identity.” Anti-white and anti-Asian racism, especially when enforced by the government, now goes by the name of &#8220;equity.&#8221; And, in maybe the farthest-reaching rebrand — the one that really goes back thousands of years, — the modern Left has even managed to redefine the term &#8220;prostitution.&#8221; Now, instead of calling prostitutes prostitutes, we&#8217;re supposed to call them &#8220;sex workers.&#8221;
The idea is to rebrand prostitution as something other than morally depraved, reprehensible conduct that no civilized society should ever tolerate, much less embrace. And as you might expect, many media outlets, including the New York Times, are on board with this change in terminology. The paper of record recently ran a whole <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/17/opinion/decriminalize-sex-work-new-york.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">op-ed</a> about the importance of &#8220;meeting the needs of sex workers.&#8221; According to the piece, we need to end &#8220;the social stigma&#8221; surrounding sex work. CBS News, for its part, has run several <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-africa-legalize-sex-work-prostitution-to-tackle-crime-against-women-hiv/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sympathetic</a> <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/san-francisco-sex-workers-battle-for-rights-legitimacy/">stories</a> about policies that can &#8220;legitimize the industry&#8221; of sex work.
Given all that, it&#8217;s with great interest that I checked out the websites of both The New York Times and CBS News last night to see how they were covering the story of a Virginia state house candidate named Susanna Gibson. Gibson, as you may have heard, was just outed as a cyber prostitute. She live-streamed videos on a porn website of herself engaging in various sex acts with her husband in exchange for money from strangers. She even offered to urinate for viewers if they paid up. To be clear, Gibson&#8217;s husband was aware all of this was happening. In fact he solicited donations himself at various points. And these were not private videos. They were not password protected, anyone could access them. And without going into too much detail, people could obtain even more salacious footage if they threw money at Gibson, in the form of &#8220;tokens.&#8221; Gibson assured her audience that the money was going to a &#8220;good cause&#8221; — perhaps her political campaign.
Now, if the New York Times and CBS News truly meant what they&#8217;ve been saying all these years about the legitimacy of sex work, you&#8217;d think this would be the easiest imaginable story to cover. Here you have a strong independent woman, engaging in consensual acts of prostitution with a willing partner. What could be more liberating than that? Truly this is what decades of feminism have been leading to, all along. This is the ultimate feminist success story. A “sex worker” becomes a politician —going from one form of prostitution to another. It’s the new American dream.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h4>
Except, strangely enough, that&#8217;s not how these outlets covered this story. Instead of defending Susanna Gibson&#8217;s conduct, both the New York Times and CBS News lied about it. And these were not subtle lies. They were as obvious and lazy as they could possibly be. The Times decided to ignore the facts of this whole situation, and instead <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/us/politics/susanna-gibson-virginia.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that Gibson&#8217;s videos had somehow leaked. This was their headline: &#8220;State House Candidate in Virginia Condemns Leak of Sex Tapes.&#8221; What they&#8217;re doing is hiding the fact that Gibson uploaded the footage herself. They&#8217;re implying that someone else leaked these videos, which they know is not what happened. For its part, CBS News ran this <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/susanna-gibson-candidate-responds-leak-tapes-sex-acts-husband-live-videos/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&amp;linkId=234641763" target="_blank" rel="noopener">headline</a>: &#8220;Virginia election candidate responds after leak of tapes showing her performing sex acts with husband.&#8221; Below that headline, CBS News copy-pasted an accurate Associated Press article describing what happened. So, CBS News&#8217; only contribution to the story was adding an obviously false headline to mislead as many people as possible.
This is all more than a little strange. Here you have a perfect opportunity for both of these outlets — the New York Times and CBS News — to report honestly on the sex work that Susanna Gibson was engaging in. That shouldn&#8217;t be a big deal, because as these organizations have established, sex work is as noble as any other form of work. But instead of doing that, they&#8217;re lying about basic facts of the story. They&#8217;re pretending that Gibson wasn&#8217;t selling pornographic videos for money. Instead, they&#8217;re pushing the lie that she was hacked and her private videos somehow found their way on the internet. When in fact they found their way onto the internet because Gibson put them there on purpose. In case you&#8217;re keeping track, these are the same outlets that went wall-to-wall on Donald Trump&#8217;s so-called &#8220;pee tape,&#8221; which didn&#8217;t exist. Now they&#8217;re telling you that you&#8217;re not allowed to discuss a Democratic Party candidate&#8217;s actual pee tape, which she uploaded on the internet. Brazen does not begin to describe this.
But it gets even more brazen. Susanna Gibson herself went even further than these outlets. She claimed to be the victim of a &#8220;sex crime&#8221;. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Virginia Democratic candidate Susanna Gibson slams release of pornographic videos" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/C78nNGWCoyg?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Let&#8217;s think about this for a second. Susanna Gibson voluntarily uploads footage of herself having sex with her husband, with her husband&#8217;s consent, to a porn website. She and her husband both solicit money from anonymous viewers on this website, and in return, they promise to engage in even more sex acts. None of this is occurring on some private channel. Anyone with a working internet connection can see it. Some of these sex acts, by the way, were broadcast after Gibson announced her run for office in Virginia.
Now, Gibson tells us, it&#8217;s a &#8220;sex crime&#8221; to share this footage. It violates Virginia&#8217;s revenge porn laws. If that&#8217;s true, ironically enough, it would mean that Susanna Gibson and her husband are guilty of sex crimes, because they&#8217;re the ones who shared the footage. So it&#8217;s not just a facile argument that we&#8217;re talking about here. It is completely and totally absurd. It&#8217;s the kind of argument you make when you&#8217;re ashamed of what you&#8217;ve done, and you know there&#8217;s no defense for it, so you blurt out the first thing that comes to mind. Saying that it’s a sex crime for people to share a sex tape that you published on the internet is like selling your car to someone and then calling the police and claiming they stole it. Or perhaps you remember when Anthony Weiner claimed he was hacked, because he had no defense for why he was sending pictures of his crotch to random women on the internet. It&#8217;s a bit like that as well.
The level of desperation is really something to behold. They&#8217;re so desperate that they&#8217;re co-opting the same terminology they told us was sacred — the language of the #MeToo movement — as a political cover for behavior they know is repulsive. They&#8217;re saying we&#8217;re all sex criminals for noticing what they&#8217;re uploading on the internet. This isn&#8217;t simply hypocrisy, these are the panicked cries of feminists who are afraid to confront the logical endpoint of their entire movement, which is that feminism doesn&#8217;t actually liberate women from anything. Instead, it encourages them to become slaves to their most degenerate, base sexual desires. 
A great illustration of this hypocrisy comes to us from the feminist blog Jezebel. Jezebel, like the New York Times and CBS News, is currently <a href="https://jezebel.com/republicans-try-to-smear-virginia-house-candidate-with-1850829023" target="_blank" rel="noopener">claiming</a> that Republicans are demonizing Gibson for the crime of having sex with her husband. That&#8217;s the strawman they&#8217;re running with, as unsurprising and predictable as it may be. And Jezebel of course repeats the line that even talking about Gibson&#8217;s videos might amount to a sex crime. 
What&#8217;s especially interesting about Jezebel&#8217;s coverage, though, is that they just ran a <a href="https://jezebel.com/tim-scott-girlfriend-1850829741" target="_blank" rel="noopener">long post</a> about the personal life of presidential candidate Tim Scott, saying he needs to be more open about why he doesn&#8217;t have a girlfriend at the age of 57. The piece mocks Scott for allegedly being a virgin until he was middle aged. It also suggests he&#8217;s suffering from &#8220;marriage-related trauma&#8221; from his upbringing after his father, a Vietnam War veteran, developed a drinking problem. So the progressive feminists at Jezebel are allowed to mock Tim Scott for all of these personal issues — which they haven&#8217;t even remotely verified. But at the same time, Jezebel also says you can&#8217;t talk about multiple sex tapes that a woman running for office in the Democratic Party published for public consumption. There’s a lot of this on the internet now. The same media outlets saying we should respect Susanna Gibson’s privacy — even though she didn’t respect her own privacy — are also reporting incessantly about their speculations about Tim Scott’s private life.
To be clear, some questions about Scott&#8217;s personal life are legitimate. He seems very much to be lying about having a girlfriend, who he refuses to identify in any way. It does sound a bit like he’s pulling the old “my girlfriend goes to another school” move. And if we&#8217;re being honest, it&#8217;s weird to have a 57-year-old bachelor running for president. But at the same time, there&#8217;s an obvious double standard in the way the media treats questions about a politician&#8217;s private life, depending on their political party. Another example is the incessant reporting on the whereabouts of Melania Trump, who has been absent from the campaign trail. Again, I think objectively those are perfectly valid questions. But by the same token, once we allow for all of that, then it&#8217;s clear that a political candidate&#8217;s history as a porn star is also very relevant.
There is a reason the Left is denying this, and it has nothing to do with one state-level candidate in Virginia. They&#8217;re lying about what Susanna Gibson did because her behavior highlights a very uncomfortable truth about the great experiment that the Left has conducted for so many years. That truth is this: After multiple &#8220;waves&#8221; and generations of feminism, which supposedly were all about treating women like people instead of objects — that’s how it was sold, anyway — pornography has now become so normalized and mainstreamed in our society that we have a bunch of soccer moms whoring themselves out on the internet for a few extra dollars. These aren&#8217;t young girls getting sex trafficked or turning to street prostitution out of desperation. They&#8217;re bored middle-class women with loose morals looking for validation and a little extra spending cash. 
I’ve talked many times about what I call the trajectory of leftism. With any item on their agenda, anything they promote, it always starts and ends the same way. First, they deny that they are doing the thing. Then they admit they’re doing it, but insist that it’s good. Then they say that since it’s good, it should actually be celebrated. And finally, they invite — or demand — that we participate. Now we see that pornography has followed this same path, and we have finally arrived at the participation stage — where the problem becomes terminal. First they denied that they wanted to make hardcore pornography mainstream and accessible to everyone, including children. Then they said that actually porn is good and should be mainstream. Then they demanded that we celebrate the free expression of porn stars. And now porn has been opened up for all to actively participate in it — an invitation that many attention-starved women like Susana Gibson have responded to.
The problem — one of the many, many problems —  is that selling your body to random creeps online is depressing and soul-crushing. Eventually, these women all get sick of it and want to move on. But there is no &#8220;moving on&#8221; in the internet age. Everything you&#8217;ve done there, you do forever. It lives on, whether you like it or not. That doesn&#8217;t make you a victim or give you the right to cry about &#8220;invasion of privacy.&#8221; It just means you need to make better choices, as Susanna Gibson, and many women like her, have now discovered.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>

Matt Walsh 2

Dem Candidate Claims It’s A ‘Sex Crime’ To Talk About The Fact That She’s A Porn Star

Dem Candidate Claims It's A 'Sex Crime' To Talk About The Fact That She's A Porn Star

Democrats

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Pornography

Sex Workers

Tim Scott

The Left is fully dedicated internationally and nationally to the idea that they would rather have bad things happen to the globe than allow their political opponents to ever achieve a victory.
Here’s an example: It looks right now as though Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, may be able to cut a deal with the Saudis to normalize relations between the two countries. This would be an earth-shattering move. It would be amazing for the Middle East. You&#8217;re talking about one of the most powerful countries in the region moving in tandem with the most powerful military country in the region — one Muslim, one Jewish.
That would be amazing — like the Abraham Accords but multiplied a hundredfold. Saudi Arabia has every interest in signing on because they need economic growth to modernize their technology and their military. And they can work with Israel in order to do that, because Israel has a very, very modern military. 
Here’s where the rubber meets the road: Neither side cares one bit about terrorist organizations like the Palestinian Authority and Hamas and what they would think of such a deal.
You know who does care about that? The leftist writer Thomas Friedman of the New York Times. Friedman really hates Netanyahu. He despises him.
Friedman wrote <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/05/opinion/biden-middle-east-deal.html">a column in the New York Times</a> saying you can&#8217;t normalize relations with a government that isn&#8217;t normal, meaning Netanyahu’s right-wing government. So Friedman’s encouraging the Saudis not to make peace with Israel because he doesn&#8217;t like Netanyahu. 
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-ben-shapiro-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h4>
You have the Biden administration, run by a man who’s not sentient. You have the Saudi government, which is a dictatorship. And lastly, you have an elected government in Israel that&#8217;s been in place for roughly six months with a prime minister who&#8217;s been prime minister several times before.
But according to Friedman, the “not normal” government is the Israeli government? 
He writes, “The more I learn about the complex peace and security deal that the Biden team is trying to put together between the United States, Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Palestinians, the more I’m convinced that if they pull it off, they’ll win both the Nobel Peace Prize and the Nobel Prize in Physics. Because finding a way to balance the different interests of all four of these parties makes quantum mechanics look as easy as tic-tac-toe.”
Here&#8217;s the truth: The Palestinian interests are of very little consequence to anyone because they have routinely undermined every peace agreement ever offered. The Palestinian leadership has been a terrorist leadership since Oslo and beyond. Mahmoud Abbas, the current leader of the Palestinian Authority (that&#8217;s the “moderate” group over there) gave a speech the other day saying that the Germans murdered the Jews in the Holocaust because the Jews were usurious, because they charged interest.
That’s who Israel is supposed to be handing concessions to? 
Friedman says, “Given the many permutations this deal could take, let me just focus here on the only one that is in America’s interest and that I would support. It’s a deal that would normalize relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, forge a deeper security relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, and concretely advance a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians.”
Here’s news for Friedman: Who cares what you think? 
Friedman states, “I want to appeal directly to President Biden and the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman: Do not let Netanyahu make you his useful idiots.”
The only idiot here is Thomas Friedman. He is perceived as a foreign policy expert, which is absurd. His entire foreign policy expertise consists of going to foreign countries and being wined and dined by dictatorial regimes and talking to taxi drivers. What a garbage heap he is. 
Political polarization is one hell of a drag. 
If you hate someone enough, you&#8217;d rather watch the countries involved fail, even though it would make the world a much better place to allow that person to succeed.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>

Ben Shapiro Editorial Series 11 copy

When The Left Hates Someone, Even Peace Takes A Back Seat

Hamas

Israel

Palestinians

Saudi Arabia

Thomas Friedman

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/cnn" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CNN</a> appears set to name a new CEO in the coming days after the leftist network fired their last CEO over the summer following a damning profile piece and a town hall debacle involving former President Donald Trump.
Puck News <a href="https://archive.ph/09h6T#selection-40947.0-41100.0" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that as early as tomorrow, CNN is expected to name former New York Times Company CEO and BBC director general Mark Thompson to be the network&#8217;s next chairman and CEO.
The report said that Thompson has a reputation for &#8220;restructuring legacy media assets and pursuing innovative growth strategies&#8221; and that he could not be more different than the network&#8217;s last CEO, Chris Licht.
Thompson &#8220;deftly architected a plan that rescued the business&#8221; at The New York Times &#8220;from its darkest financial hour in generations,&#8221; the report added. &#8220;His various restructurings and reorgs repositioned the Times Co. as a product-first company that successfully built out a portfolio of lifestyle businesses that supported the news gathering organization.&#8221;
Licht was fired from the company by Discovery CEO David Zaslav just 16 months after being picked for the position.
“For a number of reasons things didn’t work out and that’s unfortunate,” Zaslav said. “It’s really unfortunate. And ultimately that’s on me. And I take full responsibility for that.”
Zaslav told employees that CNN is “in the process of conducting a wide search” for a new leader that could “take a while.”
Licht’s tenure at CNN was rough from the start. Weeks after Licht took over the reins, the cable news giant’s attempt at launching a streaming service <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/warner-bros-discovery-is-shutting-down-cnn-after-new-streaming-service-struggled-to-attract-viewers-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">failed</a> after a month in operation, attracting fewer than 10,000 daily users. The CNN executive also faced criticism from his employees and poor ratings performances in the news channel’s primetime slots.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
Familiar faces on the network, such as longtime journalist Brian Stelter and host Don Lemon, were axed under Licht’s reign. The tumultuous leadership of Licht came to a boiling point when the network hosted a town hall with former President Donald Trump in May. Leftist critics ripped the company for giving Trump a platform. Politicians and media personalities from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Joe Scarborough were angered by CNN’s decision to host Trump on the platform that has consistently offered friendly coverage to Democrats.
Zach Jewell contributed to this report.

New York Times CEO Mark Thompson Interview

CNN Appears Set To Name New CEO

Legacy Media

Media

The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/new-york-times">New York Times</a> reported on Monday that it has &#8220;long been known&#8221; that President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a> interacted with his son Hunter&#8217;s business partners, sparking a wave of ridicule and teasing on social media.
Critics of the Gray Lady contended that the newspaper was <a href="https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1686359526478647296">&#8220;gaslighting&#8221;</a> the public after lawmakers began to share what they heard from Devon Archer, a former business partner of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/hunter-biden">Hunter Biden</a>, during <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/house-oversight-members-confirm-president-biden-was-present-during-sons-foreign-business-phone-calls">a closed-door interview</a>.
&#8220;I&#8217;m guessing most NYT readers did not know this,&#8221; Washington Free Beacon investigative reporter Chuck Ross said in a <a href="https://twitter.com/ChuckRossDC/status/1686194642511876096">post</a> to X with a screenshot of the passage. New York Post columnist Miranda Devine <a href="https://twitter.com/mirandadevine/status/1686211834695540736">replied</a>, &#8220;This takes the cake! Something Joe Biden denied for three years and the NYT defended him on. Now it’s old news. You have to laugh.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I&#39;m guessing most NYT readers did not know this <a href="https://t.co/VmFxTiYZxs">https://t.co/VmFxTiYZxs</a> <a href="https://t.co/rWX25Yw1zx">pic.twitter.com/rWX25Yw1zx</a>
&mdash; Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChuckRossDC/status/1686194642511876096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 1, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
As attested by members of Congress, Archer told the House Oversight Committee that Hunter Biden put his father — then the vice president — on speaker phone roughly 20 times during meetings with business associates to <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/devon-archer-confirms-joe-biden-lied-about-knowledge-hunters-business-dealings-comer-says">sell the &#8220;brand&#8221;</a> and the <a href="https://www.axios.com/2023/07/31/devon-archer-testify-hunter-biden">&#8220;illusion of access.&#8221;</a> For years, Joe Biden claimed to have never spoken to Hunter about his business dealings, but lately, the White House has taken to <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12335725/White-House-fire-changing-answers-Joes-involvement-Hunters-shady-deals-Karine-Jean-Pierre-says-Biden-never-business-son-months-insisting-never-discussed-it.html">saying the elder Biden never did business</a> with his son.
To some, particularly those steeped in conservative politics and media, it seemed to be a major concession that The New York Times published a line that said it has &#8220;long been known&#8221; that the elder Biden had exchanges with his son&#8217;s business partners.
&#8220;Folks, just look at this sentence from the NYT,&#8221; Fox News contributor Guy Benson <a href="https://twitter.com/ChristinaPushaw/statu">said</a> in a post to X.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-40519">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
&#8220;&#8216;It has long been known. We just hid it from you,'&#8221; Christina Pushaw, rapid response director for Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis&#8217;s 2024 presidential campaign, <a href="https://twitter.com/ChristinaPushaw/status/1686365369835909120">quipped</a> in response.
The verified account for the House Judiciary Committee GOP shared a meme of people moving a soccer goalpost.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://t.co/dC3xskP0Xo">https://t.co/dC3xskP0Xo</a> <a href="https://t.co/9IH7fNE43c">pic.twitter.com/9IH7fNE43c</a>
&mdash; House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) <a href="https://twitter.com/JudiciaryGOP/status/1686217005840429057?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 1, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
&#8220;As others have pointed out, the progression is perfect,&#8221; <a href="https://twitter.com/mattdizwhitlock/status/1686217825151586304">said</a> Republican operative Matt Whitlock. &#8220;1. Joe has never spoken to his son about his business dealings 2. Joe has never spoken to Hunter&#8217;s business partners 3. We all have known all along that Joe spoke to his son&#8217;s business partners.. duh.&#8221;

Hunter and Joe Biden

NYT Reports It’s ‘Long Been Known’ Biden Interacted With Son’s Business Partners. Mockery Ensues.

NYT Reports It's 'Long Been Known' Biden Interacted With Son's Business Partners. Mockery Ensues.

Hunter Biden

I have been open about how I used to be more Left-leaning, which I think tends to be somewhat common in your youth. When you’re young, you don’t have a firm grasp on how the world works, and the Left is really great at selling their ideas. One that took hold of me in my liberal past was the concept of modern love. I finally woke up to the fact that “modern love” is a lie. In reality, no one is happy in this type of relationship. 
The New York Times publishes a weekly column titled Modern Love, written by readers who share their “modern love” stories about how they are bucking traditional love — because they’re doing love differently. A few recent headlines include <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/19/style/modern-love-affair-therapy-spectacular-betrayal.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">My Spectacular Betrayal</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/16/style/tiny-modern-love-stories-deeply-in-love-with-a-polyamorous-woman.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Deeply in Love With a Polyamorous Woman</a>, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/07/style/modern-love-kissing-a-fellow-janitor-amid-the-trash.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Kissing a Fellow Janitor Amid the Trash</a>. You get the idea. They are all written as glamorized aspirational tales with happy endings. The implied message is that modern love is freeing: “Why have the natural traditional marriage when you can have something that is different!” But what these articles are actually promoting is narcissism: “I can live my life as I want to! I should be able to give into my every impulse.” Yet readers never get an update as to how this modern love worked out. How does that work out in the long run?
Bill de Blasio and Chirlane McCray’s marriage answers that question. Bill de Blasio was a one-time presidential contender no one took seriously, and before that, he was busy ruining New York City as the mayor. McCray and de Blasio are a biracial couple, a factor he constantly put in everyone’s face and one that obviously helped him become mayor — because his policies certainly did not. But what’s more interesting is that McCray is a lesbian — was a lesbian. Is a lesbian. Is, was, who knows? But it did not matter to de Blasio. He married her anyway. 
So how did that work out? Well, according to a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/05/nyregion/de-blasio-marriage-chirlane-mccray.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New York Times piece</a> about them, they’re splitting. But they are not getting divorced. After all, the only way to build on your modern love failure is to add yet another layer of modern love to it. Now you can apparently split, continue living together without getting divorced, and date other people. That is what they are doing. And the article glamorizes not only their relationship but their split too. 
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/candace" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
What this article should have done is addressed how strange this dynamic is. It should have delved deeper into why they are not leaving their home and will continue living together. And it certainly should have mentioned their children — the children who will come home with the full understanding that their parents are living together while also seeing other people. Their daughter was arrested at a BLM protest in 2020, so perhaps they could have explained if they think part of the reason she seems to be suffering is an effect of their unhealthy, modern love relationship. 
No one should aspire to this kind of relationship. So-called modern love is the reason so many women and men are unhappy in their relationships — yet then cannot come up with reasons as to why their relationships are failing. They don’t understand because they don’t even know what it means to come together in a marriage. Marriages are not meant to be experimental. Partners are to be chosen carefully and vows are to be taken seriously. These kinds of arrangements do not work out. So maybe this is a cue to take into serious consideration what conservatives support, what Christians support, and why marriage should not be taken outside of the church in the first place. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>

Candace_3b16x9 copy 16 (2)

And They Did Not Live Happily Ever After: A Modern Love Story

Bill de Blasio

Candace Owens

Official data was accidentally published in a province of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/communist-china" target="_blank" rel="noopener">communist China</a> this week showing that the country has dramatically underreported the true extent of the damage that the coronavirus pandemic has had on its people.
The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/19/world/asia/china-covid-data-toll.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that the data from the eastern province of Zhejiang was published on a local government website and was later reported on by a Chinese news outlet. Within a couple of days, both reports were deleted.
China has claimed that approximately only 83,700 people have died throughout the course of the entire pandemic across the country. However, the new data showed that in Zhejiang, the province saw a 72,000+ increase in excess deaths during the first quarter of this year alone compared to the same time period last year.
The 70% increase of excess deaths in the province of roughly 65 million people, when extrapolated across the entire country of nearly 1.5 billion people, results in an estimated 1.5 million excess deaths for just the first three months of this year.
China, where the coronavirus pandemic originated in 2019, experienced a coronavirus outbreak so massive late last year that the communist government was forced to end their draconian lockdown measures as nearly the entire country — up to 90% — were infected over the course of just a few months.
The Times previously estimated in February that up to 1.5 million people were killed from China&#8217;s latest mass coronavirus wave and, with the accidentally published numbers from China, multiple groups of independent experts agreed that the estimate was likely very accurate.
Those numbers only represent a fraction of the total number of deaths that the country has faced during the course of the pandemic, which originated in Wuhan.
The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) released a &#8220;conservative&#8221; estimate in April 2020 of the number of deaths the country had experienced during the first few months of the pandemic.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-7029">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/aei-releases-conservative-estimate-of-chinas-true-outbreak-numbers-its-staggering" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> said that only a few months in, China likely had a minimum of 136,000 deaths from the pandemic.

Hong Kong Continues To Reel From Covid-19 Infections

Official Data Accidentally Published In China Reveals True Scale Of COVID Deaths In Communist Nation

Chinese Communist Party

Communist China

COVID

World

Former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a> will move to reign in the power of unelected federal bureaucrats if elected president in 2024, according to former and current advisers. 
Trump, who faced nearly <a href="https://americafirstpolicy.com/latest/20222702-federal-bureaucrats-resisted-president-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">constant opposition</a> from inside the federal government during his time as president, will move to assert executive power over federal agencies if given a second term as president, acting under a legal principle known as the unitary executive theory. 
The plans, which were featured in a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/17/us/politics/trump-plans-2025.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tuesday New York Times article</a>, prompted cries of authoritarianism from the Left, but have been praised by conservative policy leaders. 
“Our current executive branch,” former Trump aide John McEntee told the Times, “was conceived of by liberals for the purpose of promulgating liberal policies. There is no way to make the existing structure function in a conservative manner. It’s not enough to get the personnel right. What’s necessary is a complete system overhaul.”
Before Trump left office, an executive order was drafted but never issued that would have given him review of regulatory actions by federal agencies. Trump and his allies say that agencies, like the Federal Trade Commission, have acted as a sort of “fourth branch” of government.
Anne Applebaum, a staff writer for The Atlantic, said that the plans would destroy American democracy. 
“Imagine wanting to destroy the US, as a democracy and a society, so much that you would scheme to give this kind of power to someone as cruel, vengeful, and  mentally limited as Donald Trump,” she <a href="https://twitter.com/anneapplebaum/status/1680968395607425030" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a> on Twitter. 
Trump, who leads polling for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, has already laid out plans to enact a similar executive order in a policy video from April 2023. 
“I will bring the independent regulatory agencies, such as the FCC and the FTC, back under Presidential authority, as the Constitution demands. These agencies do not get to become a fourth branch of government, issuing rules and edicts all by themselves. And that’s what they’ve been doing. We will require that they submit any regulations they are considering for White House review,” he <a href="https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/agenda47-liberating-america-from-bidens-regulatory-onslaught" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
The Times characterized the unitary executive theory as a rejection of traditional American legal principles like the separation of power and checks and balances, a framing disputed by Center for Renewing America President Russ Vought, who told supports the “paradigm-shifting” policies. 
“I hesitate to take any issue with the NYT article bc of the sheer enjoyment of the ongoing liberal freakout but this sentence is totally false: ‘The legal theory rejects the idea that the government is composed of three separate branches with overlapping powers to check &amp; balance each other,’” Vought said on Twitter. “No, it rejects the current governing consensus that a fourth branch, never mentioned in the Constitution, can be created out of whole cloth &amp; made immune from the wishes of voters.”
Center for Renewing America Vice President Dan Caldwell agreed, saying that the president had constitutional authority to bring oversight to unelected bureaucrats. 
&#8220;How is it anti-democratic or authoritarian for the people’s elected officials to use their constitutionally given power and oversight of the government?” Caldwell told The Daily Wire, adding that it was more authoritarian for federal officials, not accountable to the president or Congress, to be making policy decisions.

Republican National Convention: Day Four

Libs Fret Over Trump’s Plan To Exert Presidential Authority Over ‘Fourth Branch’ Of Government

Donald Trump

Elections

Executive Orders

New York Times columnist David Brooks blasted attempts from the political Left to censor speech, saying that it was a &#8220;problem for democracy.&#8221;
Brooks made the remarks during a segment on Friday during &#8220;PBS NewsHour&#8221; when asked about a federal judge ruling this week that the Biden administration cannot communicate with social media companies about removing posts that contain misinformation.
“I do think we need — obviously, they need to pull stuff down,&#8221; he said. &#8220;There are 40,000 people at Google and Meta pulling stuff down. They’ve pulled over a billion things down. I don’t really trust Big Tech to be in charge of this, and I don’t, frankly, trust government in cahoots with Big Tech in private to be in charge of this.”
“There is a law in the Senate — or a bill in the Senate that would make the process more transparent, so outside sources can see if they’re being honest and fair in what they pull down,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;And that seems, to me, the best way forward. But it is a problem for democracy to have elites in Washington and elites in Silicon Valley making decisions about what’s out there. And so, that’s just something we just have to wrestle with.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1688831213092000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1PLjNvPE9xhE43TkDJzri8">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
WATCH:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Brooks and Capehart on cluster munitions for Ukraine, Trump&#039;s grip on Republican voters" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jqho6_7T9ww?start=475&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The judge in the case did <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-judge-blocks-biden-officials-from-contacting-social-media-companies-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">allow</a> for some exceptions for Biden officials to have contact with social media companies, including informing them of posts involving “criminal activity or criminal conspiracies,” “national security threats, extortion, or other threats,” and crimes related to U.S. elections.
The lawsuit, filed by Missouri and Louisiana, accused the Biden administration of pushing social media companies to censor content related to the coronavirus pandemic. The states said in the lawsuit that the Biden administration’s actions were “the most egregious violations of the First Amendment in the history of the United States of America.”

President Biden Speaks During National Small Business Week

New York Times Columnist: It’s A ‘Problem’ For U.S. If ‘Elites’ Censor Speech

The New York Times offered a possible &#8220;solution&#8221; on Thursday that would allow colleges to circumvent the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court&#8217;s</a> recent ruling regarding Affirmative Action in the admissions process.
The Court ruled against Harvard University and University of North Carolina last week, stating that colleges could no longer consider race as a factor when reviewing the applications of potential students — so the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/02/us/affirmative-action-university-of-california-davis.html?smid=tw-nytimes&amp;smtyp=cur" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NYT offered a possible workaround</a> that has already been adopted by the University of California&#8217;s medical school.
The program, like Affirmative Action, is designed to enforce diversity — and it appears to operate essentially like Communist China&#8217;s &#8220;social credit score,&#8221; but in reverse.
&#8220;To build a diverse class of students, the medical school at UC Davis ranks applicants by the disadvantages they have faced. The disadvantage scale helped turn UC Davis into one of the most diverse medical schools in the U.S. Can it work nationally?&#8221; the NYT asked in a tweet.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
To build a diverse class of students, the medical school at UC Davis ranks applicants by the disadvantages they have faced. The disadvantage scale helped turn UC Davis into one of the most diverse medical schools in the U.S. Can it work nationally? <a href="https://t.co/4QGPL48uKe">https://t.co/4QGPL48uKe</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1676211775283384322?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 4, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Dr. Mark Henderson, head of admissions at U.C. Davis&#8217; medical school, said that he implemented the program in an effort to get away from a world where most of the students who were able to get into medical school came from wealthy families.
Henderson developed what he refers to as the &#8220;socioeconomic disadvantage scale, or S.E.D.&#8221; — and explained that it gave each student a score from 0-99 based on their individual backgrounds, financial status, parental education levels, and other personal hardships.
According to the NYT, since the Court ruled against Affirmative Action in college admissions, some 20 schools have approached Henderson for information about his process &#8212; but the question remains as to whether it would work on a grander scale or whether critics of &#8220;race-conscious admissions&#8221; would accept it as something more substantive than a back-door Affirmative Action.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1688648178298000&amp;usg=AOvVaw10v0UGh9BJZV8inaPuI6t7">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Still, it appears likely that some schools will <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/universities-react-to-scotus-affirmative-action-ruling-harvard-vows-to-find-loophole" target="_blank" rel="noopener">try to implement different programs</a> in an effort to lessen the impact of the Court&#8217;s ruling.

Supreme Court decisions on Bidenâs student loan relief program protested in Washington DC

Menu