arrow_back

search

search

sort

next_plan

‘ARE YOU KIDDING ME?’: Chaffetz, political strategist's brawl over border gets personal

expand_more

1 views1 year ago

thumb_upLike

thumb_downDislike

library_addSave

flagReport

Fox News check_circle

2K subscribers

Fox News contributor Jason Chaffetz and political strategist Lucy Caldwell join ‘MediaBuzz’ to discuss the GOP push to impeach DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ handling of the border. #foxnews Subscribe to Fox News! https://bit.ly/2vBUvAS Watch more Fox News Video: http://video.foxnews.com Watch Fox News Channel Live: http://www.foxnewsgo.com/ FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most-watched television news channel for 18 consecutive years. According to a 2020 Brand Keys Consumer Loyalty Engagement Index report, FOX News is the top brand in the country for morning and evening news coverage. A 2019 Suffolk University poll named FOX News as the most trusted source for television news or commentary, while a 2019 Brand Keys Emotion Engagement Analysis survey found that FOX News was the most trusted cable news brand. A 2017 Gallup/Knight Foundation survey also found that among Americans who could name an objective news source, FOX News was the top-cited outlet. Owned by FOX Corporation, FNC is available in nearly 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre. Watch full episodes of your favorite shows The Five: https://www.foxnews.com/video/shows/the-five Special Report with Bret Baier: https://www.foxnews.com/video/shows/special-report Jesse Watters Primetime: https://www.foxnews.com/video/shows/jesse-watters-primetime Hannity: https://www.foxnews.com/video/shows/hannity The Ingraham Angle: https://www.foxnews.com/video/shows/ingraham-angle Gutfeld!: https://www.foxnews.com/video/shows/gutfeld Fox News @ Night: https://www.foxnews.com/video/shows/fox-news-night Follow Fox News on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/ Follow Fox News on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FoxNews/ Follow Fox News on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/foxnews/

1

vid:204438

Comments0

unfold_more

NJ drone sightings: State officials accused of knowing more than they're telling

Fox News check_circle

574K views 4 months ago

President Biden's Ukraine policy is in 'shambles', Sen. Josh Hawley says

Fox News check_circle

4K views 4 months ago

BREAKING: President Biden pardons son Hunter

Fox News check_circle

365K views 4 months ago

Iconic Notre Dame cathedral to reopen nearly six years after fire #shorts

Fox News check_circle

17K views 4 months ago

Jessie James Decker on how “family-orientated” Nashville is the place she calls home

Fox News check_circle

197 views 4 months ago

keyboard_arrow_left

Alex Jones Show

Bannons War Room

navigate_next

Judge Pirro lays out why Hunter Biden could get jail time

Fox News check_circle

1 views 9 months ago

Jordan Peterson: The fatal flaw in leftist American politics | Big Think

Big Think check_circle

1 views 6 years ago

,Jordan Peterson: The fatal flaw in leftist American politics New videos DAILY: https://bigth.ink Join Big Think Edge for exclusive video lessons from top thinkers and doers: https://bigth.ink/Edge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What is political extremism? Professor of psychology Jordan Peterson points out that America knows what right-wing radicalism looks like: white nationalism. "What's interesting is that on the conservative side of the spectrum, we've figured out how to box-in the radicals and say, 'No, you're outside the domain of acceptable opinion,'" says Peterson. But where's that line for the Left? There is no universal marker of what extreme liberalism looks like, which is devastating to the ideology itself but also to political discourse as a whole. Peterson is happy to suggest such a marker: "The doctrine of equality of outcome. It seems to me that that's where people who are thoughtful on the Left should draw the line, and say no. Equality of opportunity? [That's] not only fair enough, but laudable. But equality of outcome…? It's like: 'No, you've crossed the line. We're not going there with you.'"Peterson argues that it's the ethical responsibility of left-leaning people to identify liberal extremism and distinguish themselves from it the same way conservatives distance themselves from the doctrine of racial superiority. Failing to recognize such extremism may be liberalism's fatal flaw. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JORDAN PETERSON Jordan B. Peterson, raised and toughened in the frigid wastelands of Northern Alberta, has flown a hammer-head roll in a carbon-fiber stunt-plane, explored an Arizona meteorite crater with astronauts, and built a Kwagu'l ceremonial bighouse on the upper floor of his Toronto home after being invited into and named by that Canadian First Nation. He's taught mythology to lawyers, doctors and business people, consulted for the UN Secretary General, helped his clinical clients manage depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, anxiety, and schizophrenia, served as an adviser to senior partners of major Canadian law firms, and lectured extensively in North America and Europe. With his students and colleagues at Harvard and the University of Toronto, Dr. Peterson has published over a hundred scientific papers, transforming the modern understanding of personality, while his book Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief revolutionized the psychology of religion. His latest book is 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRANSCRIPT: JORDAN PETERSON: I would like to talk briefly about depolarization on the Left and the Right, because I think there's a technical problem that needs to be addressed. So here's what I've been thinking about. It's been obvious to me for some time that, for some reason, the fundamental claim of post-modernism is something like an infinite number of interpretations and no canonical overarching narrative. Okay, but the problem with that is: okay, now what? No narrative, no value structure that is canonically overarching, so what the hell are you going to do with yourself? How are you going to orient yourself in the world? Well, the post-modernists have no answer to that. So what happens is they default—without any real attempt to grapple with the cognitive dissonance—they default to this kind of loose, egalitarian Marxism. And if they were concerned with coherence that would be a problem, but since they're not concerned with coherence it doesn't seem to be a problem. But the force that's driving the activism is mostly the Marxism rather than the post-modernism. It's more like an intellectual gloss to hide the fact that a discredited economic theory is being used to fuel an educational movement and to produce activists. But there's no coherence to it. It's not like I'm making this up, you know. Derrida himself regarded—and Foucault as well—they were barely repentant Marxists. They were part of the student revolutions in France in the 1960s, and what happened to them, essentially—and what happened to Jean-Paul Sartre for that matter—was that by the end of the 1960s you couldn't be conscious and thinking and pro-Marxist. There's so much evidence that had come pouring in from the former Soviet Union, from the Soviet Union at that point, and from Maoist China, of the absolutely devastating consequences of the doctrine that it was impossible to be apologetic for it by that point in time. So the French intellectuals in particular just pulled off a sleight of hand and transformed Marxism into post-modern identity politics. And we've seen the consequence of that. It's not good. It's a devolution into a kind of tribalism ... For the full transcript, check out https://bigthink.com/videos/top-10-jordan-peterson-leftist-liberal-politics

Kamala Harris is going to be a 'huge problem' if Biden is replaced: Brent Bozell

Fox News check_circle

1 views 9 months ago

'SNL' called out for 'woke smugness' after latest Trump ridicule

Fox News check_circle

203K views 1 year ago

Why 'upgrading' humanity is a transhumanist myth | Douglas Rushkoff | Big Think

Big Think check_circle

1 views 6 years ago

,Why 'upgrading' humanity is a transhumanist myth New videos DAILY: https://bigth.ink Join Big Think Edge for exclusive video lessons from top thinkers and doers: https://bigth.ink/Edge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Though computer engineers claim to know what human consciousness is, many neuroscientists say that we're nowhere close to understanding what it is, or its source. Scientists are currently trying to upload human minds to silicon chips, or re-create consciousness with algorithms, but this may be hubristic because we still know so little about what it means to be human. Is transhumanism a journey forward or an escape from reality? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DOUGLAS RUSHKOFF: Douglas Rushkoff is the host of the Team Human podcast and a professor of digital economics at CUNY/Queens. He is also the author of a dozen bestselling books on media, technology, and culture, including, Present Shock, Program or Be Programmed, Media Virus, and Team Human, the last of which is his latest work. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRANSCRIPT: Douglas Rushkoff: I think we still know so little about what it means to be human that the confidence with which we think we can upload ourselves to silicon or recreate ourselves with algorithms is shocking to me. The only ones out there who think they know what human consciousness is are computer engineers. If you talk to actual brain researchers and neuroscientists, they say, we're nowhere close. We don't even know for sure what goes on in a single square centimeter of soil. We're still trying to teach agriculture companies that the soil is alive, that it's not just dirt that you can put chemicals on. It's a living matrix. If we don't even know what a single centimeter of soil is, how do we know what the human brain is? We don't. We don't know what the source of consciousness is. We don't know where we come from. We don't even know if there's a meaning to this universe or not. Yet, we think that we can make a simulation that's as valid as this? Every simulation we make misses something. Think about the difference between being in a jazz club and listening to a great CD. There's a difference, you know. And some of those differences, we understand, and some of them, we don't. So when I see people rushing off to upload consciousness to a chip, it feels more like escape from humanity than it is a journey forward. And I get it. Life is scary. I mean, women, real-life women, are scary. You know, the people are scary. The moisture is scary. Death is scary. Babies are scary. Other people who don't speak the same language or have the same customs, they're scary. All sorts of stuff is scary. And I understand the idea of this kind of having a Sim City perfected simulation that I can go into and not have to worry about all that stuff I don't know, where everything is discrete, everything is a yes/no, this/that, all the choices have been made. There's a certain attractiveness to that, but that's dead. It's not alive. There's no wonder. There's no awe. There's nothing strange and liminal and ambiguous about it. I was on a panel with a famous transhumanist, and he was arguing that it's time that human beings come to accept that we will have to pass the torch of evolution to our digital successors. And that once computers have the singularity and they're really thinking and better than us, then we should really only stick around as long as the computers need us, you know, to keep the lights on and oil their little circuits or whatever we have to do. And then, after that, fade into oblivion. And I said, hey, no, wait a minute. Human beings are still special. We're weird. We're quirky. We've got David Lynch movies and weird yoga positions and stuff we don't understand, and we're ambiguous and weird and quirky. You know, we deserve a place in the digital future. And he said, oh, Rushkoff, you're just saying that because you're human. As if it's hubris, right? Oh, I'm just defending my little team. And that's where I got the idea, all right, fine, I'm a human. I'm on Team Human. And it's not Team Human against the algorithms or against anything other than those who want to get rid of the humans. I think humans deserve a place. Certainly, until we understand what it is we are, we shouldn't get rid of us. And as far as I'm concerned, we're cool. We're still weird and funny and wonderful. And yeah, we destroyed the environment. We did really nasty things. But I would argue we do those things when we're less than human. We do those things when we can dehumanize others. You can't have slaves if you're thinking of those as people. You can only have slaves if you're thinking of them... For the full transcript, check out https://bigthink.com/videos/douglas-rushkoff-critiques-transhumanism

Naomi Wolf on the New American Coup | Big Think

Big Think check_circle

1 views 1 decade ago

,Naomi Wolf on the New American Coup New videos DAILY: https://bigth.ink/youtube Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: https://bigth.ink/Edge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By deploying the First Brigade, George Bush effectively created a private army for himself. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Naomi Wolf: Naomi Wolf is an author and essayist whose works have appeared in The New Republic, Wall Street Journal, Glamour, Ms., Esquire, The Washington Post, and The New York Times. She also speaks widely to groups across the country. Her first book, The Beauty Myth, was an international bestseller. She followed it with Fire With Fire: The New Female Power and How It Will Change The 21st Century; Promiscuities: The Secret Struggle for Womanhood; Misconceptions, critique of pregnancy and birth in America; The End of America: A Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot; and Give me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries. Wolf is also co-founder of the Board of The Woodhull Institute for Ethical Leadership, an organization devoted to training young women in ethical leadership for the 21st century. She is a graduate of Yale University and completed her graduate work at New College, Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRANSCRIPT: Question: How has a coup taken place in the United States? Wolf: So, the dictionary definition of a coup is a sudden change in our form of government. And for 200 years, when America have been protected from the prospect of soldiers policing our streets, our civilian streets by two laws, the 1807 Insurrection Act and the 1879 Posse Comitatus Act and what Bush did is with a signing statement he disregarded limitations Congress set on him and made it possible for him to deploy these troops on the streets. Now, why is this so disturbing? Why do I, why am I using such language designed to get the people’s attention? Because I think it really requires our attention. These are three to four thousand warriors. They were the people who maintain crowd control in [Fallugia]. They are not answerable to Congress. They’re not answerable to the American people. Their only boss is the President of the United States of America. He is the Commander in Chief. So, I was just trying to, kind of think this through and I contacted a source of mine, Major David Antoon, and I asked him and these are questions I asked because I’ve studied closing societies and in closing societies often the leader or the president will send military especially during an election to deed or harass or arrest or worst voters and opposition leaders and I said, “You know, if the president tells the members of the first brigade to arrest civilians, what happens?” And he said they have to do it. And I said, well, if the president tells the first brigade to shoot at civilians, what happens? He said they have to do it and I said, well, if the president, you know, tells First Brigade to arrest Congress, what happens? He said they have to do it. So, you know, is this a worst case scenario? Obviously. Is there a reason that the founding generation made it absolutely clear that we were not to be policed by the military on the streets that we’re not answerable to the people? Yeah, there’s a reason because they understood from their own experience of George III mercenaries intimidating a civilian population. How difficult it is to remain a free people when the leader has its own army basically. So, it’s very, it’s a very serious development and it’s one I think we need to reverse.

'This race is already over': Tim Scott urges Republicans to rally behind Trump

Fox News check_circle

1 views 1 year ago

Kellyanne Conway: The best decision DeSantis made was dropping out

Fox News check_circle

1 views 1 year ago

‘ARE YOU KIDDING ME?’: Chaffetz, political strategist's brawl over border gets personal

Fox News check_circle

1 views 1 year ago

Hunter Biden found guilty on all counts in federal gun trial

Fox News check_circle

1 views 9 months ago

Jesse Watters: Biden wants a Taylor Swift endorsement

Fox News check_circle

113K views 1 year ago

Sign in with GoogleSign in with Google