Category: Blaze Media
You can’t be 50 in Hollywood
I had been living in New York for several years, writing young adult novels. But I wanted to move to Los Angeles. I needed a change of scenery, and I wanted to try screenwriting.
A friend connected me to a guy who had spent several years in L.A. pursuing film and TV writing. I called the guy and told him my plan.
The hair dye felt like it was burning my scalp. After I rinsed it out, my whole head glowed. Did it make me look younger? I guess it did. But it also made me look like a clown.
He said: “How old are you?”
I said 49.
He said, “That’s too old. You can’t be 50 in Hollywood. You’ll need to lie about your age.”
Then he asked me if I had gray hair. I said I did. He said I would need to dye it.
I said, “But George Clooney has gray hair. Doesn’t it look distinguished?”
He said I would definitely want to dye it. “Everyone dyes their hair in L.A. Get a good hairdresser.”
*******
He continued relating his experiences. He listed the dangers of Hollywood. They steal your ideas. They lie. They pretend to be your friend. I would need a good lawyer, and a manager, and an agent.
Most of this I already knew. But the “you can’t be 50 in Hollywood” part: I hadn’t heard that before.
Reelin’ In the Years
After we hung up, I thought about the age problem. I had already “adjusted” my age once while I was writing young adult novels.
I did this after attending a book festival, where I saw that all the other young adult authors were generally in their 20s and 30s. I was at least a decade older than most of them.
So I shaved five years off my Facebook age. Just in case anybody looked. And then I did the same thing when I filled out the publicity questionnaires for my publisher.
But the age problem got worse when I arrived in L.A. The first screenwriter I met with was 24 and looked like he was in high school. When I got home from that meeting, I went on Facebook and shaved three more years off my birthday.
When I did this, a little notice popped up, informing me that this would be the last time I would be allowed to change my birthday on Facebook.
So now, I was 41 according to Facebook, 44 according to my New York publisher, and 49 according to my driver’s license and the IRS.
This was a lot to keep track of. It made for some awkward moments on first dates.
Gray matters
It didn’t take long to realize that in Hollywood — where lying is considered “self-care” — what people really judged you on was your looks.
So then I considered my appearance. My hair was pretty gray. Should I try dyeing it?
I went to Ralphs and bought a box of Clairol Nice’n Easy hair dye. I went for espresso brown, which seemed closest to my original hair color.
I set up shop in my bathroom. I put on the gloves and followed the instructions on the box, mixing the chemicals and smearing them onto my head. It was a messy business.
The hair dye felt like it was burning my scalp. After I rinsed it out, my whole head glowed. Did it make me look younger? I guess it did. But it also made me look like a clown.
*******
I flew back to New York soon after, and a female friend immediately noticed the change. She said: “It’s true what they say; you look 10 years younger!”
That was nice to hear. But I was alarmed that she noticed it instantly. From 50 feet away.
Another friend didn’t believe me when I told her it was dyed. She had to look closer and touch it until she saw that I was telling the truth.
I was still trying to get used to it myself. Every time I saw my reflection, I startled myself. Who’s that guy with the dye job?
RELATED: The left wants to ‘reclaim’ the American flag; did they run out of lighter fluid?
Blake Nelson
Pro tips
Back in L.A., I spotted a sign in a hair salon near my apartment: “Dye and Haircut $80.” Maybe this was the solution: getting your hair dyed by a professional.
I would like to say this was a luxurious, pampering experience. It was not. The hairdresser roughed me up pretty good. And then I had to sit there for 40 minutes, in sight of people walking by the window, with a giant plastic covering over me and my thinning hair wrapped in tin foil.
And then, after all that, it looked no different from the Clairol dye job I had given myself for $9.99!
*******
Still, I stuck with it, re-dyeing it every six weeks — like it said on the box — for most of a year.
During this time, I kept a watchful eye out for other men with dyed hair. I was definitely not alone. At the beach, you would see aging “surfer dads” with dyed blonde hair and a skateboard under their arms. It wasn’t a terrible look. As long as you wore Vans and board shorts.
And of course, men who were on TV or acted in movies always dyed their hair. I’d see these men everywhere. Or I’d see guests on late-night talk shows who looked like they had just had it done an hour before. Their hair had that blurry, fresh-dye glow.
I became skilled at spotting dye jobs on either sex. I hadn’t realized how many women dyed their hair: basically all of them, after about 30.
The good news was that nobody thought less of a man for dyeing his hair. This was Los Angeles. Dyeing your hair meant you had a job.
All is vanity
This wasn’t the case on the East Coast. New York City was the land of the silver fox. Being a well-dressed, gray-haired, 50-year-old male was highly desirable. It meant you were rich!
In fact, it was in New York that a couple of female friends intervened and informed me that the hair-dye thing wasn’t working. I looked better being gray.
After that, my vanity took over, and when I returned to L.A., I shaved my head and released myself back into middle age.
Once I let myself go gray again, another Los Angeles acquaintance told me she thought I looked much better. She said the dye job made me look untrustworthy, like a used-car salesman.
*******
So that was a relief. But the real relief didn’t come until many years later, when I retired from writing and went back home to Portland and returned to total normalcy.
In retirement, I didn’t have to be young; I didn’t have to be cool. I could just be an old, gray-haired person like everybody else.
Though on Facebook — thanks to its birthday-changing restrictions — I remain a slightly younger and livelier version of myself.
Chicago female arrested for alleged string of beatings — after reportedly failing to appear in court for earlier battery case
A Chicago female recently was arrested in connection with an alleged string of beatings that took place after she allegedly failed to appear in court for an earlier battery case, CWB Chicago reported.
Records show that 37-year-old Diamond Miller failed to appear in court on a pending misdemeanor battery charge on Dec. 2, the outlet said, adding that court records show that Judge Peter Gonzalez ordered the court clerk to send Miller a postcard reminding her of her court dates rather than issuing a warrant.
Miller allegedly struck the woman in the face with a broken beer bottle, the outlet said, adding that the woman began bleeding immediately and suffered cuts to her face and a deep cut to her bottom lip.
Later that month, Miller allegedly went on a physical attack spree.
Prosecutors said that while she was “in AWOL status” from the pending misdemeanor battery case, Miller allegedly attacked three people within minutes near Pulaski Road and Cermak Road around noon on Dec. 21, CWB Chicago reported.
The first attack occurred on a southbound CTA #53 Pulaski bus after a 33-year-old man asked Miller to quiet down so he could hear his wife during a phone call, the outlet said, citing prosecutors during a detention petition.
Miller approached the man and struck him in the face “with great force,” causing him to experience “pain and dizziness,” CWB Chicago said, citing the filing. The bus driver stopped at Pulaski and Cermak and called police and EMS, the outlet noted.
Diamond Miller. Image source: Chicago Police Department
Prosecutors said Miller exited the bus and walked to a nearby bus shelter, the outlet reported.
At 12:17 p.m., a second victim and her friend approached the shelter, where Miller was acting erratically and telling them to give her space, the outlet said, citing prosecutors. The victim and her friend walked away — but Miller allegedly followed them, CWB Chicago said. The victim told police that while she stood on the sidewalk with her back turned, Miller approached from behind and struck her in the face with a white plastic bag that contained a hard object that felt like ice, the outlet said, adding that the victim called 911.
Miller returned to the bus shelter minutes later, when a 54-year-old woman — the third victim — and her 74-year-old mother approached while switching bus lines, CWB Chicago said, citing prosecutors. The detention filing said Miller yelled at them and accused them of following her, according to the outlet. The daughter helped her mother — who uses a walker — away from the shelter, but Miller allegedly followed them and continued yelling, CWB Chicago said.
The daughter saw a CTA bus idling on the corner and asked the driver if her mother could board and wait until the next bus arrived, but the driver declined, the outlet said, citing the filing. As the woman and her mother walked away, Miller allegedly struck the woman in the face with a broken beer bottle, the outlet said, adding that the woman began bleeding immediately and suffered cuts to her face and a deep cut to her bottom lip.
The second victim saw the attack on the third victim and recorded part of it with her phone, the outlet said, citing prosecutors.
The first victim — the man from the bus — was taken to St. Anthony Hospital for treatment of minor injuries, CWB Chicago said, adding that prosecutors said the third victim received five stitches.
Police said they arrested Miller at 12:50 p.m. the same day and charged her with three felony counts of aggravated battery and one misdemeanor count of aggravated assault of a person older than 60.
Judge Robert Kuzas detained Miller, CWB Chicago said.
Records indicate Miller was booked into Cook County Jail on Dec. 24, and she has no bond. Her next court date is Feb. 19, jail records say.
CWB Chicago said Miller spent three days in jail in connection with four retail theft cases in October. A fifth retail theft case was dropped in November, the outlet said, even though Miller didn’t appear in court. However, records indicate the store’s representative didn’t show up for court, either, the outlet noted. A separate misdemeanor battery case was dropped in August, CWB Chicago added.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Why strong borders are biblical — not bigoted
Liberals will often claim Christians are not acting in line with their religion when they support strict immigration laws — but that claim could not be further from the truth.
“Remember Romans 13, that the government was instituted by God to reward those who do good and to punish those who do evil. Those who think that it is immoral or it is unjust to deport people who are here illegally have no problem locking their own doors, having their own walls, dead-bolting their own fences,” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey says on “Relatable.”
“And the truth is, nations are like families. The government is supposed to put the interest in the well-being and the safety of our people first. Just because you lock your door and you don’t let any stranger come into your home doesn’t mean that you hate your neighbors,” she says.
“It doesn’t make you bigoted. It means that you love your children. If you allowed people that you don’t know, that you haven’t vetted into your home to sleep in your kid’s bed and to eat your kid’s food, you wouldn’t be a good neighbor, you would be a bad parent,” she continues.
And the same could be said for our government.
“If they were not sending ICE into these cities to deport illegal aliens who are not only here illegally, that would be enough to deport someone, by the way. Every government has that right and responsibility to maintain that sovereignty that we just talked about but also to deport the worst people in the world. We’re talking about people who raped a child. And you want to impede that justice,” Stuckey says.
“That is the God-given and righteous responsibility of any government. And Christians should be for that because we serve a God of peace, not a God of disorder. We understand that disorder and chaos are curses for a nation. And that God is a God of order who placed us in a garden, not a jungle,” she continues.
“Tough immigration policy is good,” she says, adding, “It would have been good for Laken Riley … it would have been good for all of those children who were raped or assaulted or kidnapped or harmed. The people who were killed, the people who have died because an illegal alien was driving under the influence. If we had tough immigration policy, those people would be alive.”
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
‘Going to get someone killed’: Democratic AG shocks with talk about shooting ICE agents in ‘stand your ground’ Arizona
Republican lawmakers, the Arizona Police Association, and the Trump administration castigated Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes (D) this week over her suggestion that it may be reasonable to shoot masked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
Mayes made no secret of her contempt for ICE in her interview with KPNX-TV’s Brahm Resnik, suggesting, for instance, that ICE officers are engaged in “thuggish, brutish behavior” and causing chaos, confusion, and anxiety in Minneapolis.
‘How do you know they are a peace officer?’
“It’s a combustible situation, let’s be clear about that,” said Mayes. “It’s a combustible situation being caused by ICE right now, wearing masks.”
After noting that she was “outraged and sickened” to see ICE agents outside her building and claiming that “real cops don’t wear masks,” the Democrat — who is seeking re-election — made a point of stressing that Arizona is a “stand your ground state.”
“We also have a lot of guns in Arizona,” she said with a smile.
“You know, it’s kind of a recipe for disaster because you have these masked federal officers with very little identification, sometimes no identification, wearing plain clothes and masks, and we have a stand your ground law that says that if you reasonably believe that your life is in danger and you are in your house or your car or on your property, that you can defend yourself with lethal force.”
Resnik pumped the brakes and said, “I want to be careful with that and understand what you are saying because you know how that could be interpreted.”
RELATED: Anti-ICE radical who took credit for the invasion of Minnesota church ARRESTED by feds
(Photo by Mostafa Bassim/Anadolu via Getty Image
“But it’s the fact,” said Mayes.
While Mayes clarified that you still cannot gun down peace officers in the Grand Canyon State and that she was not giving anyone license to start doing so, she appeared to give would-be killers an excuse, stating, “How do you know they’re a peace officer?”
“If there’s a situation where somebody pulls out their gun because they know Arizona is a stand your ground state, then it becomes ‘did they reasonably know that they were a peace officer?'” said Arizona’s top law enforcement officer.
When Resnik once more pressed her for clarification that she was not “telling folks you have license if you are threatened,” Mayes said, “Well,” and smirked.
“No,” she continued, “but again, if you’re being attacked by someone who is not identified as a peace officer, how do you know?”
Republican Arizona Rep. David Schweikert noted, “Let’s not pretend this was some careful legal seminar.”
“This was the attorney general of Arizona freelancing a scenario where bullets start flying and then shrugging it off as ‘just the law.’ That is reckless on its face,” wrote Schweikert. “If your job is to enforce the law, you do not go on TV and hand out a permission structure for violence, then act surprised when people hear it as a green light. Words matter. Especially when they come from the state’s top lawyer.”
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R), who is running for state attorney general, noted, “Mayes should be fully aware of her dangerous rhetoric — and how people will construe, apply, and execute her comments. Mayes’ comments were reckless, dangerous, and disqualifying.”
The Arizona Police Association also condemned Mayes’ remarks, emphasizing that “words from elected officials matter.”
APA Executive Director Joe Clure stated that the Democrat’s framing was “deeply troubling and dangerous” especially as “law enforcement officers at every level including state, local, and federal agencies do not always wear traditional uniforms” — including members of Mayes’ own investigative teams.
“This does not diminish their legal authority or status as law enforcement,” said Clure. “Publicly speculating about how someone might legally justify shooting an ICE agent sends a dangerous and irresponsible message, particularly in an already tense and polarized environment.”
Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told the New York Post, “This is [a] direct threat calling for violence against our law enforcement officers — this kind of rhetoric is going to get someone killed.”
Blaze News has reached out the Justice Department for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
‘Sparkle Beach Ken’ Is Too Kind To Gavin Newsom
The California governor correctly figures that if he stays on offense, his own dismal record will be ignored — even if that offense is odd.
‘Flagrant violation’: GOP lawmaker grills Jack Smith for ‘spying’ on former House speaker
Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) confronted ex-special counsel Jack Smith during a House committee hearing, accusing him and the Justice Department of secretly surveilling members of Congress and stomping on constitutional protections while investigating President Donald Trump.
Gill pressed Smith on his office using secret subpoenas and nondisclosure orders to obtain phone “toll records” from lawmakers, including then-Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), without notifying them or the public.
‘Nobody’s going to sue. … So who cares? We’re going to do it anyway.’
“In January of 2023, did you subpoena then-Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy’s toll records?” Gill asked.
“Yes, sir, we did,” Smith replied.
RELATED: GOP senator to sue Jack Smith after his lawyers try gaslighting on Biden FBI surveillance
SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images
Gill pushed back, claiming Smith abused executive power to secretly collect phone data on Republican leadership.
“Collecting months’ worth of phone data on the Republican speaker of the House — the leader of the opposition — right after he got sworn in as speaker, all around the time of a major vote — that sounds like a flagrant violation of the Speech or Debate Clause to me,” Gill said.
The confrontation ramped up as Gill questioned Smith about the nondisclosure orders used to prevent McCarthy from learning that his records had been subpoenaed.
“At the time you secured those nondisclosure orders, was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?” Gill asked.
“He was not,” Smith answered.
“Then why did your nondisclosure order refer to him as a flight risk?” Gill pressed. Gill then cited language in the court filing stating that disclosure could result in “flight from prosecution.”
“You think the speaker of the House is … going to hop on a plane and leave the country?” Gill asked.
“No,” Smith said, arguing that the language was not meant to apply personally to McCarthy but to general investigative risks.
Gill rejected that explanation.
RELATED: House Republican seeks criminal investigation into Jack Smith’s alleged surveillance scheme
Photo by Ricky Carioti/Washington Post/Getty Images
“This is clearly in reference to Speaker McCarthy,” Gill said. “You were using clearly false information to secure a nondisclosure order to hide from Speaker McCarthy and from the American people the fact that you were spying on his toll records.”
Gill also revealed that Smith’s office issued additional secret subpoenas in May 2023 for the toll records of nine U.S. senators and another House member, along with more nondisclosure orders.
“So again, nobody would know what you were doing,” Gill said. “The senators wouldn’t. The representatives wouldn’t. The American people wouldn’t.”
Gill then read from an internal DOJ email warning of “litigation risk” tied to compelling disclosure of lawmakers’ phone records due to Speech or Debate Clause concerns.
“As you are aware, there are some litigation risks regarding whether compelled disclosure of toll records of a member’s legislative calls violates the Speech or Debate Clause,” Gill read.
Gill emphasized another line from the same analysis, saying that because of “the low likelihood that any of the members listed below would be charged, the litigation risk should be minimal here.”
“In other words,” Gill said, “You’re using a novel legal theory. … You’re not charging any of these members. Nobody’s going to know about it because you issued NDOs. Nobody’s going to sue. … So who cares? We’re going to do it anyway.”
“You walked all over the Constitution throughout this entire process,” Gill added.
“It’s absolutely disgraceful.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
How pro-life groups are misleading you on abortion numbers
Since Roe v. Wade was overturned nearly four years ago, countless pro-life organizations have pushed new regulations on abortion. Many of those same groups have rushed to declare victory, claiming that conservative states are now “abortion-free.”
But when pro-life organizations declare any state “abortion-free,” they celebrate a victory that does not exist — and drastically overstate the impact of pro-life laws.
The preborn babies murdered under the cover of our laws deserve more than semantic victories. They deserve equal protection.
These claims don’t just mislead. They undermine the cause these organizations claim to champion.
Exaggerating victories
The claim that some states are “abortion-free” isn’t rare. It has become standard messaging.
Students for Life published a map three years ago declaring that 14 states are now “abortion-free.” Frank Pavone, who leads Priests for Life, has made the same claim about Mississippi. National Right to Life called Kentucky “abortion-free” as recently as last summer. LifeNews has become notorious for amplifying inflated or misleading abortion claims from pro-life groups at the state level.
These declarations suggest abortion has been eliminated in these states. The reality says otherwise.
Pro-life leaders do not make clear that in every state labeled “abortion-free,” abortions remain legal for women who want to kill their preborn babies.
Many conservative states shut down abortion clinics and imposed penalties on providers. At the same time, those states wrote explicit exemptions into law protecting women from prosecution for willfully obtaining abortions.
That wasn’t a mistake. Pro-life organizations crafted and promoted that policy.
Self-induced abortions
Legal immunity for women who murder their preborn babies created a massive loophole. It also opened the door to a surge in self-induced abortions.
Women in “abortion-free” states can order abortion pills online from telehealth providers operating under shield laws in blue states or from overseas providers.
In many cases, it remains perfectly legal to order these pills, possess them, and use them at home. The scale of this practice — even in conservative states — is staggering.
Consider Kentucky, which National Right to Life called “abortion-free.”
In Kentucky, more than 2,800 women in 2024 received mail-order abortion pills through telehealth providers alone, according to data from the Society of Family Planning.
That does not include the more than 4,300 Kentucky women who traveled to other states for abortions in 2024, according to the Guttmacher Institute. It also does not capture self-induced abortions outside the formal medical system.
Kentucky is not an outlier.
RELATED: How a pro-life law in Kentucky lets mothers get away with murder
Carl Lokko via iStock/Getty Images
When all available data is considered, the 14 conservative states that have banned or mostly banned abortion — the same states pro-life groups often call “abortion-free” — saw at least 250,000 preborn babies murdered in 2024.
That number represents a sharp increase from the 181,000 abortions recorded in those states in 2019.
In other words, pro-life laws have not created states with fewer abortions. They have created states where abortion has shifted away from clinics and toward self-induced abortions at home — abortions that remain legal for the mother who commits them.
How can abortion increase while pro-life organizations claim success? Because many have misrepresented what they mean by “abortion-free.”
When these groups say “abortion-free,” they mean abortion clinics have closed. They do not mean abortions have stopped. It’s like calling a city “crime-free” because the district attorney refuses to prosecute criminals. The semantics conceal the reality.
Opposing abolition
Even more troubling, major pro-life organizations often oppose the bills that would actually abolish abortion.
When lawmakers introduce equal protection bills — proposals that would make abortion illegal for everyone, including pregnant mothers — pro-life organizations often mobilize against them.
This has happened dozens of times across the country. The reasoning stays consistent: Pro-life groups insist women are victims of abortion and should not face legal consequences, even when they deliberately order abortion pills and self-induce abortions at home.
When pro-life groups oppose equal protection bills and then claim their states are “abortion-free,” they don’t merely exaggerate. They sabotage.
Everyday anti-abortion Americans hear “abortion-free” and assume the fight is over. Activism slows. Political pressure fades. Donations and support shift elsewhere. Meanwhile organizations that should be pressing for equal protection instead suppress the only laws that would actually end abortion.
In the meantime, abortion continues unabated — simply moved from clinics to living rooms.
The pro-life establishment has redefined victory to fit what it has achieved, not what it claims to seek. It has declared victory over a substitute target — abortion clinics — while the killing of preborn children continues through abortion pills and interstate travel.
RELATED: Why the pro-life movement fails without a Christian worldview
wildpixel via iStock/Getty Images
Demanding honesty
Americans who oppose abortion deserve honesty from the organizations claiming to represent them.
If abortion can still be performed legally in a state through mail-order pills, that state is not “abortion-free.” If abortion numbers rise rather than fall, victory has not arrived. If pro-life groups oppose laws that would make abortion illegal for everyone, they owe the public an explanation.
Abolishing abortion requires equal protection under the law: making the killing of any human being illegal for everyone, without exception or compromise.
Until major pro-life organizations support that principle, their claims of creating “abortion-free” states remain not just premature but dishonest.
The preborn babies murdered under the cover of our laws deserve more than semantic victories. They deserve equal protection — and Americans who oppose abortion deserve leaders honest enough to admit when that goal remains unmet.
Cuba next? Trump admin eying possible regime change after Maduro arrest: Report
The Trump administration indicated in its National Security Strategy that “after years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere.”
Making abundantly clear to all that this was not empty rhetoric, the U.S. kicked off 2026 by militarily deposing Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.
Maduro was the first leftist dictator removed from power this year, but he may not be the last.
Sources familiar with the matter told the Wall Street Journal that now with a blueprint for surgical governmental restructures in the region, the Trump administration is searching for well-placed insiders in Cuba who could help oust the island nation’s communist regime by the end of the year.
‘I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.’
That strategy appears, after all, to have worked in Caracas, Venezuela, where an asset within Maduro’s inner circle furnished American intelligence personnel with critical information about the leftist leader’s habits, travels, and whereabouts, according to administration officials.
It’s unclear if that asset was Maduro’s vice president, now acting President Delcy Rodríguez, whom four sources familiar with the discussions told the Guardian signaled a willingness to cooperate with the Trump administration ahead of the military extraction.
RELATED: The truth behind Trump’s Venezuela plan: It’s not about Maduro at all
Photo by Horacio Villalobos#Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images
One U.S. official told the Journal that in recent meetings with Cuban exiles and civic groups, Trump administration officials have brainstormed possible individuals within the current Cuban regime who have an appetite for change and might want to make a deal.
The sense is that the time is ripe for a shakeup in the Stalinist island nation in light of its economic instability and loss of a key ally in Caracas.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, said earlier this month, “I think Cuba is going to be something we’ll end up talking about, because Cuba is a failing nation right now, a very badly failing nation, and we want to help the people.”
“If I lived in Havana, and I was in the government, I’d be concerned,” added Rubio.
Cuba — which has suffered rolling blackouts in recent months and years — has long relied on Venezuela for subsidized oil, which has made up around 70% of its total oil imports.
In the wake of Maduro’s removal, Pavel Vidal, a former Cuban central bank economist who teaches at Javeriana University, told NBC News, “If oil supply were to cease entirely, the Cuban economy would grind to a halt.”
Senior U.S. officials told the Journal that the U.S. plans to further undermine the Cuban regime by restricting its access to Venezuelan oil.
“Cuba lived, for many years, on large amounts of OIL and MONEY from Venezuela,” Trump noted in a Truth Social post on Jan. 11. “THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA — ZERO! I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.”
The State Department said in a statement that it is in America’s national security interests for Cuba “to be competently run by a democratic government and to refuse to host our adversaries’ military and intelligence services.”
Rubio made a point of noting last week that the Cuban regime was “illegitimate.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
’28 Years Later: The Bone Temple’ brings new life to horror franchise
Like the post-apocalyptic Britain of the “28 Days Later” franchise, Hollywood has become a wasteland, teeming with the stripped-down, lethally efficient shells of once-vital creations. Nostalgia-driven reboots swarm the multiplex, satisfying audience cravings for familiarity and studio appetites for certainty — even as they leave the surrounding creative landscape increasingly barren.
This year’s “28 Years Later” could just as easily have been another of these living-dead productions. While previous installment “28 Weeks Later” (2007) — made with nominal participation from the original creative team — delivered competent scares, it hardly cried out for a follow-up.
The movie is littered with British cultural references — decontextualized and repurposed by survivors struggling to find meaning in a world they no longer understand.
But the return of director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland proved worth the wait. “28 Years Later” demonstrated that this universe could still surprise, ending with a tantalizingly bizarre coda in which our hero Spike is rescued by Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal (Jack O’Connell) and his blonde-wigged, track-suited minions. Clearly the infected are not the only menace stalking the British countryside.
Charity cases
“28 Years Later: The Bone Temple” picks up right after this moment, confirming our suspicions that Spike’s troubles have just begun. After a gruesome kind of initiation, Spike is forcibly enlisted as one the “Jimmys,” who turn out to be a gang of satanic killers. Led by Jimmy Crystal, who believes himself to be the son of “Old Nick,” they prowl the land inflicting gruesome ritualized violence — which they call “charity” — on those unfortunate enough to meet them.
While Garland returns as screenwriter, Boyle (who stays on as producer) cedes the director’s chair to Nia DaCosta, whose striking use of lingering close-ups and tightly framed compositions inject the film with a raw, anarchic energy. The result is a legacy sequel that both pays homage to its origins and reimagines them — one that weaves graphic violence together with incisive observations on culture, faith, and survival in a world irreversibly altered by catastrophe.
Doctor Sleep
Many of those observations come straight from the kindly and philosophical Dr. Ian Kelson (Ralph Fiennes), an eccentric recluse who provided shelter for runaway Spike and his dying mother in “28 Years Later.” In this grisly sequel, the iodine-covered, blowdart-wielding former physician is searching for a cure to the rage virus, using an infected “alpha” zombie — whom he names Samson — as his pet project.
He also continues work on the titular bone temple, a memorial to the outbreak’s victims, until his optimism and ingenuity is tested by the new and horrifying human adversary we met in the beginning.
While Boyle’s 2002 film focused on urban chaos, this installment widens its lens, exploring the virus’ impact across the countryside while delving into deeper philosophical terrain. Beneath the skin-flaying, stabbings, “Mortal Kombat”-style spine removals, and Iron Maiden needle drops lies a poignant meditation on a once-beautiful country sliding into social and spiritual decay.
This is England
DaCosta, an American director, deftly preserves the distinctly English identity of the original films. The movie is littered with British cultural references — decontextualized and repurposed by survivors struggling to find meaning in a world they no longer understand.
The Jimmys, with their blonde wigs, tracksuits, and gold jewelry, are intentionally modeled after Jimmy Savile, one of Britain’s most notorious sex offenders. In this universe — where society collapsed in 2002, years before Savile’s real-world crimes were exposed — the cult reveres him as a benevolent, almost mythical figure. Their so-called acts of “charity” grotesquely invert Savile’s public image of philanthropy, turning it into a rationale for cruelty and sadism.
The dynamic between Sir Jimmy and Kelson is magnetic. O’Connell and Fiennes deliver outstanding performances, moving seamlessly between surrealism and melancholy. Some of the film’s most compelling moments occur when these two simply share the screen in conversation.
Sir Jimmy and Kelson represent competing philosophies of survival. In desperate times, humanity creates belief systems — sometimes as tools of power, sometimes as mechanisms of self-preservation. Through these two figures, Garland weaves a thoughtful exploration of evil, faith, and meaning.
RELATED: ‘28 Years Later’: Brutal, bewildering, and unabashedly British
Tim P. Whitby/Getty Images
Feral faith
Religious symbolism runs throughout the film. The Jimmys repurpose Savile’s catchphrase “Howzat!” as a ritual chant — stripped of its original meaning and reconstituted as a signifier of violence. Kelson, meanwhile, assumes the role of a secular creator. His humanist liturgy centers on music and literature, which function as sacred texts connecting him to the past and preserving his sanity.
Samson’s transformation becomes an allegory for rebirth: emerging from the hell of infection into renewal. Where the biblical Adam becomes aware of his nakedness after eating from the tree of knowledge, Samson’s recovery inspires modesty as he clothes himself with memories of his return. It is the Fall in reverse — self-awareness as ascension, rebirth without grace.
“The Bone Temple” manages to inject genuine life into a franchise nearly 25 years old. I may regret saying this, but I am genuinely curious to see where the story goes next — especially with Boyle returning to direct the third and final installment. The film’s closing scene teases the return of a familiar face, and John Murphy’s fuzzed-out guitar theme suggests that hope remains, for both the survivors and the fans.
Trump’s primary endorsements are sabotaging his own agenda
Imagine what the Republican Party would have looked like had President Trump been endorsing conservative reformers down-ballot rather than milquetoast RINOs backed by special interests for five consecutive cycles.
In 2016, President Trump stormed the corporatist castle of the country-club GOP. But over the next five election cycles, he pulled up the rope ladder behind him. He left the reinforcements outside the gates, which crushed his ability to deliver on his promises in his first term. It also allowed generic Republicans to ride his brand while drifting away from his original America First message.
Conservatives understand that competition improves a product. When Trump protects incumbents from primary pressure, he guarantees that the party never improves.
Now he is making the same mistake in his second term by backing status-quo, corporatist Republicans in key races.
2026 is do or die
The opening months of 2026 should be the Super Bowl of primaries for the right. Vulnerable establishment Republicans and open seats sit on the board across solid red states — for Senate and governor.
Even if Republicans struggle in swing states, Trump could still lock in a generation of red-state power by backing grassroots conservatives in open seats and insurgents challenging weak incumbents.
Instead, he keeps yanking the rug out from under his own base.
Louisiana bait and switch
Over the weekend, the president endorsed Rep. Julia Letlow (R-La.) for U.S. Senate in Louisiana. Until now, Trump has refused to back conservatives against incumbents — except when he endorsed against Freedom Caucus Chairman Rep. Bob Good of Virginia in 2024.
So yes, Trump finally moved against Sen. Bill Cassidy, a pro-COVID-vaccine liberal wasting a conservative seat. But he waited until more conservative candidates — state Treasurer John Fleming, state Sen. Blake Miguez, and state Rep. Julie Emerson — softened Cassidy up. Then Trump picked a challenger who matches Cassidy’s worldview in a prettier package.
Letlow sides with Cassidy on government-run health care and the COVID vaccines. She also voted against penalizing FDA officials for unlawfully expanding access to mifepristone. Trump carried Louisiana by 22 points and won 57 of 64 parishes. He could have used his clout to elect a conservative stalwart like Miguez. Instead, he chose another version of the same problem.
RELATED: Voters won’t buy ‘freedom in Iran’ while Minneapolis goes lawless
Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
Governors matter now
If Democrats regain Washington, governors become the last real barrier against federal abuse. Red-state governors will matter more than ever, especially if Democrats install a weaponized Gavin Newsom-style agenda at the national level.
After Ron DeSantis turned Florida from swing state into the red-state model, Republicans should be building an entire bench of governors who make even DeSantis look tame. But Trump’s endorsement habits keep locking in mediocrity. In Florida, he is backing Byron Donalds — a favorite of the legislative RINOs who fought DeSantis for years.
Fourteen governorships are up in states Republicans should win even in a rough year: Alabama, Alaska, Florida, Iowa, Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming. Trump hasn’t made one bold, movement-building endorsement as he did with DeSantis in 2018. Instead, he has already pre-emptively endorsed Idaho Gov. Brad Little for a third term and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott for a fourth.
Texas betrayal rewarded
Trump has started interfering even in state legislative races. In Texas, Republicans cut a deal with Democrats and installed Dustin Burrows as speaker against the will of most of the party. Burrows rewarded them by handing committees to Democrats and killing conservative priorities.
When conservatives moved to defeat the traitors, Trump carpet-bombed the effort by endorsing Burrows and his lieutenants for re-election.
Conservatives understand that competition improves a product. Trump keeps canceling that competition. When he protects incumbents from primary pressure, he guarantees that the party never improves.
