Podcasts about yale

What if our relentless drive to be better than others is quietly breaking us?Miroslav Volf unpacks the core themes of his 2025 book, The Cost of Ambition: How Striving to Be Better Than Others Makes Us Worse. In this book, Volf offers a penetrating critique of comparison culture, diagnosing the hidden moral and spiritual wounds caused by competition and superiority.Drawing on Scripture, theology, philosophy, literature, and our culture's obsession with competition and superiority, Volf challenges our assumptions about ambition and identity—and presents a deeply humanizing vision of life rooted not in being “the best,” but in receiving ourselves as creatures made and loved by God.From Milton's depiction of Satan to Jesus' descent in Philippians 2, from the architectural rivalry of ancient Byzantium to modern Olympic anxieties, Volf invites us to imagine a new foundation for personal and social flourishing: a life free from striving, rooted in love and grace.Highlights“The key here is for us to come to appreciate, affirm, and—importantly—love ourselves. Love ourselves unconditionally.”“Striving for superiority devalues everything we have, if it doesn't contribute to us being better than someone else.”“The inverse of striving for superiority is internal plague by inferiority.”“In Jesus, we see that God's glory is not to dominate but to lift up what is low.”“We constantly compare to feel good about ourselves, and end up unsure of who we are.”“We have been given to ourselves by God—our very existence is a gift, not a merit.”Helpful Links and ResourcesVisit faith.yale.edu/ambition to get a 40-page PDF Discussion Guide and Full Access to 7 videosThe Cost of Ambition by Miroslav Volf (Baker Academic, May 2025)Philippians 2:5–11 (NIV) – Christ's Humility and Exaltation – BibleGatewayRomans 12:10 – “Outdo one another in showing honor” – BibleHubParadise Lost by John Milton – Project GutenbergParadise Regained by John Milton – Project GutenbergShow NotesOpening Reflections on CompetitionThe conversation begins with Volf recalling a talk he gave at the Global Congress on Christianity & Sports.He uses athletic competition—highlighting Lionel Messi—as a lens for questioning the moral value of striving to be better than others.“Sure, competition pulls people up—but it also familiarizes us with inferiority.”“We compare ourselves to feel good… but end up feeling worse.”Introduces the story of Justinian and Hagia Sophia: “Oh Solomon, I have outdone you.”Rivalry, Power, and InsecurityShares the backstory of Juliana's competing church and the gold-ceiling arms race with Justinian.“Religious architecture became a battlefield of status.”Draws insight from these historic rivalries as examples of how ambition pervades religious life—not just secular.Modern Parallels: Yale Students's & the Rat RaceVolf notes how even Yale undergrads—once top of their class—feel insecure in comparison to peers.“They arrive and suddenly their worth plummets. That's insane.”The performance-driven culture makes stable identity nearly impossible.Biblical Illustration: Kierkegaard's LilyVolf recounts Kierkegaard's retelling of Jesus's lily parable.A bird whispers to the little lily that it's not beautiful enough, prompting the lily to uproot itself—and wither.“The lesson: we are destined to lose ourselves when our value depends on comparison.”Intrinsic Value and the Image of God“We need to discover the intrinsic value of who we are as creatures made in the image of God.”Kierkegaard and Jesus both show us the beauty of ‘mere humanity.'“You are more glorious in your humanity than Solomon in his robes.”Theological Anthropology and Grace“We have been given to ourselves by God—our lives are a gift.”“We owe so much to luck, to others, to God. So how can we boast?”Paul's challenge in 1 Corinthians: “What do you have that you have not received?”Milton and Satan's AmbitionShifts to Paradise Lost: Satan rebels because he can't bear not being top.“Even what is beautiful becomes devalued if it doesn't prove superiority.”In Paradise Regained, Satan tempts Jesus to be the greatest—but Jesus refuses.Christ's Humility and Downward GloryHighlights Philippians 2: Jesus “emptied himself… took the form of a servant.”“God's glory is not domination—it's lifting up the lowly.”“Salvation comes not through seizing status, but through relinquishing it.”Paul's Vision of Communal HonorRomans 12:10: “Outdo one another in showing honor.”“True honor comes not from climbing over others, but from lifting them up.”Connects this ethic to Paul's vision of church as an egalitarian body.God's Care for Creation and HumanityLuther's observation: God calls Earth good but not Heaven—“God cares more for our home than his own.”“We are called to emulate God's loving attention to the least.”Striving vs. AcceptanceVolf contrasts ambition with love: “The inverse of striving for superiority is the plague of inferiority.”Encourages unconditional self-love as a reflection of God's love.Uses image of a parent greeting a newborn: “You've arrived.”A Vision for Healed Culture“We wreck others in our pursuit of superiority—and we leave them wounded in our wake.”The gospel reveals a better way: not performance, but grace.“Our salvation and our culture's healing lie in the humility of Jesus.”“We must rediscover the beauty of our mere humanity.”About Miroslav VolfMiroslav Volf is the founding director of the Yale Center for Faith & Culture and the Henry B. Wright Professor of Theology at Yale Divinity School. One of the leading public theologians of our time, he is the author of numerous books including Exclusion and Embrace, Flourishing, A Public Faith, Life Worth Living, and most recently, The Cost of Ambition. His work explores themes of identity, reconciliation, human dignity, and the role of faith in a pluralistic society. He is a frequent speaker around the world and has advised both religious and civic leaders on matters of peace and justice.Production NotesThis podcast featured Miroslav VolfEdited and Produced by Evan RosaHosted by Evan RosaProduction Assistance by Macie Bridge and Taylor CraigA Production of the Yale Center for Faith & Culture at Yale Divinity School https://faith.yale.edu/aboutSupport For the Life of the World podcast by giving to the Yale Center for Faith & Culture: https://faith.yale.edu/give

Presented by Lauren Stibgen Sometimes when we are in the midst of a conflict, we talk about it with others to seek counsel. Seeking counsel from others is not a bad thing. In fact, Proverbs 15:22 tells us that without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed, and in Proverbs 24:6 we learn surely you need guidance to wage war, and victory is won through many advisers. Sometimes during a conflict, we seek counsel from people who may tell us what we want to hear instead of what we need to hear. You know that group of friends or colleagues that always seems to share your point of view, the ones that cheer you on and will tell you the other party is just plain wrong. In industrial psychology, we call this group think. Irving Janus, a Yale psychologist defines group think as a mode of thinking that people in a group engage in where striving for unanimity overrides the motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. Finding people that will agree with us can certainly feel good in the moment, but it can have monumental consequences when it comes to resolving a conflict. In 1 Kings 22 Jehoshaphat sought counsel to discern whether he should go to battle. The prophets that he would typically take counsel from told him to go … for the Lord will give it into the king's hand (1 Kings 22:6). When he asked if there was another prophet that he could inquire of, Micaiah was suggested. Jehoshaphat states, I hate him because he never prophesies anything good about me, but always bad (1 Kings 22:8). In the remaining verses of 1 Kings 22 we learn Jehosaphat goes to battle after not listening to Micaiah, and he lost his life. When you are seeking advice during a conflict, are you listening to wise counsel or are you listening to the voices that always agree with you? And more importantly are you seeking counsel from other believers? Good counsel asks questions; it challenges you and will seek to help you maintain and discern how you can come to a good resolution to a conflict. Good counsel will turn you toward God's Word and to your relationship with Jesus as you look for solutions in whatever situation you are in.

Our Summer Series kickoff is a twofer, Andy Golden, now retired after thirty years at Princeton University Investment Management Company, and Scott Wilson from Washington University-St. Louis. We packaged these two leading endowments to compare their investment styles. Andy started his career at Yale with me and became one of the leaders of the endowment model for decades. His discussion of Princo's decision-making process is among the most referenced descriptions of any podcast with a CIO. Original air date: June 26, 2017 Learn More Follow Ted on Twitter at @tseides or LinkedIn Subscribe to the mailing list Access Transcript with Premium Membership

In Episode 218 OF GROWING OLDER LIVING YOUNGER, Dr. William Hsu, endocrinologist and Chief Medical Officer at L Nutra, joins Dr. Gillian Lockitch to explore the science behind fasting mimicking diets (FMD) and how they may lower biological age, fight chronic disease, and boost metabolic health. You'll hear how simple lifestyle interventions, when structured and supported, can trigger the body's natural repair systems—and why healthspan, not just lifespan, should be the goal of aging well.  Dr. William Hsu is a Harvard-trained endocrinologist who spent 20 years at Harvard's Joslin Diabetes Center before joining L-Nutra in 2019 as Chief Medical Officer. At L-Nutra, he leads clinical development and drives education around fasting and the Fasting Mimicking Diet. Previously, he served as Vice President at Joslin, leading international education and healthcare advisory efforts, helping to shape national diabetes care guidelines. Dr. Hsu's research focuses on diabetes pathophysiology and digital health in chronic care. He earned degrees from Cornell and Mount Sinai, completed his Internal Medicine residency at Yale, and his Endocrinology fellowship at Harvard, where he was later an Assistant Professor.   Episode Timeline: 0:00 – Introduction and Podcast Overview Host Dr. Gillian Lockitch introduces the theme for 2025: “Age is just a number.” She frames the episode around exploring strategies to extend healthspan—the years of life spent in good health—and invites listeners to book one-on-one sessions.  2:12 – Meet Dr. William Hsu Gillian introduces her guest, Harvard-trained endocrinologist Dr. William Hsu. Formerly with the Joslin Diabetes Center, Dr. Hsu now leads clinical efforts at L- Nutra, pioneering fasting-mimicking nutrition science.  4:50 – Lifestyle Change: More Than Just Willpower Dr. Hsu explains why lifestyle interventions often fail without structural support. He acknowledges the essential role of medications but stresses the need for more systemic, pragmatic solutions to improve public health.  9:29 – Why Modern Life Challenges Healthy Living The conversation turns to the external forces—processed foods, advertising, time scarcity—that sabotage health. Dr. Hsu advocates for societal-level interventions and introduces fasting mimicking diets (FMD) as a practical tool.  12:24 – What is a Fasting Mimicking Diet? Dr. Hsu defines the FMD as a plant-based meal plan that tricks the body into a fasting state while providing nourishment. He explains how FMD promotes autophagy, cellular renewal, and metabolic reset.  28:23 – Clinical Trials: Reversing Biological Age Dr. Hsu cites a Nature Communications study where FMD reduced participants' biological age by 2.5 years in just three cycles. He explains how biological age is measured and why it's a more powerful indicator than the number on your birthday cake.  31:53 – Can You Track Your Own Biological Age? Gillian and Dr. Hsu discuss current tools for measuring biological age and where the science is heading. Dr. Hsu shares how consumers can access FMD kits and programs in various global regions.  33:14 – FMD and Diabetes Management Dr. Hsu shares compelling data showing how FMD can reduce visceral fat, insulin resistance, and blood sugar levels—attacking the root of type 2 diabetes and reducing reliance on medication.  36:09 – El Nutra's Comprehensive FMD Program Dr. Hsu describes a complete support system for FMD users, including medical oversight, apps, coaching, and lab tracking. The program is already in use in the U.S., UK, and Italy, and expanding.  39:22 – Final Thoughts: Healing Through the Right Environment Dr. Hsu emphasizes the body's innate ability to rejuvenate when supported by evidence-based nutrition like FMD. Gillian closes with a call to action: explore the tools discussed to take control of your aging journey.  Action Steps:  Check out posts in the Age is Just a Number 2025  A to Z Blogging Challenge Schedule a one on one call with Dr. Gillian Lockitch.  Join the Growing Older Living Younger  Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/growingolderlivingyounger Access Your Free E-book from Dr. Gillian Lockitch Guide to Mind and Memory Boosting Strategies   Learn about the work of Dr. William Hsu and L-Nutra https://prolonfast.ca/ https://www.twitter.com/lnutraofficial/ https://www.facebook.com/LNutra/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-hsu-md/  

Send us a textIn this powerful episode, Corie sits down with Maxine Williams, VP Head of Accessibility and Engagement at Meta (formerly Chief Diversity Officer), Rhodes Scholar, Oxford and Yale graduate,  for an honest, inspiring, and deeply Trinidadian conversation. From acting on stage in Earl Lovelace's the Dragon Can't Dance with Brother Resistance and playing the evil Isis in Westwood Park, to working alongside Mark Zuckerberg at one of the world's most influential tech companies, Maxine shares the personal and professional journey that led her from WoodBrook, POS to Silicon Valley boardrooms.They discuss the magic of Carnival, the legacy of Peter Minshall, the future of AI and assistive tech, and what it really takes to get a job at a company like Meta. Maxine also reflects on imposter syndrome, community, the power of representation, and why excellence gives you the freedom to choose your own path.This one is full of laughter, real talk, and lessons for anyone navigating creativity, identity, and career on a global scale — all while staying rooted in the Caribbean spirit.Click the link in my bio for the full episode#coriesheppardpodcast #MaxineWilliams #Meta #RhodesScholar #Oxford #Yale #Trinidad #Carnival #AI #TechAndCulture #RepresentationMatters

#626: A software programmer and an accountant walk into retirement planning. Are they being creative? Dr. Zorana Ivcevic Pringle, a senior research scientist at Yale University's Center for Emotional Intelligence, says absolutely. Pringle defines creativity as something that's both original and effective, whether you're solving an accounting problem or planning an unconventional retirement. We explore the gap between having ideas and actually implementing them. You have this brilliant vision for starting a business, changing careers, or retiring early, but somehow you never take the first step. Pringle calls this the implementation gap, and she explains why it happens. The conversation centers on a hypothetical couple: both 55 years old, one a programmer, the other in middle management. They want to retire at 57 and travel the world. Pringle uses this example to illustrate how creative problem-solving works in real life. She explains that creativity requires comfort with uncertainty. When you're doing something new, you don't have a blueprint or checklist. There's always the risk that your early retirement plan could fail spectacularly — imagine having to return to work at 59 after the market tanks and your portfolio gets crushed. Here's the key insight: you don't need full confidence to start. Pringle compares creative confidence to fuel in a car. You don't need a full tank — you can start with just a quarter tank and refuel along the way. Each small success builds more confidence for the next step. The bottom line? Innovation happens through constant iteration. Your final destination might change throughout your career and retirement, and that's completely normal. Resources Mentioned: https://www.zorana-ivcevic-pringle.com/ Timestamps: Note: Timestamps will vary on individual listening devices based on dynamic advertising run times. The provided timestamps are approximate and may be several minutes off due to changing ad lengths. (0:00) Implementation gap intro (1:00) Creativity beyond arts (2:00) Original plus effective (3:00) Ideas to action gap (5:00) Retirement as creativity (7:00) Openness drives creativity (8:00) Problem finding process (10:00) Big Five traits (12:00) Openness and creativity (15:00) Traits can change (18:00) Uncertainty creates risk (20:00) Courage versus comfort (23:00) Self-efficacy challenges (25:00) Quarter tank confidence (28:00) Creative failure recovery (32:00) Creative blocks (36:00) Pivoting versus quitting (39:00) Emotions as information (42:00) Metrics versus intuition (50:00) Implementation strategies Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Eric and Matt dive into the fascinating dynamics of the market from the past quarter. Despite a 10% rise in the S&P 500, the quarter was marked by significant early volatility due to unexpected tariff announcements. The discussion covers the impact of tariffs on markets, the influence of global trade tensions, and the interplay between short-term and long-term market reactions. They also delve into the implications of AI and new technologies on market trends and the potential for volatility driven by algorithmic trading. The episode explores the role of the US Federal Reserve, the evolving market perception of Bitcoin, and the broader economic impacts of geopolitical events.  For the full show notes, transcript, and links to the best content to learn more, check out the episode page HERE. ----- Making Markets is a property of Colossus, LLC. For more episodes of Making Markets, visit joincolossus.com/episodes. Stay up to date on all our podcasts by signing up to Colossus Weekly, our quick dive every Sunday highlighting the top business and investing concepts from our podcasts and the best of what we read that week. Sign up here. Follow us on Twitter: @makingmkts | @ericgoldenx Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant (https://thepodcastconsultant.com). Show Notes (00:00:00) Welcome to Making Markets (00:01:34) Market Reactions to Tariffs (00:03:38) Trump's Strategy and Market Dynamics (00:06:33) Volatility and Market Structure (00:15:33) Geopolitical Tensions and Market Impact (00:20:28) AI Revolution and Market Sentiment (00:24:25) The Gold Rush Analogy in Business (00:25:43) Private Investment Trends and Mega Funds (00:26:26) Yale's Investment Strategy and Its Impact (00:27:22) Challenges in Private Equity Liquidity (00:29:46) Jerome Powell and the Federal Reserve (00:30:51) The Role of the Fed in Economic Stability (00:34:25) Trump's Influence on Treasury and Fed Dynamics (00:40:31) The Impact of AI and Inflation on the Economy (00:43:34) Bitcoin's Maturation and Market Dynamics (00:47:04) Concluding Thoughts on Market Trends Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Rich welcomes Christian Briggs, CEO of Hard Asset Management, to break down the passage of the Genius Act in the House and its major implications for cryptocurrency, stablecoins. Congressman Mike Haridopolos (R-FL-8), member of the House Science, Space & Technology and Financial Services Committees, joins to discuss Trump's latest tariffs, cuts to public programming, and how the administration plans to reduce federal spending through key rescissions. Also, Debbie Wuthnow, President of iVoterGuide, weighs in on a revealing new Yale poll showing a surprising rightward shift among young voters. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

"Yale couch incident" survivor Sarah Braasch describes being/becoming the 1st major Karen. Support the show

Yale professor, Dr Samuel Wilkensen, explains what Evolution and Human Nature imply about the meaning of our existence.Our LinksWebsite: http://thoughtfulfaith.orgInstagram:  / thoughtful.faithTikTok:  / thoughtful.faithPodcast: https://www.buzzsprout.com/1478749DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this video are entirely the opinion of the creator and do not necessarily reflect any officially endorsed positions of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints or channel sponsors.

Foreign aid accounts for 1% of the U.S. federal budget. These funds are used to fight famine and disease worldwide. This week, the Senate will debate cutting $7.9 billion earmarked for these efforts. In July, the Humanitarian Research Lab at Yale had federal funds rescinded. They are currently operating by with the help of individual donors. Today, we get an update on humanitarian crises and international conflicts around the globe. We'll also discuss the future of humanitarian aid in the United States and abroad. GUESTS: Lila Hassan: Independent Investigative Journalist Nathaniel Raymond: Executive Director of the Humanitarian Research Lab at the Yale School of Public Health Provash Budden: Deputy Senior Vice President of Emergency Programs at Americares Support the show: http://wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

“Life is short and it ends, the clock is ticking. Don't get all wrapped up in your personal self, that's a very unhealthy thing to do.” - Fred Smith, Founder of FedEx (1944 - 2025) On June 21, 2025, the business world - more specifically the supply chain world - lost a giant. FedEx Founder Fred Smith passed away at the age of 80. Frederick Wallace Smith was born in Marks, Mississippi in 1944. According to common anecdotes, he first imagined a company that could provide overnight delivery for an economics paper he wrote while studying at Yale in 1965 - and he got a C because the professor thought the idea was implausible. In this episode of Art of Supply, Kelly Barner looks at Fred Smith's many contributions from five decades in business: The risk he had to be willing to take on in pursuit of his vision The many innovations that were introduced by FedEx during his tenure Why Smith's perspective on what kind of business FedEx was in was so critical to its success Links: FedEx Ground's Contractor Woes Case Dismissed: Spencer Patton Prevails Over FedEx Reading FedEx Ground the RICO Act Will FedEx Freight hit the open road? Kelly Barner on LinkedIn Art of Supply LinkedIn newsletter  Art of Supply on AOP Subscribe to This Week in Procurement

CT Insider's Natasha Sokoloff wrote a piece discussing Yale freezing hiring and due to the cost cutting of the Big Beautiful Bill.

Duane and Hurls are joined by new Sabres goalie Alex Lyon! - Signing with Buffalo - His career in the NHL - Playing for Yale in the NCAA - Goaltender Development - His thoughts in Devon Levi - Recruiting Pat Kane to Buffalo next year? - Some great one-liners and more! Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts! Presented by Fattey Beer Co. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Struggling with low energy, brain fog, or hormonal imbalances? Discover how holistic wellness can transform your life. In this episode of The Women's Vibrancy Code, Maraya Brown shares powerful insights on reclaiming vitality by making intentional choices around what you consume—physically, emotionally, and mentally. She unpacks how detoxification, nourishment, and letting go play a crucial role in living a vibrant, empowered life. Through real-life testimonials and practical tools, Maraya breaks down the connection between daily habits and long-term wellness. You'll learn how to identify what's serving you—and what's silently draining your health. This episode is for you if you're ready to stop running on empty and start living with more energy, clarity, and purpose.   Tips in this episode: Understanding what we consume through various facets of our lives has a profound impact on our vitality and overall well-being. Embracing a holistic approach by synchronizing mind and body can lead to reconnection with one's vitality. Making small but significant changes in daily routines, like hydration or diet, can have a significant impact on well-being.     _____________________ The Women's Vibrancy Accelerator Trifecta: Your 90-Day Health Reset Ready to take your health to the next level? The Women's Vibrancy Accelerator Trifecta offers deep, personalized support to help you regain control of your energy, hormones, and well-being. This program includes: Three one-on-one calls with Maraya Dutch Plus Test and full assessment Bi-weekly live Q&A sessions Self-paced health portal covering energy, hormones, libido, and confidence Podcast listeners get an exclusive discount. Use code PODCAST. Learn more and enroll now: https://marayabrown.com/trifecta/ _______________________ Free Wellness Resources Access free tools like the Menstrual Tracker, Adaptogen Elixir Recipes, Two-Week Soul Cleanse, Food Facial, and more. Download now: https://marayabrown.com/resources/ _______________________ Subscribe to The Women's Vibrancy Code Podcast Listen on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, and Spotify. _______________________ Connect with the Show Find us on Facebook,  Linkedin | Website | Tiktok | Facebook Group _______________________ Apply for a Call with Maraya Brown Start your journey with personalized support. Apply here: https://marayabrown.com/call  _______________________ About Maraya Brown Maraya is a Yale and Functional Medicine-trained Women's Health and Wellness Expert (CNM, MSN). She helps women feel energized, confident, and connected to themselves and their lives. With over 25 years of experience, she specializes in energy, hormones, libido, confidence, and deep transformation. _______________________ Disclaimer The content of this podcast is for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only and does not constitute medical or professional advice. Listeners should consult with a qualified professional before making any health decisions.

In this episode of the Award-winning PRS Journal Club Podcast, 2025 Resident Ambassadors to the PRS Editorial Board – Christopher Kalmar, Ilana Margulies, and Amanda Sergesketter- and special guest, Lara Devgan, MD, MPH, discuss the following articles from the July 2025 issue: “Use of Text-to-Image Artificial Intelligence Model in Preoperative Counseling for Lip-Lift Procedures” by Huang, Balas, Yan, and Wulc. Read the article for FREE: https://bit.ly/TexttoImageAiLip Special guest, Lara Devgan, MD, MPH is an internationally known aesthetic plastic surgeon practicing aesthetic surgery of the face, breast, and body as well as facial injectables in New York City. She attended Yale for her undergraduate education followed by Johns Hopkins for medical school and the Columbia/Cornell program for plastic surgery residency. She is the founder and CEO of the medical-grade skincare line Dr. Devgan Scientific Beauty, serves as a medical expert for ABC News, is an editorial consultant for the Lancet, and lectures internationally on aesthetic plastic surgery. READ the articles discussed in this podcast as well as free related content: https://bit.ly/JCJuly25Collection The views expressed by hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of ASPS.

This week, we sit down with designer David Jon Walker and talk about his journey from Nashville to Yale. We explore how David's roots, family inspirations (his quilting grandmother!), and a persistent drive to learn have shaped his style and career in typography and design. David candidly shares the sacrifices, risks, and leaps of faith that brought him to where he is today, including starting a new MFA mid-life and juggling fatherhood. Tune in for an engaging conversation filled with insights and a reminder that the creative process is full of unexpected turns — and endless possibilities. You can find blog posts for this and all our past episodes at monotype.com/podcast.

In this powerful conversation, Rob talks with Jennifer Kaufman, educator, and grandmother to an autistic child - about the often overlooked but critical role that grandparents play in the lives of neurodivergent kids. Jennifer shares wisdom from her book Grandparenting on the Spectrum and opens up about navigating her dual role as both a seasoned professional and a grandparent still learning to step back. This episode is a must-listen for parents and grandparents alike who want to create stronger, more supportive relationships without stepping on each other's toes. What You'll Learn in This Episode: Why well-meaning grandparents can unintentionally make things harder—and how to fix that The importance of respecting parental boundaries, even when you “know better” How to build meaningful relationships with autistic grandkids (especially from a distance) Why letting go of old expectations can make room for deeper connection Practical advice for grandparents navigating IEPs, meltdowns, and special routines Tips for handling holidays and vacations with neurodivergent kids The most supportive thing a grandparent can say (and what not to say) How Jennifer's book can help families communicate, collaborate, and grow together About My Guest: Jennifer Kaufman is an educator, former autism school principal, and author of Grandparenting on the Spectrum: A Journey From Both Sides of the Desk. She's also the proud grandmother of an autistic child and speaks regularly to grandparent groups about inclusion, understanding, and support. Learn more or connect with Jennifer at: https://www.grandparentingonthespectrum.com Facebook: @GrandparentingOnTheSpectrum Find her book on Amazon: https://amzn.to/40W0L2e About Rob: Rob Gorski is a single dad to three amazing autistic sons and the voice behind The Autism Dad blog and podcast. A nationally recognized autism advocate and keynote speaker, Rob has been featured by CNN, ABC News, BBC, and more. He creates content that supports and validates parents of neurodivergent kids. Learn more at: https://www.theautismdad.com Call to Action: If this episode helped you feel seen, pass it on. Share it with a grandparent, a parent, or anyone helping to raise a neurodivergent child. Don't forget to subscribe, leave a review, and visit: https://www.listen.theautismdad.com for more episodes. You can also support this podcast by checking out our sponsors below. Today's Sponsors: NeuroProtek® – Brain-supporting flavonoid supplement developed by a Yale-trained neuroinflammation expert. Save 5% with code ROB5 at ⁠https://www.algonot.com. Mightier – Help kids learn emotional regulation through play. Learn more: https://www.mightier.com Use code “theautismdad” for a discount.

Send us a textThe One About…Steve Dykstra's Interpretation of Mark Seidenberg's Slide Deck“Identifying what was wrong was much easier than figuring out what to do instead.” – Mark Seidenberg How are teachers supposed to figure out what to do?The Literacy View asked Dr. Steve Dykstra to help us unpack Mark Seidenberg's Yalepresentation slides. Mark Seidenberg's Slide Deck from a presentation given at Yale:“Where Does the Science of Reading Go From Here?”https://seidenbergreading.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Yale-talk.pdfDr. Steve Dykstra has worked as a psychologist for over thirty years in the public sector. He is a founding member of the Wisconsin Reading Coalition and Vice President of the Coalition for Reading Excellence.BREAKING News: A revolutionary breakthrough in dyslexia intervention is HERE!/Dysolve-Created By Dr. Coral HohIt's bold. It's brain-based. It's changing lives.And it's available for schools, districts and individual families.This is next-level literacy.Listen now. Then email us: FaithandJudy@gmail.comLet's bring this cutting-edge work to YOU!

John Zmirak- Trump Is Whipsawing His Base, Sending Contradictory Signals, Amnesty for Sweatshop Farms & Hotels Tempts a Prodigal America to Stay in Its Pigsty   The Eric Metaxas Show  Jul 08 2025   Other Episodes Big Bad John joins us to discuss his article Amnesty for Sweatshop Farms & Hotels Tempts a Prodigal America to Stay in Its Pigsty   Article mentioned- Trump Is Whipsawing His Base, Sending Contradictory Signals https://stream.org/the-brew-trump-is-whipsawing-his-base-sending-contradictory-signals/   Find All of John Zmirak Articles at- https://stream.org/author/johnzmirak/   John Zmirak is a Senior Editor of The Stream. He received his B.A. from Yale University in 1986, then his M.F.A. in screenwriting and fiction and his Ph.D. in English in 1996 from Louisiana State University. He has been Press Secretary to pro-life Louisiana Governor Mike Foster, and a reporter and editor at Success magazine and Investor's Business Daily, among other publications. His essays, poems, and other works have appeared in First Things, The Weekly Standard, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, USA Today, FrontPage Magazine, The American Conservative, The South Carolina Review, Modern Age, The Intercollegiate Review, Commonweal, and The National Catholic Register, among other venues. He has contributed to American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia and The Encyclopedia of Catholic Social Thought. From 2000-2004 he served as Senior Editor of Faith & Family magazine and a reporter at The National Catholic Register. During 2012 he was editor of Crisis. He is author, co-author, or editor of twelve books, including Wilhelm Ropke: Swiss Localist, Global Economist, The Grand Inquisitor and The Race to Save Our Century. His newest book is No Second Amendment, No First. Zmirak can be found at https://stream.org/author/johnzmirak/   John Zmirak is a senior editor at The Stream and author or co-author of ten books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism. He is co-author with Jason Jones of “God, Guns, & the Government.”   John Zmirak's latest book: No Second Amendment, No First  by John Zmirak  Available March 19, 2024 Today's Left endlessly preaches the evils of “gun violence." It is a message increasingly echoed from the nation's pulpits, presented as common-sense decency and virtue. Calls for “radical non-violence” are routinely endowed with the imprimatur of religious doctrine.   But what if such teachings were misguided, even damaging? What if the potential of a citizenry to exercise force against violent criminals and tyrannical governments is not just compatible with church teaching, but flows from the very heart of Biblical faith and reason? What if the freedoms we treasure are intimately tied to the power to resist violent coercion?  This is the long-overdue case John Zmirak makes with stunning clarity and conviction in No Second Amendment, No First. A Yale-educated journalist and former college professor, Zmirak shows how the right of self-defense against authoritarian government was affirmed in both the Old and New Testaments, is implied in Natural Law, and has been part of Church tradition over the centuries.   --------------------------------------------------------------------  Check out our ACU Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/ACUPodcast   HELP ACU SPREAD THE WORD!  Please go to Apple Podcasts and give ACU a 5 star rating. Apple canceled us and now we are clawing our way back to the top. Don't let the Leftist win. Do it now! Thanks. Also Rate us on any platform you follow us on. It helps a lot. Forward this show to friends. Ways to subscribe to the American Conservative University Podcast Click here to subscribe via Apple Podcasts Click here to subscribe via RSS You can also subscribe via Stitcher FM Player Podcast Addict Tune-in Podcasts Pandora Look us up on Amazon Prime …And Many Other Podcast Aggregators and sites ACU on Twitter- https://twitter.com/AmerConU . Warning- Explicit and Violent video content.   Please help ACU by submitting your Show ideas. Email us at americanconservativeuniversity@americanconservativeuniversity.com   Endorsed Charities -------------------------------------------------------- Pre-Born! Saving babies and Souls. https://preborn.org/ OUR MISSION To glorify Jesus Christ by leading and equipping pregnancy clinics to save more babies and souls. WHAT WE DO Pre-Born! partners with life-affirming pregnancy clinics all across the nation. We are designed to strategically impact the abortion industry through the following initiatives:… -------------------------------------------------------- Help CSI Stamp Out Slavery In Sudan Join us in our effort to free over 350 slaves. Listeners to the Eric Metaxas Show will remember our annual effort to free Christians who have been enslaved for simply acknowledging Jesus Christ as their Savior. As we celebrate the birth of Christ this Christmas, join us in giving new life to brothers and sisters in Sudan who have enslaved as a result of their faith. https://csi-usa.org/metaxas   https://csi-usa.org/slavery/   Typical Aid for the Enslaved A ration of sorghum, a local nutrient-rich staple food A dairy goat A “Sack of Hope,” a survival kit containing essential items such as tarp for shelter, a cooking pan, a water canister, a mosquito net, a blanket, a handheld sickle, and fishing hooks. Release celebrations include prayer and gathering for a meal, and medical care for those in need. The CSI team provides comfort, encouragement, and a shoulder to lean on while they tell their stories and begin their new lives. Thank you for your compassion  Giving the Gift of Freedom and Hope to the Enslaved South Sudanese -------------------------------------------------------- Food For the Poor https://foodforthepoor.org/ Help us serve the poorest of the poor Food For The Poor began in 1982 in Jamaica. Today, our interdenominational Christian ministry serves the poor in primarily 17 countries throughout the Caribbean and Latin America. Thanks to our faithful donors, we are able to provide food, housing, healthcare, education, fresh water, emergency relief, micro-enterprise solutions and much more. We are proud to have fed millions of people and provided more than 15.7 billion dollars in aid. Our faith inspires us to be an organization built on compassion, and motivated by love. Our mission is to bring relief to the poorest of the poor in the countries where we serve. We strive to reflect God's unconditional love. It's a sacrificial love that embraces all people regardless of race or religion. We believe that we can show His love by serving the “least of these” on this earth as Christ challenged us to do in Matthew 25. We pray that by God's grace, and with your support, we can continue to bring relief to the suffering and hope to the hopeless.   Report on Food For the Poor by Charity Navigator https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/592174510   -------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer from ACU. We try to bring to our students and alumni the World's best Conservative thinkers. All views expressed belong solely to the author and not necessarily to ACU. In all issues and relations, we hope to follow the admonitions of Jesus Christ. While striving to expose, warn and contend with evil, we extend the love of God to all of his children. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------   

In this episode, co-hosts Elliot Turner and John Mihaljevic welcome Ryan O'Connor of Crossroads Capital and Toan Tran of 10 West Advisors to discuss the investment case for AST SpaceMobile (Nasdaq: ASTS), a satellite designer and manufacturer based in Midland, Texas. Enjoy the conversation! The primary purpose of this podcast is to educate and inform. The views, information, or opinions expressed by hosts or guests are their own. Neither this show, nor any of its content should be construed as investment advice or as a recommendation to buy or sell any particular security. Security specific information shared on this podcast should not be relied upon as a basis for your own investment decisions -- be sure to do your own research. The podcast hosts and participants may have a position in the securities mentioned, personally, through sub accounts and/or through separate funds and may change their holdings at any time.   About the Co-Hosts: Elliot Turner is a co-founder and Managing Partner, CIO at RGA Investment Advisors, LLC. RGA Investment Advisors runs a long-term, low turnover, growth at a reasonable price investment strategy seeking out global opportunities. Elliot focuses on discovering and analyzing long-term, high quality investment opportunities and strategic portfolio management. Prior to joining RGA, Elliot managed portfolios at at AustinWeston Asset Management LLC, Chimera Securities and T3 Capital. Elliot holds the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) designation as well as a Juris Doctor from Brooklyn Law School.. He also holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Emory University where he double majored in Political Science and Philosophy. John Mihaljevic leads MOI Global and serves as managing editor of The Manual of Ideas. He managed a private partnership, Mihaljevic Partners LP, from 2005-2016. John is a winner of the Value Investors Club's prize for best investment idea. He is a trained capital allocator, having studied under Yale University Chief Investment Officer David Swensen and served as Research Assistant to Nobel Laureate James Tobin. John holds a BA in Economics, summa cum laude, from Yale and is a CFA charterholder.

#366 In this episode, the host welcomes Peter Panagore for the third time on the podcast to delve into deep discussions on spirituality, mysticism, and the challenges of modern life. The conversation kicks off with Peter's insights on the suppression of internal salvation within Western religious frameworks, advocating for spiritual awakening from within rather than relying on external saviors. They discuss key themes such as the light breaking through worldly illusions, the mystical experiences Peter had during his near-death experience, and the importance of the heart in spiritual practice. Peter shares his extensive knowledge on ancient texts like the Gospels of Mary and Thomas, highlighting their significance in understanding Christ's teachings on oneness. They also explore the potential impact of AI and societal shifts on spirituality, emphasizing the role of love and compassion in shaping a benevolent future. The episode encourages listeners to embrace mystical experiences and integrate spiritual practices into their daily lives, fostering a sense of unity and compassion. About Peter: Reverend Peter Panagore, M. Div., Yale, is the author of two best-sellers, “Two Minutes for God,” a 7/365 collection of inspirational devotions that aired daily for fifteen years on two NBC News stations in Maine and New Hampshire, and ‘Heaven Is Beautiful: How Dying Taught Me That Death Is Just the Beginning”, an audible best seller that is available globally. His upcoming third book tells true tales of modern mystics in the classical tradition, in the high hopes that he can inspire more people to come out and share their own mystical experiences.  – He previously served as a United Church of Christ minister and pastor in Maine and Connecticut. He now speaks from pulpits, stages, and on national and international media about Near Death Experience, the Reality of God, Christian mysticism, meditation, and prayer.  – Reverend Peter Panagore, M.Div (Yale) has had two near-death experiences, the first while ice climbing in 1980 and the second in 2015 due to a heart attack. In this episode, he recalls his near death experience in March 1980 when he went ice climbing along the Ice Fields Parkway in Alberta Canada with an experienced ice climber. He shares their countless misfortunes on their descent, how he was overcome by exhaustion and hypothermia. He recalls being in a proverbial tunnel and in those minutes, he has experience hell, forgiveness, and unconditional love. He also has encountered God. Key Points Discussed:  (00:00) - Unlocking the SECRETS of the Ancient Mystics (00:56) - Introduction to the Podcast and Guest (01:19) - Key Themes and Insights from the Podcast (03:34) - Peter's Near-Death Experience and Mystical Insights (07:28) - The Nature of Mystical Experiences (11:30) - The Role of Meditation and Surrender (23:07) - Historical Repression of Mysticism (29:27) - Modern Challenges and Spiritual Awakening (31:47) - The Great Awakening and AI's Role (34:06) - Climate Change and Its Impact on Livelihoods (34:44) - The Rise of Near-Death Experiences (36:08) - Healing Emotional Trauma (39:09) - The Concept of Ripening in Spirituality (43:42) - Exploring Mystical Texts and Gospels (48:19) - The Repression of Women in Early Christianity (54:23) - The Potential Impact of UFOs on Religion (57:44) - Manifestation and Living in the Flow (01:02:53) - Conclusion and Final Thoughts How to Contact Peter Panagore:www.peterpanagore.love   About me:My Instagram: www.instagram.com/guyhlawrence/?hl=en Guy's websites:www.guylawrence.com.au www.liveinflow.co

On today's Quick Start podcast: NEWS: A Kentucky man ambushes a state trooper, then fatally shoots two women inside a Baptist church in a chilling act of violence. FOCUS STORY: A new Yale poll shows major generational divides on key political issues—how young voters differ from the general population. MAIN THING: A Catholic priest is kidnapped by Boko Haram in Nigeria—Joel Veldkamp with CSI breaks down the alarming silence from the international community. LAST THING: Proverbs 16:7 – When a man's ways please the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him. SHOW LINKS Faith in Culture: https://cbn.com/news/faith-culture Heaven Meets Earth PODCAST: https://cbn.com/lp/heaven-meets-earth NEWSMAKERS POD: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/newsmakers/id1724061454 Navigating Trump 2.0: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/navigating-trump-2-0/id1691121630

Today's show features one of the biggest industry legends you may never have heard before. My guest is Tim Sullivan, who recently retired from overseeing Yale University's private market portfolios for 39 years. He joined the Yale Investments Office upon graduation from Yale College in 1986, just one year after David Swensen took the helm. He worked alongside David to build and manage the most successful institutional private equity and venture capital programs in history. Tim lived through the 1987 crash, the early years allocating to privates when no one else did, the dot.com boom and bust, the institutional adoption of alternatives after David published his book in 2000, the GFC, the ZIRP aftermath that created a bigger boom until the hiccup in 2021. We weave in and out of that history, as Tim shares lessons from how Yale managed its portfolios along the way. Tim carries a quiet conviction and sharp analytical mind developed from the front line of the greatest success in institutional investing for decades, and he weighs in on the increasing challenges of repeating that past success going forward.   Learn More Follow Ted on Twitter at @tseides or LinkedIn Subscribe to the mailing list Access Transcript with Premium Membership

This week, McKay introduces a practical and powerful challenge: the one-month happiness test. Drawing inspiration from Laurie Santos's famous Yale course, "Psychology and the Good Life," this episode moves beyond big, life-altering events to focus on the small, consistent actions that are scientifically proven to boost happiness. McKay breaks down simple yet profound practices like savoring positive moments, actively choosing your focus through selective attention, expressing gratitude, performing acts of kindness, and strengthening social connections. Through relatable stories and real-world examples, he illustrates how these "micro-adjustments" can retrain our brains, counteracting our natural negativity bias and leading to a more joyful, fulfilling life. Listeners are invited to take the test for themselves and discover how intentional, daily habits can create lasting change.Main Themes:Happiness comes from small, consistent changes, not just big life events.You can retrain your brain to focus on the positive through selective attention.Savoring positive experiences - before, during, and after - deepens their impact.Practicing gratitude is a powerful choice that turns what you have into enough.Acts of kindness boost happiness for both the giver and the receiver.Strong social connections are a primary predictor of a long, happy life.Exercise and sleep are foundational pillars for mental well-being and happiness.You can become the author of your life by choosing what to focus on and practice.What you notice becomes your reality.A one-month test is long enough to implement new habits and see real results.Top 10 Quotes:"The strange truth is... most people return to their baseline level of happiness after these major life events. This phenomenon is called the hedonic treadmill.""Tiny, regular changes to your daily life often make a bigger, longer-lasting difference than these big things.""Your brain is built to scan for problems... but you can change what you focus on, and it will help you be more happy.""Savoring is the deliberate, post-activity act of looking back on what you've done and taking time to appreciate it.""Gratitude turns what we have into enough.""Close relationships, more than money or fame, are what kept people happy throughout their lives.""These examples aren't miracles; they're micro-adjustments in their lives.""You get to choose what you'll focus on. So this month, to test your happiness, focus on the good.""Kind service has this magic feel to it."Show Links:Open Your Eyes with McKay Christensen

Reading graphs is a perennial problem for many candidates. Yet, the problem is not the interpretation of the graphical data itself. Rather, it is knowing what to do with that data once you have interpreted it. This podcast introduces a simple 4-step process we introduced for a Yale doctoral client, Felix, and a technique called the One-Sentence-Test which we again developed for the same client. The improvement in her answers warrants sharing this technique. You can see Felix's Improvement in Season One of The Consulting Offer.   Here are some free gifts for you:   Overall Approach Used in Well-Managed Strategy Studies free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/OverallApproach   McKinsey & BCG winning resume free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/resumepdf   Enjoying this episode? Get access to sample advanced training episodes here: www.firmsconsulting.com/promo

Which would you pick?

Your special talents?

​In this episode, Laney discusses her experience learning about eye movements from taking a training in Eye Movement Desensitization Reprocessing (EMDR). After trying it one time she then found a way to be as direct and quick as possible, which she called Accelerated Resolution Therapy (ART). She discusses her approach to utilizing ART to help clients rescript past negative images and narratives. With a background in Gestalt therapy, Laney incorporates rapid eye movements and guided associations to support clients in transforming adverse cognitions into more positive, empowering perspectives. She discovered a way to have the clients brain erase negative images, which cause triggers. Laney has developed this accelerated, directive therapeutic method to address conditions such as ADHD, OCD, eating disorders, generalized anxiety, and depression. She emphasizes the efficiency of ART, noting that clients often experience significant breakthroughs in just a few sessions—sometimes even in a single session. Laney likens the process to a dental procedure: identifying and removing emotional “decay” and replacing it with a metaphorical filling. When clients become emotionally stuck, therapists may employ a technique called Scene Matching, which connects current emotions to past experiences with similar emotional tones, facilitating healing and insight. Much like Fritz Perls' empty chair technique in Gestalt therapy, ART utilizes metaphorical visualization to allow clients to process unresolved experiences internally. Laney distinguishes ART from EMDR by highlighting its structured, therapist-directed approach, as opposed to EMDR's emphasis on building a longer-term client-therapist relationship and a free association approach. ART's clinical precision and efficiency are key to its growing popularity. She explained how today, over 16,000 clinicians have been trained in ART. She discussed research in ART and how in July 2025, Laney and a team of professionals from Yale will begin training clinicians in Kenya. Laney Rosenzweig, MS, LMFT is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist who has been in the mental health field since 1989. Laney is the Founder/Developer of Accelerated Resolution Therapy (ART) developed in 2008. She is the CEO of Rosenzweig Center for Rapid Recovery, which trains clinicians in ART. ART has a treatment protocol that is directive, standardized and easy to apply using. It is an eye movement therapy. Her introduction of the Voluntary Image Replacement (VIR), which guides clients to erase negative images from view in their mind, is a unique and powerful way to quickly eliminate triggers and eradicate symptoms. Laney has traveled the globe training licensed mental health professionals in ART and has over 65 ART trainers. Yale University has trained clinicians and in the process of doing a study as well as Mayo Clinic and the Canadian Military. She is available for presentations to civilian and military groups who are seeking an alternative to longer, less effective treatments for trauma and other mental health problems. The website is www.ARTworksNOW.com. There is an intro to ART every 4th Wednesday of the month at 6 pm Eastern and the link can be found on the top of the website.

Many of today's anti-trans sentiments revolve around the belief that things like gender-affirming care and nonbinary identities are part of a new trend. Yet, over a century ago, one doctor's revolutionary work around gender and sexuality suggests otherwise. Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld, a German-Jewish sexologist and activist, grew famous (and infamous) for his theory of sexual relativity. While he may be largely forgotten, journalist Daniel Brook wants to reintroduce Hirschfeld to today's discussion around gender and sexuality. Drawing from his book, The Einstein of Sex: Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld, Visionary of Weimar Berlin, Brook retraces Hirschfeld's life and legacy. Living in an era when gay sex was a crime and gender roles were rigid, Hirschfeld taught that each person has their own unique mixture of masculinity and femininity. He advocated for gay rights and counseled patients toward self-acceptance. He also became part of Berlin's cabaret scene and helped turn it into the world's queer capital. But this was also during the rise of Nazis. They ransacked his Institute for Sexual Science and burned his books, nearly erasing his work from history. Brook wants to bring him back into the next century. Brook argues that Hirschfeld's life, and his gift for thinking beyond the confines of his world, have much to teach us. While the same societal fights continue, Brook believes there may be something new to learn from the past. Daniel Brook is a journalist whose writing has appeared in Harper's Magazine, Nation, and New York Times Magazine, and he is the author of several books, including A History of Future Cities and The Accident of Color: A Story of Race in Reconstruction. A New York native and a Yale graduate, Brook lives in New Orleans. He researched The Einstein of Sex in Berlin on a Robert and Ina Caro Research/Travel Fellowship. Buy the Book The Einstein of Sex: Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld, Visionary of Weimar Berlin (Hardcover) Third Place Books

After a brief hiatus, during which the team from Failure - the Podcast/Innovation Blab/5-Minute Update contemplated their umbilici (think, M.C. Escher), we found ourselves at the Yale University School of Medicine to continue our exploration of the health care system. Our intent was to learn about urban health care from an emergency room perspective, and we had an outstanding guide: Dr. Arjun Venkatesh. He is the Chair of the Department of Emergency Medicine at Yale and a practitioner, as well.Mark and Jeff, avid fans of HBO Max's “The Pitt,” quickly lost the journalist's sense and overwhelmed the good doctor with questions: What is the most realistic TV medical drama? (Yes, The Pitt). Why is actor Noah Wyle an honorary MD? (He isn't, he just plays one on TV). Is The Pitt filmed before a studio audience? (Surprisingly, no). Did Grey's Anatomy use real patients? (Are you kidding?)Finally back on track, the team had a serious discussion with Dr. Venkatesh about health care delivery. “We're not failing like we did in the 1970s,” he said. “But we're not getting what we pay for.” Still, he had a hopeful prognosis of the American healthcare system, albeit one requiring longer-term thinking, centralized coordination, and political will.From Dr. Venkatesh's perspective, the current system is overwhelmed by well-intentioned but disjointed efforts. At his own emergency department, for example, 47 separate quality improvement initiatives were active on a single day—each addressing a different problem, but few seeing completion.One of Dr. Venkatesh's most provocative proposals was a shift from annual insurance cycles to 10- or 30-year health plans. “Right now, insurers only care about your health for three to five years,” he said. “If they had to manage your care for a decade, they'd invest in prevention and long-term outcomes.” He also saw promise in Germany's hybrid model: centralized financing with decentralized delivery.Though Mark and Jeff remained a bit distracted — hoping to get Dr. Venkatesh to offer a second opinion on the diagnosis central to season #1, episode 7 of The Pitt — the good doctor returned to a central theme of our discussion: healthcare is a political decision. From Medicaid expansion to vaccine access, he argued that the system reflects the values and priorities of policymakers. “We made a political choice last week to reduce Medicaid coverage,” he said. “That's not a technical failure. That's a choice.”Join the team from Failure - the Podcast/Innovation Blab/5-Minute Update as we resuscitate ourselves with the kind assistance of a top ER doctor. Listen to the full episode and you'll be ready for this listener challenge: is excreting “blue pee” ever a good thing?

The most misunderstood Stoic practice is Memento Mori - remember you will die. Dr. Laurie Santos, an expert on the science of happiness, joins Ryan to share the research behind why thinking about your mortality is proven to increase happiness. Dr. Laurie shares how to balance negative and positive visualizations for a fulfilling life, the Stoic practices that she swears by, and practical applications of Stoic and Buddhist teachings. Dr. Laurie Santos is an expert on the science of happiness and the ways in which our minds lie to us about what makes us happy. Her Yale course, “Psychology and the Good Life,” teaches students how the science of psychology can provide important hints about how to make wiser choices and live a life that's happier and more fulfilling. The class became Yale's most popular course in over 300 years, with almost one out of four students enrolled. Her course has been featured in the New York Times, NBC Nightly News, The Today Show, GQ Magazine, Slate and O! Magazine. The online version of the class—The Science of Well-Being on Coursera.org—has attracted more than 4 million learners from around the world. A winner of numerous awards both for her science and teaching, she was recently voted as one of Popular Science Magazine's “Brilliant 10” young minds, and was named in Time Magazine as a “Leading Campus Celebrity.” Listen to Dr. Laurie's podcast, The Happiness Lab, where she shares the latest scientific research on what it means to be truly happy. Check out more of Dr. Laurie's work at DrLaurieSantos.com and follow her Instagram @LaurieSantosOfficial, X @LaurieSantos, and on YouTube and TikTok @DrLaurieSantos

Story of the Week (DR):NEO turnover week MMApple CFO and COO resign, raising questions about CEO Tim Cook's futureApple CEO succession plan blown open as most obvious candidate to step downChief Operating Officer (COO) Jeff Williams, 62, will retire at the end of this year. Following the retirement of former Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Luca Maestri, 61, last year, the departure of these 'key figures in growth' seems to signal a significant generational shift within Apple.Meet Apple's next COO Sahib Khan, a 30-year veteran who will oversee the iPhone maker's supply chain amid the ‘Trump tariff black cloud'Twitter/X CEO Linda Yaccarino quits after Grok AI praises HitlerWendy's CEO Kirk Tanner Leaving Burger Giant for HersheyIs this another Peltz failure? Tanner has been CEO of Wendy's since only February 2024Trian Fund Management controls two board seats:Peter May (29%): director since 1993; former Wendy's executive; Founding Partner of Trian; chair of Capital and Investment committee, chair of Technology Committee, member of Compensation Committee, member of Corporate Social Responsibility committee, and member of Executive committee.Matthew Peltz (31%): son of Nelson; Partner of Trian; chair of Corporate Social Responsibility committee, member of Capital and Investment committee, member of Technology Committee, and member of Executive committee.Matthew resigned in same 8-k mentioning the CEO's departure and will be replaced by his brother Bradley Peltz; drafted by the Ottawa Senators and played in the Senators' organization from September 2012 to January 2013.Always my favorite line: “There are no arrangements or understandings between Mr. B. Peltz and any other persons pursuant to which Mr. B. Peltz was selected as a director.”His photo on website:leaving Tanner (8%) with a small voiceGolden hello at Hershey: (i) $7M RSU Award (ii) $4M PSU Award, (iii) an additional $1.2M Pro-Rata 2025 RSU Award, and (iv) an additional $2.2M Pro-Rata 2025 RSU AwardWendy's: salary $1M; 175% annual target; $6M annual equity targetHershey: $1.25M/180%/$9MAlso Kristin Dolan, James Dolan wifeHershey not much different: controlled by Hershey Trust and several Hershey Trust directorsInterim CEO is CFO Ken Cook, who started in December 2024Tesla announces Nov. annual meeting under pressure from shareholders, but may still be skirting lawElon Musk's Tesla finally sets a shareholder meeting date amid doubts about his long-denied $56 billion pay packageThe exciting Item 5.08 (which I never see): “The board of directors (the “Board”) of Tesla, Inc. (“Tesla”) has designated November 6, 2025 as the date of Tesla's 2025 annual meeting of shareholders (the “2025 Annual Meeting”).”T-Mobile follows orders from Trump FCC, ends DEI to get two mergers approved"As T-Mobile indicated earlier this year, we recognize that the legal and policy landscape surrounding DEI under federal law has changed and we remain fully committed to ensuring that T-Mobile does not have any policies or practices that enable invidious discrimination, whether in fulfillment of DEI or any other purpose," T-Mobile General Counsel Mark Nelson wrote in a July 8 letter that was posted to the Federal Communications Commission's filings website yesterday. "We have conducted a comprehensive review of T-Mobile's policies, programs, and activities, and pursuant to this review, T-Mobile is ending its DEI-related policies as described below, not just in name, but in substance."CEO Mike Sievert: CNN Business recognized Mike as “CEO of the Year” in 2022, and Yale honored him in 2024 with its “Legend in Leadership Award,” in part due to the impact of these initiatives.UPS Drivers Are Battling Deadly Heat—Without A.C. in Their TrucksWhy is the company dragging its heels on updating the vehicles, as the new union contract requires?As part of the contract the union negotiated with UPS in 2023, the company is now required to provide workers with several protections against the kind of extreme heat many of them are facing across the U.S. right now. Those include readily available clean water and ice, as well as access to “cool zones” and the right to take and extend breaks when they feel overheated. The contract further mandated UPS to install fans in the largely non-air-conditioned warehouses where packages are sorted and loaded, and in the front of vehicles. Delivery trucks have also been outfitted with heat exhaust shields and vents. UPS Teamsters, though, are still waiting on some of these historic protections. UPS is required to equip its fleet with at least 28,000 new air-conditioned delivery trucks by the time the current contract expires in 2028; toward that end, all new vans UPS purchases after January 1, 2024, are supposed to have air conditioning. As of last summer, CNN reported, it hadn't bought any. UPS Brand Management Representative Becca Hunnicut did not directly answer my questions about whether UPS has purchased any new delivery vehicles equipped with air conditioning since the beginning of 2024 and if any of its delivery trucks currently have air conditioning. She wrote over email that the company is “installing air conditioning in all new delivery vehicles we buy and adding them as quickly as possible,” adding that UPS does not “publicly share the number of vehicles we purchase” and that it is “prioritizing deployment in the hottest regions.”Goodliest of the Week (MM/DR):DR: ‘Prevention is better than remedy': majority of investors say governance gaps attract activists, research shows MM DR84 percent of investors polled, who hail from North America, Europe (including the UK) and Asia, said that poor governance was the main driver of activist investor attention.Investors also largely (71 percent) favor activism targeting the board on governance and management change versus operational (10 percent), balance sheet (3 percent) or M&A activism (3 percent)MM: Tesla announces Nov. annual meeting under pressure from shareholders, but may still be skirting lawAssholiest of the Week (MM):Democracy73% of votes cast in alternative democracy were for directors in the US0.01% of directors up for a vote were voted out - incumbency rulesWe know governance in corporations isn't working, and it's the primary driver of activism: ‘Prevention is better than remedy': majority of investors say governance gaps attract activists, research showsGovernance proponents were the only winners in the shareholder proposal space with an 18% win rateWe know money doesn't care nearly as much about performance as it cares about power status quo:Vote Gap - directors batting .333 or lower on TSR vs. average vote at the companyAverage vote gap was actually +1.3% - bottom directors outperformed average vote at the companiesWe know that only 22% of US directors have “merit”, but we know that more than 1 in 4 directors are connected to each other through other boards and non profits - including the CEOSo we should all fucking lose our minds when…New York's Financial Crowd Rushes to Build Anti-Mamdani War Chest - no more buying electionsJamie Dimon criticizes Zohran Mamdani as 'Marxist,' blasts Democrats' DEI push: 'Big hearts and little brain' - shut your fat mouthAdvertisersYour ads are now next to AI for middle school boysGrok praises Hitler, gives credit to Musk for removing “woke filters”Grok's harmful outputs come at a time when advertisers have just begun returning to X, after X first sued advocacy groups publishing reports of hate speech on the platform, then sued advertiser groups who boycotted the platform allegedly partly due to those reports. Most recently, X's plan to sue firms that don't buy ads has seemed to pay off, while the Federal Trade Commission has moved to stop advertising boycotts, which may help X avoid losing revenue no matter what Grok is trained to say.Musk says Grok chatbot was 'manipulated' into praising HitlerGrok 4 appears to seek Elon Musk's views when answering controversial questionsNo more hedging “well, he is a brilliant businessman and innovator” - Elon Musk is a fucking nightmare, antisemite, misogynist pig baby.We don't say “Well, Hitler was a brilliant dictator, but you know, Holocaust.” Musk is pure shitbird. Dollar Tree DRNEW RULE: if your CEO pay ratio is more than 5:1, the Aristotle rule, no fucking share buybacksShare Buyback Program Declared by Dollar Tree (NASDAQ:DLTR) Board of Directorsour median employee in fiscal 2024 was a parttime hourly store associate located in the United States.Out of a total population of 209,517 employees, 140,001 were part-time employees and 5,892 were either temporary or seasonal workers.Mr. Creedon's total annual compensation for purposes of the pay ratio was $9,246,835The median employee's total annual compensation for fiscal 2024 was $15,602, resulting in an estimated pay ratio of 592:1.Creedon effectively made is median employee's salary 14 hours into his first 24 hours of the yearThe board approved a buyback of $2.5 billion, with a “B”, equal to roughly 11.5% of outstanding sharesThe annual total paid to part time employees is $2.18 billion - they took a full year of 140,000 people's pay and bought their own stock with it to grease investorsAccording to the internet, a Dollar Tree cashier makes on average $10/hour - you could easy give them $15 and pay for it for TWO YEARS without needing to make a dollar if you can afford these buybacksAnd Bill Ackman is busy complaining why a labor focused socialist democrat won NYC mayor… Headliniest of the WeekDR: TVA board set to be all-male, all-whiteOn Tuesday, President Donald Trump nominated four white men to join the three white men he left on the board after firing the only two female directors.MM: Barbie Launches Doll With Type 1 DiabetesMM: How Starbucks' Founder Uses the ‘Two Chairs Rule' to Guide Every Leadership Decision“Every decision that we tried to make with two chairs metaphorically sitting in the room was designed to ask ourselves during the debate, is this decision going to exceed the expectations of our people and our customers and make them proud?” Schultz said. “And if the answer was no, we shouldn't do it.”Not mentioned were the chairs of “CEO” and “Chair of Board” a total of three timesWho Won the Week?DR: Kirk Tanner, more chocolate, less disgusting grease, less Peltz, more diversity in leadership, and zero nepotism (LD is woman; 3 Hershey Trust board members are Asian woman and two lack men)MM: Tennis, the great billionaire equalizer. ‘Biggest joke I've ever watched in professional tennis': Swift backlash after billionaire Bill Ackman's pro debutPredictionsDR: New Wendy's director Brad Peltz gets caught watching hockey during board meetings, still gets the support of 99.3% of shareholdersMM: Elon Musk Obtains Permit to Spew Pollution - isn't this the greatest future money maker for the Trump administration? Pay for a permit to do heinous shit? PREDICTION: Trump begins issuing permits, with starting cost of $1m, for oil spills, pollution, hate speech, deforestation, and using forced labor (kids or immigrants are both covered, obviously).

Kate Warren is here to challenge every limiting belief about musicianship. In this episode, she talks about mental health in the arts, the science behind motivation, and how social media can be a platform for positive change. If you've ever felt stuck between your passion and practicality, this episode is your reminder that a thriving music career is possible—and personal.Kate Warren is an internationally recognized hornist, music educator, and mental health advocate. She's a featured soloist with Blast!, a lecturer at Ocean County College, and Social Media Coordinator for the International Horn Society. With degrees from Yale, the New School, and FSU, she uses her platform to create accessible, empowering resources for musicians.

  This episode is brought to you by Fatty15, LMNT and Audible. In this gripping and mind-opening conversation, Yale psychiatrist and author Dr. James Kimmel Jr. joins us to explore one of humanity's most primal urges—revenge. Drawing from neuroscience, psychology, and personal experience, Dr. Kimmel explains how revenge mimics addiction in the brain and why many of us unknowingly suffer from “revenge cravings.” He shares a deeply personal story of nearly acting on revenge as a teenager, the lessons he learned as a litigator-turned-researcher, and practical, science-backed ways to break the cycle. From mass shootings and bullying to road rage and “revenge bodies,” this episode dives deep into the psychology of retaliation, the illusion of justice, and how forgiveness may be the ultimate act of self-healing. ----- In this episode we discuss... 03:25 – What is revenge? Real-life examples and dangers 06:39 – Legal revenge: Lawyers as licensed avengers 11:30 – The definition of grievance and how it fuels revenge 16:00 – Mass shooters and "grievance collectors" 17:35 – Dr. Kimmel's personal revenge story 25:02 – Masculinity, shame, and revenge 28:27 – Why revenge seems inevitable 30:15 – Why bullies see themselves as victims 33:38 – The monster isn't people—it's the craving for revenge 35:22 – Justice vs. punishment in addiction and revenge 37:54 – Can we solve revenge like an addiction? 40:45 – The neuroscience of revenge cravings 44:18 – Legal vs. illegal retaliation and the arrow of time 49:24 – Dr. Kimmel's revenge addiction as a lawyer 53:06 – The pain of inflicting pain on others 56:04 – The Miracle Court mental role-play 58:45 – Neuroscience of forgiveness 01:00:05 – Justice vs. revenge: How language shapes violence 01:05:21 – Why revenge escalates: evolutionary roots 01:15:58 – Revenge body & revenge sex: healthy or harmful? 01:20:04 – Road rage and everyday revenge 01:21:26 – Hollywood's revenge addiction: From Kill Bill to The Lion King 01:28:27 – GLP-1 drugs and reducing revenge cravings 01:32:43 – Forgiveness as the fastest cure 01:36:17 – Living Ever Forward: Forgiveness as freedom ----- Episode resources: Save an additional 15% on C15:0 essential fatty acid with code EVERFORWARD at https://www.Fatty15.com/everforward FREE variety sample pack with any electrolyte purchase at https://www.DrinkLMNT.com/everforward FREE 30-day trial of Audible at https://www.AudibleTrial.com/everforward Watch and subscribe on YouTube Learn more at JamesKimmelJr.com

We are thrilled to welcome Leslie Zane, to this episode of SEE Change. Zane is the President and Founder of Triggers® Brand Consulting ® and Author of the acclaimed book, 'The Power of Instinct.  Zane is an award-winning marketer, a TEDx speaker, and a leading authority on leveraging the instinctive mind to boost brand and business growth.  Zane's ideas about behavioral science and marketing were dismissed early on but she didn't let that stop her. In 1995 she founded Triggers®, the first brand consulting firm rooted in behavioral science and, together with her team, cracked the code on accelerating brand growth.  Join Annie for a fascinating conversation on Zane's groundbreaking book and how it challenges conventional wisdom in business and brand building. Zane says the old rules were based on the premise that the conscious mind drives decisions. But now that we know the unconscious mind is king, it's time for a new rulebook – one that works with the mind instead of against it. Leslie Zane is an award-winning marketer, a TEDx speaker, and a leading authority on leveraging the instinctive mind to boost brand and business growth. Like many trailblazers, her innovative ideas faced skepticism in the early days. In 1995, she established Triggers®, the first brand consulting firm grounded in behavioral science, and, along with her team, successfully unlocked the secrets to accelerating brand growth.Over the past 25 years, her firm has generated more than $25 billion in incremental revenue growth for Fortune 100 clients.Zane's impressive background includes education from Yale, Harvard Business School, and professional experience with Bain & Company and P&G. She has received accolades such as the Congressional Women of Distinction and the Ogilvy Award. Her insights and work have been featured in prestigious publications, including Knowledge@Wharton, Harvard Business Review, the World Economic Forum, and Newsweek, among others.ABOUT R. Seelaus & Co., Inc. Annie Seelaus is CEO of R. Seelaus & Co., Inc. The firm is a certified women's business enterprise ("WBE") and has grown into a full-service financial firm that is mission-driven in its commitment to creating more opportunities for women in financial services. R. Seelaus & Co., Inc., and its subsidiaries offer investment advisory, asset management, capital markets, brokerage, fixed income and equity trading, institutional sales, leveraged finance, and insurance services. The R. Seelaus & Co., LLC subsidiary is a broker-dealer registered with the SEC and a member of FINRA, and the subsidiary Seelaus Asset Management, LLC, is an SEC Registered Investment Advisor ("RIA"). With various fixed-income trading desks and more than seventy professionals, both entities serve individuals, families, public and private companies, non-profit organizations, and institutional investors. The firm has offices in New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, and Massachusetts. For more information about R. Seelaus & Co., and its subsidiaries visit www.rseelaus.com

This week on DANGER CLOSE, Jack Carr is joined by Alex Berenson—former New York Times reporter, bestselling thriller author, and investigative journalist.Alex began his career as a journalist after graduating from Yale with degrees in history and economics, joining The Denver Post and later becoming one of the first reporters at TheStreet.com. He spent more than a decade at The New York Times, where he covered everything from Big Pharma to Hurricane Katrina—including two assignments reporting from Iraq. Those experiences inspired his debut spy novel, THE FAITHFUL SPY, which won the Edgar Award for Best First Novel.Alex went on to write twelve bestselling novels in the John Wells series—gritty, high-stakes thrillers centered on a rogue CIA operative who infiltrates al Qaeda and operates in the shadows of global terrorism – and a standalone thriller titled THE POWER COUPLE.  Berenson eventually stepped away from the series, pivoting back to journalism and nonfiction with TELL YOUR CHILDREN and PANDEMIA. In this episode, Alex discusses the personal and professional journey that shaped his fiction, his thoughts on the thriller genre today, and what he's working on next.FOLLOW ALEXInstagram: @alberenX: @AlexBerensonFacebook: @AlexBerensonAuthorWebsite: https://alexberenson.com/ FOLLOW JACKInstagram: @JackCarrUSA X:  @JackCarrUSAFacebook:  @JackCarr YouTube:  @JackCarrUSASPONSORSCRY HAVOC – A Tom Reece Thriller https://www.officialjackcarr.com/books/cry-havoc/Bravo Company Manufacturing - https://bravocompanyusa.com/ and on Instagram @BravoCompanyUSATHE SIGs of Jack Carr:Visit https://www.sigsauer.com/ and on Instagram @sigsauerinc Jack Carr Gear: Explore the gear here https://jackcarr.co/gear 

Unexpected Rise In Disease and Death Sinks U.S. Insurance Companies- Dr. Chris Martensen and The Face of Immigration Chaos: 300,000 Kids Lost in the Wind to Abusers and Porn Merchants By John Zmirak   Unexpected Rise In Disease Sinks U.S. Insurance Companies  - Peak Prosperity Watch this video at- https://youtu.be/jQS7rFKwKVo?si=V1L6bykndB4fQo6P Peak Prosperity 555K subscribers 18,173 views Premiered Jul 7, 2025 #donaldtrump #news #usanews To watch Part 2 of this video: https://peak.fan/3hcuj9f3 Join the discussion at Peak Prosperity: https://peak.fan/fr5b44er Unexpected rates of sickness (morbidity) has sunk the stock price of a major US health insurer (Centene or CNC).  Maybe now we can finally have an open conversation about the causes? #donaldtrump #news #usanews #stocks #worldnews #educationalvideo   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Face of Immigration Chaos: 300,000 Kids Lost in the Wind to Abusers and Porn Merchants By John Zmirak Published on July 1, 2025 For article visit-   https://stream.org/the-face-of-immigration-chaos-300000-kids-lost-in-the-wind-to-abusers-and-porn-merchants/   The Face of Immigration Chaos: 300,000 Kids Lost in the Wind to Abusers and Porn Merchants By John Zmirak Published on July 1, 2025 There's one drum I won't stop banging, because it's a righteous call to war: The Left is not a secular, rationalistic, science-driven movement — though for the sake of social prestige and power it still pretends to be. But in fact, it never was. At every point since the invention of the Left/Right spectrum in the fevered, bloodthirsty frenzy of the French Revolution, the Left has been a post-Christian heresy. It's a cargo cult that cherrypicks from the gospels shiny moral sentiments and glittering aspirations, like the work of some mindless magpie. A New Rival Gospel Never mind that Jesus's moral mandates would be literally nonsensical if He was not divine and couldn't offer eternal rewards for self-sacrifice in this life. (Try explaining “Turn the other cheek” to Ghengis Khan and then get back to me; I'd love to hear how that goes. The meek did not inherit the Mongol Empire.) Nor that claims of “equality” among all men only hold up if we mean “in the eyes of God,” since in our own sight we're vastly diverse and manifestly unequal. Even the militantly atheistic, self-styled “scientific” Communist Utopia millions were willing to kill for was cooked up by Karl Marx as a thinly secularized knock-off of the New Jerusalem. Read historian Norman Cohn's authoritative The Pursuit of the Millennium to learn how Marx's program replicated the crackpot claims of self-anointed “prophets” who roused the rabble to murder the priests and pillage the local Jews. But Leftists are born with the same God-shaped hole in their souls as everyone else, so they plunder the Gospel to fill it, picking only the bits and pieces that please them to make a kind of taxidermied replacement Christ fashioned in their own image. These false Christs or antichrists are invariably cast as victims, waved around as banners, and finally used as cudgels … to pummel actual Christians. First the Peasants, Then the Workers The original radical Leftists of the French Revolution held up “the peasants” as the suffering souls for whom they fought — even as the revolutionary government waged a vicious, genocidal war against the real, live peasants of the Vendee region, killing some 300,000 for the crime of clinging to their Church, instead of the fake one the government had set up and imposed on them. A hundred years later, Karl Marx and his movement would claim the international working class as the victims whom they'd champion against the ruthless exploitation of capitalist oppressors. But Marx would fiercely oppose any moderate reforms that would improve workers' real lives, since these might slow down the bloody revolution he needed to impose Communist rule. His followers would fight against any labor unions they couldn't control. Of course, once the Communists seized power in Russia, then other countries, they would enslave the workers and peasants alike, putting them to work in state-owned monopolies, closing their churches, and subjecting them to totalitarian surveillance and persecution. The New Antichrist Idols: “Persecuted” Immigrants The present face of Leftist false religion manifests as a trinity: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and its ersatz Christ figure is the immigrant. Marxists and tribalists paint immigrants as victims of climate change, Islamophobia, and dictatorial governments. Cheap labor globalists depict them as rough and ready workers whose ethic is better than the sullen, spoiled American natives ripe for replacement.   The media, besotted by their new post-Christian creed, like to select which immigrant stories to tell, the better to paint the Trump administration and its backers as heartless, intolerant, ignorant racist bullies. But Trump's team has been clever, having learned from the debacle of 2017, when their efforts to protect child migrants from human traffickers got painted as “separating families” and “putting kids in cages.” So the administration focused its first removal efforts on gang members, rabid antisemites and jihadists, confident that diversity-happy editors and lawless federal judges wouldn't be able to restrain themselves — but would lionize and try to paint as wounded, hapless puppies the worst immigrants on Earth. Poor, Poor Pitiful Jihadis The Left took the bait. Look at the latest “victims” these apostles of counterfeit Christian compassion have decided to paint as martyrs: The equally radical, equally illegal immigrant relatives of the vicious jihadi who used arson to target a Jewish event to aid Holocaust survivors (one of whom he burned to death), Mohamed Sabry Soliman. Mass media can't help themselves. They're too driven by religious zeal: Of course, the facts of the case fall by the wayside in all this jerry-rigged empathy: Collecting Slaves for Sex Traffickers So the Left will go to the wall for privileged, middle-class, jihadi Muslims who blew through their tourist visas and stayed in our country so their patriarch could incinerate Jews who'd escaped the Nazis. You know who the Left won't talk about? The 300,000 unaccompanied minors smuggled into our country and sent to whoever wanted them, with no vetting or DNA tests for alleged relatives. (Joe Biden abolished that.) How are things going for those migrants, who aren't incinerating American Jews? Gateway Pundit gives us a glimpse: A 37-year-old illegal immigrant, Wilson Manfredo Lopez-Carillo, was arrested in Palm Beach County, Florida, for sexually assaulting a 16-year-old girl placed in his home through the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) “Unaccompanied Alien Children” (UAC) program. According to the Daily Wire, the arrest was made on May 22, 2025. According to charging documents from the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, Lopez-Carillo faces three counts of sexual assault on a minor. The victim, who arrived in the U.S. in August 2023 as an unaccompanied minor, was sent by HHS to live with Lopez-Carillo and others in a loosely vetted household.   Police reports detail a horrifying pattern of abuse, with Lopez-Carillo allegedly taking advantage of the girl's isolation to assault her on multiple occasions in February 2024.   On one occasion, while the adult woman in the household was out selling tamales to support the family, Lopez-Carillo allegedly grabbed the teen in the kitchen, dragged her to his bedroom, and sexually assaulted her.   A second incident followed a similar pattern, with the predator offering the girl $100 to stay silent — an offer she bravely refused. Fearing retribution, the teen initially did not report the assaults, as Lopez-Carillo had threatened her to keep quiet.   Go read the rest, if you have the heart. How many more victims are on Joe Biden's catatonic conscience? We won't know on this side of the grave.   This is the filth, the exploitation, the mass rape that the Left is happy to invite into our nation in order to pose as defenders of “victims” and rack up names for voter fraud. Once again, the group designated as “victims” get victimized for real by those who pretend to defend them.   Leftists haven't just chosen Barabbas. They have tarted him up as Christ.   John Zmirak is a senior editor at The Stream and author or coauthor of 14 books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism. His newest book is No Second Amendment, No First.   Find All of John Zmirak Articles at- https://stream.org/author/johnzmirak/   John Zmirak is a Senior Editor of The Stream. He received his B.A. from Yale University in 1986, then his M.F.A. in screenwriting and fiction and his Ph.D. in English in 1996 from Louisiana State University. He has been Press Secretary to pro-life Louisiana Governor Mike Foster, and a reporter and editor at Success magazine and Investor's Business Daily, among other publications. His essays, poems, and other works have appeared in First Things, The Weekly Standard, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, USA Today, FrontPage Magazine, The American Conservative, The South Carolina Review, Modern Age, The Intercollegiate Review, Commonweal, and The National Catholic Register, among other venues. He has contributed to American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia and The Encyclopedia of Catholic Social Thought. From 2000-2004 he served as Senior Editor of Faith & Family magazine and a reporter at The National Catholic Register. During 2012 he was editor of Crisis. He is author, co-author, or editor of twelve books, including Wilhelm Ropke: Swiss Localist, Global Economist, The Grand Inquisitor and The Race to Save Our Century. His newest book is No Second Amendment, No First. Zmirak can be found at https://stream.org/author/johnzmirak/   John Zmirak is a senior editor at The Stream and author or co-author of ten books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism. He is co-author with Jason Jones of “God, Guns, & the Government.”   John Zmirak's latest book: No Second Amendment, No First  by John Zmirak  Available March 19, 2024 Today's Left endlessly preaches the evils of “gun violence." It is a message increasingly echoed from the nation's pulpits, presented as common-sense decency and virtue. Calls for “radical non-violence” are routinely endowed with the imprimatur of religious doctrine.   But what if such teachings were misguided, even damaging? What if the potential of a citizenry to exercise force against violent criminals and tyrannical governments is not just compatible with church teaching, but flows from the very heart of Biblical faith and reason? What if the freedoms we treasure are intimately tied to the power to resist violent coercion?  This is the long-overdue case John Zmirak makes with stunning clarity and conviction in No Second Amendment, No First. A Yale-educated journalist and former college professor, Zmirak shows how the right of self-defense against authoritarian government was affirmed in both the Old and New Testaments, is implied in Natural Law, and has been part of Church tradition over the centuries.   -------------------------------------------------------------------- 

What if the desire for revenge wasn't just emotional—but biological? In this gripping conversation, Yale-trained lawyer and researcher James Kimmel Jr. explains how the brain processes revenge, why it feels so satisfying in the moment, and why it rarely brings the peace we expect. Drawing from neuroscience, psychology, and his own powerful personal story, James unpacks how revenge fuels everything from schoolyard fights to mass shootings—and how it's often disguised as “justice.” We explore the real reasons people commit violent acts, how our justice system may be reinforcing cycles of harm, and what it actually takes to break free. You'll walk away with a deeper understanding of the human drive to get even—and how to shift that impulse toward healing. If you've ever held a grudge, fantasized about payback, or wondered why letting go is so hard, this episode will change the way you see yourself—and others. Dr. Kimmel's book, The Science of Revenge, is available wherever books are sold. Learn more about Dr. Kimmel at jameskimmeljr.com. Support the Show - Become a Patron! Help us grow and become a Patron today: https://www.patreon.com/smartpeoplepodcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this engaging conversation, Kathryn speaks with Mary Marantz, author of 'Underestimated', about her journey from growing up in a single wide trailer in West Virginia to attending Yale Law School and ultimately choosing a career in photography, podcasting, speaking, and writing. Mary shares her insights on overcoming fear, the importance of accountability, and the power of gratitude. She emphasizes that fear is a boring liar that keeps us from pursuing our dreams and encourages listeners to take action, even when scared. The discussion highlights the significance of recognizing the voice of fear and the impact of storytelling in empowering women to embrace their true potential.00:00 Introduction to Mary Marantz and Her Mission02:18 Growing Up in a Single Wide Trailer04:48 The Journey to Yale Law School10:40 Overcoming Self-Doubt and Fear19:30 Transitioning from Law to Photography26:21 The Writing Journey and Underestimated30:35 Fear as a Creative Enemy33:03 Understanding Fear and Its Impact36:40 The Power of Neuroplasticity39:34 Building Resilience Through Hardship42:03 The Importance of Accountability48:56 Embracing Self-Acceptance51:34 Reflecting on Personal Growth54:37 Encouragement to Overcome FearFollow me on Instagram:Kathryn @kathryn_benkoHeart + Sole @heartandsolepodcastSole Fitness @sole_fitnessSubscribe to our YouTube Channel and WATCH all episodes!Follow Mary on Instagram: @marymarantzVisit her website HERE!Purchase her new book HERE!Listen to her podcast HERE!Sign up for the Sole Online Training App!Use coupon code 'SOLE20' for 20% off your first month!!

Can leading with desire be the key to business success for women entrepreneurs—without the burnout? In this episode of The Women's Vibrancy Code, Maraya Brown sits down with Marla Diann—former entertainment publicist turned transformational coach—to explore how intuition and strategy can coexist in entrepreneurship. Marla shares her powerful story of reinvention, revealing how burnout led her to reclaim joy, creativity, and purpose in both her personal and professional life. From her leap into coaching in 2008 to her transformational journey through Italy in 2017, Marla unpacks how honoring your feminine desires, while taking aligned action, can unlock deep fulfillment and lasting success. She offers a roadmap for women to balance play and structure, passion and productivity. If you're a purpose-driven woman ready to build a business without burning out, this episode will show you how to lead with desire—and win.   Also in this episode: Embracing and balancing creativity with structured business strategies can lead to profound personal and professional transformations. Regular reinvention and dedication to self-growth are crucial for evolving as an entrepreneur and aligning life with one's desires. Prioritizing desires while setting structured goals can prevent burnout and lead to more joyful, successful outcomes.     About Marla Diann: Marla Diann, owner of Marla Diann Mentoring International since 2008, creator of Creative Achievement Formula™ is a keynote speaker, life designer, intuitive business strategist and podcast host of Follow Your Joy. Her creative entrepreneur clients are ready to take their ability to increase revenues, evolve their consciousness, visibility, and attract more of their right clients without all the distractions of overwhelm using her Creative Achievement Formula and innovative manifesting technique. She helps her clients transform their relationship with money as they shorten the timeframe of achieving their one-year desires & goals in three-months or less. Through her life design coaching, Marla serves women 40+ by guiding them how to listen to and use their intuition as a reliable and essential source helping them design their next life chapter and create a renewed belief in their dreams. Celebrating 29 years as a creative entrepreneur of two businesses since 1996, Marla is a proud Mom of her 33-year-old son who has his own successful real estate investing business. She lives in Palos Verdes Estates, CA, with her adorable dog Ruby and loves all things Italian, Disney, creative, romance, spiritual, inspirational, humanitarian, nature and outdoors.   Website: www.marladiann.com Facebook: Marla Diann Dennis IG Handle: Marla_diann   Resources: Check in on where your money relationship could be preventing you from higher earning power by reading, “What if applying these 4 daily money habits changes everything in your finances?” https://marladiann.com/4-daily-money-habits/ Prioritizing Your Desires: A Catalyst for Lasting Transformation - https://marladiann.com/prioritizing-desires/ Consider ordering Marla's Starter Video & Workbook Training, Transform your Money Relationship. It will open you up to a whole new truth about money and help you redefine your money story. It's a simple beginning step to truly connect all the dots as to why money, as it ebbs and flows, has been a mystery to you in keeping more of it.  To download her three free resources: Higher Earning Power, Top Success Books List, and Feeding Your Creative Spirit Impacts Your Income, go to www.marladiann.com/free     _____________________ The Women's Vibrancy Accelerator Trifecta: Your 90-Day Health Reset Ready to take your health to the next level? The Women's Vibrancy Accelerator Trifecta offers deep, personalized support to help you regain control of your energy, hormones, and well-being. This program includes: Three one-on-one calls with Maraya Dutch Plus Test and full assessment Bi-weekly live Q&A sessions Self-paced health portal covering energy, hormones, libido, and confidence Podcast listeners get an exclusive discount. Use code PODCAST. Learn more and enroll now: https://marayabrown.com/trifecta/ _______________________ Free Wellness Resources Access free tools like the Menstrual Tracker, Adaptogen Elixir Recipes, Two-Week Soul Cleanse, Food Facial, and more. Download now: https://marayabrown.com/resources/ _______________________ Subscribe to The Women's Vibrancy Code Podcast Listen on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, and Spotify. _______________________ Connect with the Show Find us on Facebook,  Linkedin | Website | Tiktok | Facebook Group _______________________ Apply for a Call with Maraya Brown Start your journey with personalized support. Apply here: https://marayabrown.com/call  _______________________ About Maraya Brown Maraya is a Yale and Functional Medicine-trained Women's Health and Wellness Expert (CNM, MSN). She helps women feel energized, confident, and connected to themselves and their lives. With over 25 years of experience, she specializes in energy, hormones, libido, confidence, and deep transformation. _______________________ Disclaimer The content of this podcast is for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only and does not constitute medical or professional advice. Listeners should consult with a qualified professional before making any health decisions.

In this episode of the Award-winning PRS Journal Club Podcast, 2025 Resident Ambassadors to the PRS Editorial Board – Christopher Kalmar, Ilana Margulies, and Amanda Sergesketter- and special guest, Lara Devgan, MD, MPH, discuss the following articles from the July 2025 issue: “A Prospective Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes after Facial Laser Resurfacing” by Arias, Gala, Stetz, et al. Read the article for FREE: https://bit.ly/FacialLzrPROs Special guest, Lara Devgan, MD, MPH is an internationally known aesthetic plastic surgeon practicing aesthetic surgery of the face, breast, and body as well as facial injectables in New York City. She attended Yale for her undergraduate education followed by Johns Hopkins for medical school and the Columbia/Cornell program for plastic surgery residency. She is the founder and CEO of the medical-grade skincare line Dr. Devgan Scientific Beauty, serves as a medical expert for ABC News, is an editorial consultant for the Lancet, and lectures internationally on aesthetic plastic surgery. READ the articles discussed in this podcast as well as free related content: https://bit.ly/JCJuly25Collection The views expressed by hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of ASPS.

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded its latest Term. And over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has continued to duke it out with its adversaries in the federal courts.To tackle these topics, as well as their intersection—in terms of how well the courts, including but not limited to the Supreme Court, are handling Trump-related cases—I interviewed Professor Pamela Karlan, a longtime faculty member at Stanford Law School. She's perfectly situated to address these subjects, for at least three reasons.First, Professor Karlan is a leading scholar of constitutional law. Second, she's a former SCOTUS clerk and seasoned advocate at One First Street, with ten arguments to her name. Third, she has high-level experience at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), having served (twice) as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ.I've had some wonderful guests to discuss the role of the courts today, including Judges Vince Chhabria (N.D. Cal.) and Ana Reyes (D.D.C.)—but as sitting judges, they couldn't discuss certain subjects, and they had to be somewhat circumspect. Professor Karlan, in contrast, isn't afraid to “go there”—and whether or not you agree with her opinions, I think you'll share my appreciation for her insight and candor.Show Notes:* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Stanford Law School* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Wikipedia* The McCorkle Lecture (Professor Pamela Karlan), UVA Law SchoolPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any transcription errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat dot Substack dot com. You're listening to the seventy-seventh episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, June 27.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.With the 2024-2025 Supreme Court Term behind us, now is a good time to talk about both constitutional law and the proper role of the judiciary in American society. I expect they will remain significant as subjects because the tug of war between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary continues—and shows no signs of abating.To tackle these topics, I welcomed to the podcast Professor Pamela Karlan, the Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law and Co-Director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at Stanford Law School. Pam is not only a leading legal scholar, but she also has significant experience in practice. She's argued 10 cases before the Supreme Court, which puts her in a very small club, and she has worked in government at high levels, serving as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice during the Obama administration. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Professor Pam Karlan.Professor Karlan, thank you so much for joining me.Pamela Karlan: Thanks for having me.DL: So let's start at the beginning. Tell us about your background and upbringing. I believe we share something in common—you were born in New York City?PK: I was born in New York City. My family had lived in New York since they arrived in the country about a century before.DL: What borough?PK: Originally Manhattan, then Brooklyn, then back to Manhattan. As my mother said, when I moved to Brooklyn when I was clerking, “Brooklyn to Brooklyn, in three generations.”DL: Brooklyn is very, very hip right now.PK: It wasn't hip when we got there.DL: And did you grow up in Manhattan or Brooklyn?PK: When I was little, we lived in Manhattan. Then right before I started elementary school, right after my brother was born, our apartment wasn't big enough anymore. So we moved to Stamford, Connecticut, and I grew up in Connecticut.DL: What led you to go to law school? I see you stayed in the state; you went to Yale. What did you have in mind for your post-law-school career?PK: I went to law school because during the summer between 10th and 11th grade, I read Richard Kluger's book, Simple Justice, which is the story of the litigation that leads up to Brown v. Board of Education. And I decided I wanted to go to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and be a school desegregation lawyer, and that's what led me to go to law school.DL: You obtained a master's degree in history as well as a law degree. Did you also have teaching in mind as well?PK: No, I thought getting the master's degree was my last chance to do something I had loved doing as an undergrad. It didn't occur to me until I was late in my law-school days that I might at some point want to be a law professor. That's different than a lot of folks who go to law school now; they go to law school wanting to be law professors.During Admitted Students' Weekend, some students say to me, “I want to be a law professor—should I come here to law school?” I feel like saying to them, “You haven't done a day of law school yet. You have no idea whether you're good at law. You have no idea whether you'd enjoy doing legal teaching.”It just amazes me that people come to law school now planning to be a law professor, in a way that I don't think very many people did when I was going to law school. In my day, people discovered when they were in law school that they loved it, and they wanted to do more of what they loved doing; I don't think people came to law school for the most part planning to be law professors.DL: The track is so different now—and that's a whole other conversation—but people are getting master's and Ph.D. degrees, and people are doing fellowship after fellowship. It's not like, oh, you practice for three, five, or seven years, and then you become a professor. It seems to be almost like this other track nowadays.PK: When I went on the teaching market, I was distinctive in that I had not only my student law-journal note, but I actually had an article that Ricky Revesz and I had worked on that was coming out. And it was not normal for people to have that back then. Now people go onto the teaching market with six or seven publications—and no practice experience really to speak of, for a lot of them.DL: You mentioned talking to admitted students. You went to YLS, but you've now been teaching for a long time at Stanford Law School. They're very similar in a lot of ways. They're intellectual. They're intimate, especially compared to some of the other top law schools. What would you say if I'm an admitted student choosing between those two institutions? What would cause me to pick one versus the other—besides the superior weather of Palo Alto?PK: Well, some of it is geography; it's not just the weather. Some folks are very East-Coast-centered, and other folks are very West-Coast-centered. That makes a difference.It's a little hard to say what the differences are, because the last time I spent a long time at Yale Law School was in 2012 (I visited there a bunch of times over the years), but I think the faculty here at Stanford is less focused and concentrated on the students who want to be law professors than is the case at Yale. When I was at Yale, the idea was if you were smart, you went and became a law professor. It was almost like a kind of external manifestation of an inner state of grace; it was a sign that you were a smart person, if you wanted to be a law professor. And if you didn't, well, you could be a donor later on. Here at Stanford, the faculty as a whole is less concentrated on producing law professors. We produce a fair number of them, but it's not the be-all and end-all of the law school in some ways. Heather Gerken, who's the dean at Yale, has changed that somewhat, but not entirely. So that's one big difference.One of the most distinctive things about Stanford, because we're on the quarter system, is that our clinics are full-time clinics, taught by full-time faculty members at the law school. And that's distinctive. I think Yale calls more things clinics than we do, and a lot of them are part-time or taught by folks who aren't in the building all the time. So that's a big difference between the schools.They just have very different feels. I would encourage any student who gets into both of them to go and visit both of them, talk to the students, and see where you think you're going to be most comfortably stretched. Either school could be the right school for somebody.DL: I totally agree with you. Sometimes people think there's some kind of platonic answer to, “Where should I go to law school?” And it depends on so many individual circumstances.PK: There really isn't one answer. I think when I was deciding between law schools as a student, I got waitlisted at Stanford and I got into Yale. I had gone to Yale as an undergrad, so I wasn't going to go anywhere else if I got in there. I was from Connecticut and loved living in Connecticut, so that was an easy choice for me. But it's a hard choice for a lot of folks.And I do think that one of the worst things in the world is U.S. News and World Report, even though we're generally a beneficiary of it. It used to be that the R-squared between where somebody went to law school and what a ranking was was minimal. I knew lots of people who decided, in the old days, that they were going to go to Columbia rather than Yale or Harvard, rather than Stanford or Penn, rather than Chicago, because they liked the city better or there was somebody who did something they really wanted to do there.And then the R-squared, once U.S. News came out, of where people went and what the rankings were, became huge. And as you probably know, there were some scandals with law schools that would just waitlist people rather than admit them, to keep their yield up, because they thought the person would go to a higher-ranked law school. There were years and years where a huge part of the Stanford entering class had been waitlisted at Penn. And that's bad for people, because there are people who should go to Penn rather than come here. There are people who should go to NYU rather than going to Harvard. And a lot of those people don't do it because they're so fixated on U.S. News rankings.DL: I totally agree with you. But I suspect that a lot of people think that there are certain opportunities that are going to be open to them only if they go here or only if they go there.Speaking of which, after graduating from YLS, you clerked for Justice Blackmun on the Supreme Court, and statistically it's certainly true that certain schools seem to improve your odds of clerking for the Court. What was that experience like overall? People often describe it as a dream job. We're recording this on the last day of the Supreme Court Term; some hugely consequential historic cases are coming down. As a law clerk, you get a front row seat to all of that, to all of that history being made. Did you love that experience?PK: I loved the experience. I loved it in part because I worked for a wonderful justice who was just a lovely man, a real mensch. I had three great co-clerks. It was the first time, actually, that any justice had ever hired three women—and so that was distinctive for me, because I had been in classes in law school where there were fewer than three women. I was in one class in law school where I was the only woman. So that was neat.It was a great Term. It was the last year of the Burger Court, and we had just a heap of incredibly interesting cases. It's amazing how many cases I teach in law school that were decided that year—the summary-judgment trilogy, Thornburg v. Gingles, Bowers v. Hardwick. It was just a really great time to be there. And as a liberal, we won a lot of the cases. We didn't win them all, but we won a lot of them.It was incredibly intense. At that point, the Supreme Court still had this odd IT system that required eight hours of diagnostics every night. So the system was up from 8 a.m. to midnight—it stayed online longer if there was a death case—but otherwise it went down at midnight. In the Blackmun chambers, we showed up at 8 a.m. for breakfast with the Justice, and we left at midnight, five days a week. Then on the weekends, we were there from 9 to 9. And they were deciding 150 cases, not 60 cases, a year. So there was a lot more work to do, in that sense. But it was a great year. I've remained friends with my co-clerks, and I've remained friends with clerks from other chambers. It was a wonderful experience.DL: And you've actually written about it. I would refer people to some of the articles that they can look up, on your CV and elsewhere, where you've talked about, say, having breakfast with the Justice.PK: And we had a Passover Seder with the Justice as well, which was a lot of fun.DL: Oh wow, who hosted that? Did he?PK: Actually, the clerks hosted it. Originally he had said, “Oh, why don't we have it at the Court?” But then he came back to us and said, “Well, I think the Chief Justice”—Chief Justice Burger—“might not like that.” But he lent us tables and chairs, which were dropped off at one of the clerk's houses. And it was actually the day of the Gramm-Rudman argument, which was an argument about the budget. So we had to keep running back and forth from the Court to the house of Danny Richman, the clerk who hosted it, who was a Thurgood Marshall clerk. We had to keep running back and forth from the Court to Danny Richman's house, to baste the turkey and make stuff, back and forth. And then we had a real full Seder, and we invited all of the Jewish clerks at the Court and the Justice's messenger, who was Jewish, and the Justice and Mrs. Blackmun, and it was a lot of fun.DL: Wow, that's wonderful. So where did you go after your clerkship?PK: I went to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, where I was an assistant counsel, and I worked on voting-rights and employment-discrimination cases.DL: And that was something that you had thought about for a long time—you mentioned you had read about its work in high school.PK: Yes, and it was a great place to work. We were working on great cases, and at that point we were really pushing the envelope on some of the stuff that we were doing—which was great and inspiring, and my colleagues were wonderful.And unlike a lot of Supreme Court practices now, where there's a kind of “King Bee” usually, and that person gets to argue everything, the Legal Defense Fund was very different. The first argument I did at the Court was in a case that I had worked on the amended complaint for, while at the Legal Defense Fund—and they let me essentially keep working on the case and argue it at the Supreme Court, even though by the time the case got to the Supreme Court, I was teaching at UVA. So they didn't have this policy of stripping away from younger lawyers the ability to argue their cases the whole way through the system.DL: So how many years out from law school were you by the time you had your first argument before the Court? I know that, today at least, there's this two-year bar on arguing before the Court after having clerked there.PK: Six or seven years out—because I think I argued in ‘91.DL: Now, you mentioned that by then you were teaching at UVA. You had a dream job working at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. What led you to go to UVA?PK: There were two things, really, that did it. One was I had also discovered when I was in law school that I loved law school, and I was better at law school than I had been at anything I had done before law school. And the second was I really hated dealing with opposing counsel. I tell my students now, “You should take negotiation. If there's only one class you could take in law school, take negotiation.” Because it's a skill; it's not a habit of mind, but I felt like it was a habit of mind. And I found the discovery process and filing motions to compel and dealing with the other side's intransigence just really unpleasant.What I really loved was writing briefs. I loved writing briefs, and I could keep doing that for the Legal Defense Fund while at UVA, and I've done a bunch of that over the years for LDF and for other organizations. I could keep doing that and I could live in a small town, which I really wanted to do. I love New York, and now I could live in a city—I've spent a couple of years, off and on, living in cities since then, and I like it—but I didn't like it at that point. I really wanted to be out in the country somewhere. And so UVA was the perfect mix. I kept working on cases, writing amicus briefs for LDF and for other organizations. I could teach, which I loved. I could live in a college town, which I really enjoyed. So it was the best blend of things.DL: And I know, from your having actually delivered a lecture at UVA, that it really did seem to have a special place in your heart. UVA Law School—they really do have a wonderful environment there (as does Stanford), and Charlottesville is a very charming place.PK: Yes, especially when I was there. UVA has a real gift for developing its junior faculty. It was a place where the senior faculty were constantly reading our work, constantly talking to us. Everyone was in the building, which makes a huge difference.The second case I had go to the Supreme Court actually came out of a class where a student asked a question, and I ended up representing the student, and we took the case all the way to the Supreme Court. But I wasn't admitted in the Western District of Virginia, and that's where we had to file a case. And so I turned to my next-door neighbor, George Rutherglen, and said to George, “Would you be the lead counsel in this?” And he said, “Sure.” And we ended up representing a bunch of UVA students, challenging the way the Republican Party did its nomination process. And we ended up, by the student's third year in law school, at the Supreme Court.So UVA was a great place. I had amazing colleagues. The legendary Bill Stuntz was then there; Mike Klarman was there. Dan Ortiz, who's still there, was there. So was John Harrison. It was a fantastic group of people to have as your colleagues.DL: Was it difficult for you, then, to leave UVA and move to Stanford?PK: Oh yes. When I went in to tell Bob Scott, who was then the dean, that I was leaving, I just burst into tears. I think the reason I left UVA was I was at a point in my career where I'd done a bunch of visits at other schools, and I thought that I could either leave then or I would be making a decision to stay there for the rest of my career. And I just felt like I wanted to make a change. And in retrospect, I would've been just as happy if I'd stayed at UVA. In my professional life, I would've been just as happy. I don't know in my personal life, because I wouldn't have met my partner, I don't think, if I'd been at UVA. But it's a marvelous place; everything about it is just absolutely superb.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits at nexfirm dot com.So I do want to give you a chance to say nice things about your current place. I assume you have no regrets about moving to Stanford Law, even if you would've been just as happy at UVA?PK: I'm incredibly happy here. I've got great colleagues. I've got great students. The ability to do the clinic the way we do it, which is as a full-time clinic, wouldn't be true anywhere else in the country, and that makes a huge difference to that part of my work. I've gotten to teach around the curriculum. I've taught four of the six first-year courses, which is a great opportunityAnd as you said earlier, the weather is unbelievable. People downplay that, because especially for people who are Northeastern Ivy League types, there's a certain Calvinism about that, which is that you have to suffer in order to be truly working hard. People out here sometimes think we don't work hard because we are not visibly suffering. But it's actually the opposite, in a way. I'm looking out my window right now, and it's a gorgeous day. And if I were in the east and it were 75 degrees and sunny, I would find it hard to work because I'd think it's usually going to be hot and humid, or if it's in the winter, it's going to be cold and rainy. I love Yale, but the eight years I spent there, my nose ran the entire time I was there. And here I look out and I think, “It's beautiful, but you know what? It's going to be beautiful tomorrow. So I should sit here and finish grading my exams, or I should sit here and edit this article, or I should sit here and work on the Restatement—because it's going to be just as beautiful tomorrow.” And the ability to walk outside, to clear your head, makes a huge difference. People don't understand just how huge a difference that is, but it's huge.DL: That's so true. If you had me pick a color to associate with my time at YLS, I would say gray. It just felt like everything was always gray, the sky was always gray—not blue or sunny or what have you.But I know you've spent some time outside of Northern California, because you have done some stints at the Justice Department. Tell us about that, the times you went there—why did you go there? What type of work were you doing? And how did it relate to or complement your scholarly work?PK: At the beginning of the Obama administration, I had applied for a job in the Civil Rights Division as a deputy assistant attorney general (DAAG), and I didn't get it. And I thought, “Well, that's passed me by.” And a couple of years later, when they were looking for a new principal deputy solicitor general, in the summer of 2013, the civil-rights groups pushed me for that job. I got an interview with Eric Holder, and it was on June 11th, 2013, which just fortuitously happens to be the 50th anniversary of the day that Vivian Malone desegregated the University of Alabama—and Vivian Malone is the older sister of Sharon Malone, who is married to Eric Holder.So I went in for the interview and I said, “This must be an especially special day for you because of the 50th anniversary.” And we talked about that a little bit, and then we talked about other things. And I came out of the interview, and a couple of weeks later, Don Verrilli, who was the solicitor general, called me up and said, “Look, you're not going to get a job as the principal deputy”—which ultimately went to Ian Gershengorn, a phenomenal lawyer—“but Eric Holder really enjoyed talking to you, so we're going to look for something else for you to do here at the Department of Justice.”And a couple of weeks after that, Eric Holder called me and offered me the DAAG position in the Civil Rights Division and said, “We'd really like you to especially concentrate on our voting-rights litigation.” It was very important litigation, in part because the Supreme Court had recently struck down the pre-clearance regime under Section 5 [of the Voting Rights Act]. So the Justice Department was now bringing a bunch of lawsuits against things they could have blocked if Section 5 had been in effect, most notably the Texas voter ID law, which was a quite draconian voter ID law, and this omnibus bill in North Carolina that involved all sorts of cutbacks to opportunities to vote: a cutback on early voting, a cutback on same-day registration, a cutback on 16- and 17-year-olds pre-registering, and the like.So I went to the Department of Justice and worked with the Voting Section on those cases, but I also ended up working on things like getting the Justice Department to change its position on whether Title VII covered transgender individuals. And then I also got to work on the implementation of [United States v.] Windsor—which I had worked on, representing Edie Windsor, before I went to DOJ, because the Court had just decided Windsor [which held Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional]. So I had an opportunity to work on how to implement Windsor across the federal government. So that was the stuff I got to work on the first time I was at DOJ, and I also obviously worked on tons of other stuff, and it was phenomenal. I loved doing it.I did it for about 20 months, and then I came back to Stanford. It affected my teaching; I understood a lot of stuff quite differently having worked on it. It gave me some ideas on things I wanted to write about. And it just refreshed me in some ways. It's different than working in the clinic. I love working in the clinic, but you're working with students. You're working only with very, very junior lawyers. I sometimes think of the clinic as being a sort of Groundhog Day of first-year associates, and so I'm sort of senior partner and paralegal at a large law firm. At DOJ, you're working with subject-matter experts. The people in the Voting Section, collectively, had hundreds of years of experience with voting. The people in the Appellate Section had hundreds of years of experience with appellate litigation. And so it's just a very different feel.So I did that, and then I came back to Stanford. I was here, and in the fall of 2020, I was asked if I wanted to be one of the people on the Justice Department review team if Joe Biden won the election. These are sometimes referred to as the transition teams or the landing teams or the like. And I said, “I'd be delighted to do that.” They had me as one of the point people reviewing the Civil Rights Division. And I think it might've even been the Wednesday or Thursday before Inauguration Day 2021, I got a call from the liaison person on the transition team saying, “How would you like to go back to DOJ and be the principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division?” That would mean essentially running the Division until we got a confirmed head, which took about five months. And I thought that this would be an amazing opportunity to go back to the DOJ and work with people I love, right at the beginning of an administration.And the beginning of an administration is really different than coming in midway through the second term of an administration. You're trying to come up with priorities, and I viewed my job really as helping the career people to do their best work. There were a huge number of career people who had gone through the first Trump administration, and they were raring to go. They had all sorts of ideas on stuff they wanted to do, and it was my job to facilitate that and make that possible for them. And that's why it's so tragic this time around that almost all of those people have left. The current administration first tried to transfer them all into Sanctuary Cities [the Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group] or ask them to do things that they couldn't in good conscience do, and so they've retired or taken buyouts or just left.DL: It's remarkable, just the loss of expertise and experience at the Justice Department over these past few months.PK: Thousands of years of experience gone. And these are people, you've got to realize, who had been through the Nixon administration, the Reagan administration, both Bush administrations, and the first Trump administration, and they hadn't had any problem. That's what's so stunning: this is not just the normal shift in priorities, and they have gone out of their way to make it so hellacious for people that they will leave. And that's not something that either Democratic or Republican administrations have ever done before this.DL: And we will get to a lot of, shall we say, current events. Finishing up on just the discussion of your career, you had the opportunity to work in the executive branch—what about judicial service? You've been floated over the years as a possible Supreme Court nominee. I don't know if you ever looked into serving on the Ninth Circuit or were considered for that. What about judicial service?PK: So I've never been in a position, and part of this was a lesson I learned right at the beginning of my LDF career, when Lani Guinier, who was my boss at LDF, was nominated for the position of AAG [assistant attorney general] in the Civil Rights Division and got shot down. I knew from that time forward that if I did the things I really wanted to do, my chances of confirmation were not going to be very high. People at LDF used to joke that they would get me nominated so that I would take all the bullets, and then they'd sneak everybody else through. So I never really thought that I would have a shot at a judicial position, and that didn't bother me particularly. As you know, I gave the commencement speech many years ago at Stanford, and I said, “Would I want to be on the Supreme Court? You bet—but not enough to have trimmed my sails for an entire lifetime.”And I think that's right. Peter Baker did this story in The New York Times called something like, “Favorites of Left Don't Make Obama's Court List.” And in the story, Tommy Goldstein, who's a dear friend of mine, said, “If they wanted to talk about somebody who was a flaming liberal, they'd be talking about Pam Karlan, but nobody's talking about Pam Karlan.” And then I got this call from a friend of mine who said, “Yeah, but at least people are talking about how nobody's talking about you. Nobody's even talking about how nobody's talking about me.” And I was flattered, but not fooled.DL: That's funny; I read that piece in preparing for this interview. So let's say someone were to ask you, someone mid-career, “Hey, I've been pretty safe in the early years of my career, but now I'm at this juncture where I could do things that will possibly foreclose my judicial ambitions—should I just try to keep a lid on it, in the hope of making it?” It sounds like you would tell them to let their flag fly.PK: Here's the thing: your chances of getting to be on the Supreme Court, if that's what you're talking about, your chances are so low that the question is how much do you want to give up to go from a 0.001% chance to a 0.002% chance? Yes, you are doubling your chances, but your chances are not good. And there are some people who I think are capable of doing that, perhaps because they fit the zeitgeist enough that it's not a huge sacrifice for them. So it's not that I despise everybody who goes to the Supreme Court because they must obviously have all been super-careerists; I think lots of them weren't super-careerists in that way.Although it does worry me that six members of the Court now clerked at the Supreme Court—because when you are a law clerk, it gives you this feeling about the Court that maybe you don't want everybody who's on the Court to have, a feeling that this is the be-all and end-all of life and that getting a clerkship is a manifestation of an inner state of grace, so becoming a justice is equally a manifestation of an inner state of grace in which you are smarter than everybody else, wiser than everybody else, and everybody should kowtow to you in all sorts of ways. And I worry that people who are imprinted like ducklings on the Supreme Court when they're 25 or 26 or 27 might not be the best kind of portfolio of justices at the back end. The Court that decided Brown v. Board of Education—none of them, I think, had clerked at the Supreme Court, or maybe one of them had. They'd all done things with their lives other than try to get back to the Supreme Court. So I worry about that a little bit.DL: Speaking of the Court, let's turn to the Court, because it just finished its Term as we are recording this. As we started recording, they were still handing down the final decisions of the day.PK: Yes, the “R” numbers hadn't come up on the Supreme Court website when I signed off to come talk to you.DL: Exactly. So earlier this month, not today, but earlier this month, the Court handed down its decision in United States v. Skrmetti, reviewing Tennessee's ban on the use of hormones and puberty blockers for transgender youth. Were you surprised by the Court's ruling in Skrmetti?PK: No. I was not surprised.DL: So one of your most famous cases, which you litigated successfully five years ago or so, was Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the Court held that Title VII does apply to protect transgender individuals—and Bostock figures significantly in the Skrmetti opinions. Why were you surprised by Skrmetti given that you had won this victory in Bostock, which you could argue, in terms of just the logic of it, does carry over somewhat?PK: Well, I want to be very precise: I didn't actually litigate Bostock. There were three cases that were put together….DL: Oh yes—you handled Zarda.PK: I represented Don Zarda, who was a gay man, so I did not argue the transgender part of the case at all. Fortuitously enough, David Cole argued that part of the case, and David Cole was actually the first person I had dinner with as a freshman at Yale College, when I started college, because he was the roommate of somebody I debated against in high school. So David and I went to law school together, went to college together, and had classes together. We've been friends now for almost 50 years, which is scary—I think for 48 years we've been friends—and he argued that part of the case.So here's what surprised me about what the Supreme Court did in Skrmetti. Given where the Court wanted to come out, the more intellectually honest way to get there would've been to say, “Yes, of course this is because of sex; there is sex discrimination going on here. But even applying intermediate scrutiny, we think that Tennessee's law should survive intermediate scrutiny.” That would've been an intellectually honest way to get to where the Court got.Instead, they did this weird sort of, “Well, the word ‘sex' isn't in the Fourteenth Amendment, but it's in Title VII.” But that makes no sense at all, because for none of the sex-discrimination cases that the Court has decided under the Fourteenth Amendment did the word “sex” appear in the Fourteenth Amendment. It's not like the word “sex” was in there and then all of a sudden it took a powder and left. So I thought that was a really disingenuous way of getting to where the Court wanted to go. But I was not surprised after the oral argument that the Court was going to get to where it got on the bottom line.DL: I'm curious, though, rewinding to Bostock and Zarda, were you surprised by how the Court came out in those cases? Because it was still a deeply conservative Court back then.PK: No, I was not surprised. I was not surprised, both because I thought we had so much the better of the argument and because at the oral argument, it seemed pretty clear that we had at least six justices, and those were the six justices we had at the end of the day. The thing that was interesting to me about Bostock was I thought also that we were likely to win for the following weird legal-realist reason, which is that this was a case that would allow the justices who claimed to be textualists to show that they were principled textualists, by doing something that they might not have voted for if they were in Congress or the like.And also, while the impact was really large in one sense, the impact was not really large in another sense: most American workers are protected by Title VII, but most American employers do not discriminate, and didn't discriminate even before this, on the basis of sexual orientation or on the basis of gender identity. For example, in Zarda's case, the employer denied that they had fired Mr. Zarda because he was gay; they said, “We fired him for other reasons.”Very few employers had a formal policy that said, “We discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.” And although most American workers are protected by Title VII, most American employers are not covered by Title VII—and that's because small employers, employers with fewer than 15 full-time employees, are not covered at all. And religious employers have all sorts of exemptions and the like, so for the people who had the biggest objection to hiring or promoting or retaining gay or transgender employees, this case wasn't going to change what happened to them at all. So the impact was really important for workers, but not deeply intrusive on employers generally. So I thought those two things, taken together, meant that we had a pretty good argument.I actually thought our textual argument was not our best argument, but it was the one that they were most likely to buy. So it was really interesting: we made a bunch of different arguments in the brief, and then as soon as I got up to argue, the first question out of the box was Justice Ginsburg saying, “Well, in 1964, homosexuality was illegal in most of the country—how could this be?” And that's when I realized, “Okay, she's just telling me to talk about the text, don't talk about anything else.”So I just talked about the text the whole time. But as you may remember from the argument, there was this weird moment, which came after I answered her question and one other one, there was this kind of silence from the justices. And I just said, “Well, if you don't have any more questions, I'll reserve the remainder of my time.” And it went well; it went well as an argument.DL: On the flip side, speaking of things that are not going so well, let's turn to current events. Zooming up to a higher level of generality than Skrmetti, you are a leading scholar of constitutional law, so here's the question. I know you've already been interviewed about it by media outlets, but let me ask you again, in light of just the latest, latest, latest news: are we in a constitutional crisis in the United States?PK: I think we're in a period of great constitutional danger. I don't know what a “constitutional crisis” is. Some people think the constitutional crisis is that we have an executive branch that doesn't believe in the Constitution, right? So you have Donald Trump asked, in an interview, “Do you have to comply with the Constitution?” He says, “I don't know.” Or he says, “I have an Article II that gives me the power to do whatever I want”—which is not what Article II says. If you want to be a textualist, it does not say the president can do whatever he wants. So you have an executive branch that really does not have a commitment to the Constitution as it has been understood up until now—that is, limited government, separation of powers, respect for individual rights. With this administration, none of that's there. And I don't know whether Emil Bove did say, “F**k the courts,” or not, but they're certainly acting as if that's their attitude.So yes, in that sense, we're in a period of constitutional danger. And then on top of that, I think we have a Supreme Court that is acting almost as if this is a normal administration with normal stuff, a Court that doesn't seem to recognize what district judges appointed by every president since George H.W. Bush or maybe even Reagan have recognized, which is, “This is not normal.” What the administration is trying to do is not normal, and it has to be stopped. So that worries me, that the Supreme Court is acting as if it needs to keep its powder dry—and for what, I'm not clear.If they think that by giving in and giving in, and prevaricating and putting things off... today, I thought the example of this was in the birthright citizenship/universal injunction case. One of the groups of plaintiffs that's up there is a bunch of states, around 23 states, and the Supreme Court in Justice Barrett's opinion says, “Well, maybe the states have standing, maybe they don't. And maybe if they have standing, you can enjoin this all in those states. We leave this all for remind.”They've sat on this for months. It's ridiculous that the Supreme Court doesn't “man up,” essentially, and decide these things. It really worries me quite a bit that the Supreme Court just seems completely blind to the fact that in 2024, they gave Donald Trump complete criminal immunity from any prosecution, so who's going to hold him accountable? Not criminally accountable, not accountable in damages—and now the Supreme Court seems not particularly interested in holding him accountable either.DL: Let me play devil's advocate. Here's my theory on why the Court does seem to be holding its fire: they're afraid of a worse outcome, which is, essentially, “The emperor has no clothes.”Say they draw this line in the sand for Trump, and then Trump just crosses it. And as we all know from that famous quote from The Federalist Papers, the Court has neither force nor will, but only judgment. That's worse, isn't it? If suddenly it's exposed that the Court doesn't have any army, any way to stop Trump? And then the courts have no power.PK: I actually think it's the opposite, which is, I think if the Court said to Donald Trump, “You must do X,” and then he defies it, you would have people in the streets. You would have real deep resistance—not just the “No Kings,” one-day march, but deep resistance. And there are scholars who've done comparative law who say, “When 3 percent of the people in a country go to the streets, you get real change.” And I think the Supreme Court is mistaking that.I taught a reading group for our first-years here. We have reading groups where you meet four times during the fall for dinner, and you read stuff that makes you think. And my reading group was called “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty,” and it started with the Albert Hirschman book with that title.DL: Great book.PK: It's a great book. And I gave them some excerpt from that, and I gave them an essay by Hannah Arendt called “Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship,” which she wrote in 1964. And one of the things she says there is she talks about people who stayed in the German regime, on the theory that they would prevent at least worse things from happening. And I'm going to paraphrase slightly, but what she says is, “People who think that what they're doing is getting the lesser evil quickly forget that what they're choosing is evil.” And if the Supreme Court decides, “We're not going to tell Donald Trump ‘no,' because if we tell him no and he goes ahead, we will be exposed,” what they have basically done is said to Donald Trump, “Do whatever you want; we're not going to stop you.” And that will lose the Supreme Court more credibility over time than Donald Trump defying them once and facing some serious backlash for doing it.DL: So let me ask you one final question before we go to my little speed round. That 3 percent statistic is fascinating, by the way, but it resonates for me. My family's originally from the Philippines, and you probably had the 3 percent out there in the streets to oust Marcos in 1986.But let me ask you this. We now live in a nation where Donald Trump won not just the Electoral College, but the popular vote. We do see a lot of ugly things out there, whether in social media or incidents of violence or what have you. You still have enough faith in the American people that if the Supreme Court drew that line, and Donald Trump crossed it, and maybe this happened a couple of times, even—you still have faith that there will be that 3 percent or what have you in the streets?PK: I have hope, which is not quite the same thing as faith, obviously, but I have hope that some Republicans in Congress would grow a spine at that point, and people would say, “This is not right.” Have they always done that? No. We've had bad things happen in the past, and people have not done anything about it. But I think that the alternative of just saying, “Well, since we might not be able to stop him, we shouldn't do anything about it,” while he guts the federal government, sends masked people onto the streets, tries to take the military into domestic law enforcement—I think we have to do something.And this is what's so enraging in some ways: the district court judges in this country are doing their job. They are enjoining stuff. They're not enjoining everything, because not everything can be enjoined, and not everything is illegal; there's a lot of bad stuff Donald Trump is doing that he's totally entitled to do. But the district courts are doing their job, and they're doing their job while people are sending pizza boxes to their houses and sending them threats, and the president is tweeting about them or whatever you call the posts on Truth Social. They're doing their job—and the Supreme Court needs to do its job too. It needs to stand up for district judges. If it's not willing to stand up for the rest of us, you'd think they'd at least stand up for their entire judicial branch.DL: Turning to my speed round, my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as a more abstract system of ordering human affairs.PK: What I liked least about it was having to deal with opposing counsel in discovery. That drove me to appellate litigation.DL: Exactly—where your request for an extension is almost always agreed to by the other side.PK: Yes, and where the record is the record.DL: Yes, exactly. My second question, is what would you be if you were not a lawyer and/or law professor?PK: Oh, they asked me this question for a thing here at Stanford, and it was like, if I couldn't be a lawyer, I'd... And I just said, “I'd sit in my room and cry.”DL: Okay!PK: I don't know—this is what my talent is!DL: You don't want to write a novel or something?PK: No. What I would really like to do is I would like to bike the Freedom Trail, which is a trail that starts in Montgomery, Alabama, and goes to the Canadian border, following the Underground Railroad. I've always wanted to bike that. But I guess that's not a career. I bike slowly enough that it could be a career, at this point—but earlier on, probably not.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?PK: I now get around six hours of sleep each night, but it's complicated by the following, which is when I worked at the Department of Justice the second time, it was during Covid, so I actually worked remotely from California. And what that required me to do was essentially to wake up every morning at 4 a.m., 7 a.m. on the East Coast, so I could have breakfast, read the paper, and be ready to go by 5:30 a.m.I've been unable to get off of that, so I still wake up before dawn every morning. And I spent three months in Florence, and I thought the jet lag would bring me out of this—not in the slightest. Within two weeks, I was waking up at 4:30 a.m. Central European Time. So that's why I get about six hours, because I can't really go to bed before 9 or 10 p.m.DL: Well, I was struck by your being able to do this podcast fairly early West Coast time.PK: Oh no, this is the third thing I've done this morning! I had a 6:30 a.m. conference call.DL: Oh my gosh, wow. It reminds me of that saying about how you get more done in the Army before X hour than other people get done in a day.My last question, is any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?PK: Yes: do what you love, with people you love doing it with.DL: Well said. I've loved doing this podcast—Professor Karlan, thanks again for joining me.PK: You should start calling me Pam. We've had this same discussion….DL: We're on the air! Okay, well, thanks again, Pam—I'm so grateful to you for joining me.PK: Thanks for having me.DL: Thanks so much to Professor Karlan for joining me. Whether or not you agree with her views, you can't deny that she's both insightful and honest—qualities that have made her a leading legal academic and lawyer, but also a great podcast guest.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat at Substack dot com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat dot substack dot com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, July 23. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

In today's episode, I sit down with former NFL fullback and Yale alum Chris Hetherington, now CEO of Fathead, to talk about the shift from pro sports to entrepreneurship. Chris shares how lessons from the football field like discipline, grit, and team focus helped him revive a legacy brand by leaning into technology, cultural relevance, and smart partnerships. We get into prioritization, staying mentally and physically sharp, and why his mantra is “hell yes or not yet.” Chris also opens up about personal adversity, what it means to surrender without giving up, and how asking for help changed his approach to leadership.

Listener call-in commentary on the long march through American institutes of higher education and the failures of the federal government. The classrooms of America desperately need anti-Communist educators. Producer David Doll’s take on William F. Buckley, Jr.’s inaugural book “God and Man at Yale.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back Described as having “something approaching rock star status” in her field by The New York Times Magazine, Joan C. Williams is a scholar of social inequality and a prominent public intellectual. Williams is the author of 12 books and 116 academic articles in law, sociology, psychology, medical and management journals. She is the 11th most cited legal scholar both in critical theory and employment law. She is a Sullivan Professor and the Founding Director of the Equality Action Center at UC Law San Francisco, former Founding Director of the Center for WorkLife Law. She has three TED/TEDx talks, including one with over 1.3 million views. Her 2016 essay on why Trump attracted so many non-college voters went viral, with over 3.7 million reads, becoming the most-read article in the 90-year history of Harvard Business Review. She is widely known for “bias interrupters,”—an evidence-based metrics-driven approach to eradicating implicit bias introduced in the Harvard Business Review in 2014. The website  biasinterrupters.org with open-sourced toolkits for individuals and organizations has been accessed over 500,000 times. She was profiled in Financial Times and has published on class dynamics in American politics in The New York Times, Washington Post, The Atlantic, The New Republic, Politico, The Hill, the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere. Her work on class includes her upcoming book Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class – And How to Win Them Back (forthcoming St. Martin's, May 2025) and her critically acclaimed 2017 book White Working Class – one of three books President Biden carried, dog-eared and annotated, during his 2020 presidential campaign, according to the Washington Post. Her work on gender includes What Works for Women at Work: Four Patterns Working Women Need to Know (NYU Press, 2014) and her prize-winning Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What To Do About It (Oxford, 1999). Williams' work helped create the field of work-family studies, modern workplace flexibility policies, and the study of maternal wall bias in sociology. Her work on race includes eight studies documenting how racial and gender bias play out in today's workplaces, including two focused specifically on women of color: Pinning down the Jellyfish: Racial and Gender Bias against Women in Tech (2022) and Double Jeopardy? Gender Bias against Women of Color in STEM (2014). She is a leading voice on diversity, equity, and inclusion; with her team, she has published 39 articles published in Harvard Business Review. In 2014, she launched Bias Interrupters, a data-driven approach to interrupting bias in organizations whose website has been downloaded over half a million times. Williams has received awards in several different fields. For her contributions to the legal profession, she is one of the few people to receive both the American Bar Foundation's Outstanding Scholar Award (2012) and the ABA's Margaret Brent Women Award for Lawyers of Achievement (2006).  For her contributions to the work-family field, she received the Work Life Legacy Award from the Families and Work Institute (2014) and MSOM Responsible Research Award in Operations Management (2022). For her contributions to women's advancement in engineering, she received the President's Award from the Society of Women Engineers (2019). For contributions to psychology, she received the Distinguished Publication Award from the Association for Women in Psychology (2005). Her work has been funded by three National Science Foundation grants, as well as grants from Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the W. W. Kellogg Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. She holds degrees from Yale, Harvard, and MIT as well as an honorary PhD from Utrecht University in the Netherlands. Join us Monday's and Thursday's at 8EST for our Twice Weekly Happy Hour Hangout's !  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift

Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 3656: Loneliness is rising to dangerous levels, yet Ryan Frederick highlights how thoughtful choices about where and how we live can help foster deep social connections and belonging. Drawing on insights from researchers like Dr. John Cacioppo and examples such as co-housing and walkable communities, Frederick explores practical ways to make the opposite of loneliness part of everyday life. Discover how simple kindness, intentional design, and community spirit can transform isolation into connection. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://www.here.life/blog/the-opposite-of-loneliness Quotes to ponder: "We don't have a word for the opposite of loneliness, but if we did, I could say that's what I want in life. What I'm grateful and thankful to have found at Yale, and what I'm scared of losing when we wake up tomorrow and leave this place." "It's not quite love and it's not quite community; it's just this feeling that there are people, an abundance of people, who are in this together. Who are on your team." "Loneliness and weak social connections are associated with a reduction in lifespan similar to that caused by smoking 15 cigarettes a day and even greater than that associated with obesity." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode is one that Matt and Sam have been anticipating for years: after two-and-a-half decades of research and writing, Sam Tanehaus's authoritative biography of William F. Buckley, Jr.—youthful booster of America First, enfant terrible at Yale, CIA agent, founder of National Review, best-selling author, brilliant television host, and more—has blessedly arrived. Buckley: The Life and the Revolution That Changed America stretches to just under 900 pages of text, before you get to the endnotes and index, an appropriately epic biography of an overstuffed, consequential life, containing far more than could be covered in a single episode. This conversation focuses on the challenges of writing a biography of a man whose archives rivaled those found in presidential libraries; Tanenhaus's discovery of a newspaper the Buckley's owned in South Carolina that essentially was a mouthpiece for the White Citizens' Council, and the Southern roots of Buckley's "northern segregationist" politics; the influence of his oilman father, who fled the revolution in Mexico and instilled anti-communist politics, as well as the Catholic faith, in his children; Buckley's role in forging the post-war conservative movement, through National Review and his frenetic endeavors as a columnist and speaker; the controversies, disappointments, failures, and triumphs of his decades-long career; and more. Sources:Sam Tanenhaus, Buckley: The Life and the Revolution That Changed America (2025)— Whittaker Chambers: A Biography (1997)John Judis, William F. Buckley, Jr.: Patron Saint of the Conservatives (1988)Sam Adler-Bell, "A Practical Fanatic," The Idea Letters, June 26, 2025Alexander Chee, "Mr. and Mrs. B.," Longreads, June 18, 2025Christopher Owen, Heaven Can Indeed Fall: The Life of Willmoore Kendall, (2022)Listen again to these Know Your Enemy episodes for background on:Brent Bozell: "Keeping up with the Bozells," Feb 26, 2021Willmoore Kendall: "The Long Farewell to Majority Rule? (w/ Joshua Tait)," May 17, 2021Frank Meyer: "Frank Meyer, the Father of Fusionism," Nov 10, 2021Joan Didion: "Joan Didion, Conservative (w/ Sam Tanenhaus)," Jan 13, 2022William F. Buckley, Jr.: "Buckley for Mayor (w/ Sam Tanenhaus)," Aug 23, 2021— "The Conservative and the Convict (w/ Sarah Weinman)," May 9, 2022— "Consider the Cranks (w/ David Austin Walsh)," May 21, 2024...and don't forget to subscribe to Know Your Enemy on Patreon for access to all of our bonus episodes!   

America is turning 250. And we're throwing a yearlong celebration of the greatest country on Earth. The greatest? Yes. The greatest. We realize that's not a popular thing to say these days. Americans have a way of taking this country for granted: a Gallup poll released earlier this week shows that American pride has reached a new low. And the world at large, which is wealthier and freer than it has ever been in history thanks to American power and largesse, often resents us. We get it. As journalists, we spend most of our time finding problems and exposing them. It's what the job calls for. But if you only focus on the negatives, you get a distorted view of reality. As America hits this milestone birthday, it's worthwhile to take a moment to step back and look closely at where we actually are—and the reality of life in America today compared to other times and places. That reality is pretty spectacular. Could Thomas Jefferson and the men gathered in Philadelphia who wrote down the words that made our world—“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”—ever have imagined what their Declaration of Independence would bring? The Constitution. The end of slavery—and the defeat of Hitler. Astonishing wealth and medical breakthroughs. Silicon Valley. The most powerful military in the world. The moon landing. Hollywood. The Hoover Dam. The Statue of Liberty (a gift from France). Actual liberation (a thing we gave France). Humphrey Bogart and Tom Hanks. Josephine Baker and Beyoncé. Hot dogs. Corn dogs. American Chinese food. American Italian food. The Roosevelts and the Kennedys. The Barrymores and the Fondas. Winston Churchill (his mom was from Brooklyn). The Marshall Plan and Thurgood Marshall. Star Wars. Missile-defense shields. Baseball. Football. The military-industrial complex. Freedom of religion. UFO cults. Television. The internet. The Pill. The Pope. The automobile, the airplane, and AI. Jazz and the blues. The polio vaccine and GLP-1s, the UFC and Dolly Parton. The list goes on because it's really, truly endless. Ours is a country where you can hear 800 languages spoken in Queens, drive two hours and end up among the Amish in Pennsylvania. We are 330 million people, from California to New York Island, gathered together as one. Each of those 330 million will tell you that ours is not a perfect country. But we suspect most of them would agree that their lives would not be possible without it. So for the next 12 months, we're going to toast to our freedoms on the page, on this podcast and in real life. And we're doing it the Free Press way: by delving into all of it—the bad and the good and the great, the strange and the wonderful and the wild. And today—on America's 249th birthday—we're kicking off this yearlong event with none other than Akhil Reed Amar. Akhil has a unique understanding of this country—and our Constitution. Akhil is a Democrat who testified on behalf of Brett Kavanaugh, is a member of The Federalist Society, who is pro-choice but also anti-Roe—and these seeming contradictions make him perfectly suited to answer questions about the political and legal polarization we find ourselves in today. Akhil is a constitutional law professor at Yale and the author of the brilliant book The Words That Made Us: America's Constitutional Conversation, 1760–1840. He also hosts the podcast Amarica's Constitution, and you might recognize his name from his work in The Atlantic. I ask him about the unique history that created our founding document, the state of the country, our political polarization, the American legal system, and what this country means to him. The Free Press earns a commission from any purchases made through all book links in this article. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dr. Laurie Santos is a renowned psychology professor at Yale University and creator of the most popular course in Yale's history: "Psychology and the Good Life." This conversation explores why our intuitions about happiness are spectacularly wrong and the mental health crisis plaguing young people. We discuss how our brains mislead us about well-being, the power of negative visualization, and evidence-based "rewirements" to overcome our natural biases.  Along the way, she shares the stark reality among elite students and practical strategies for authentic happiness. Laurie brings science to humanity's quest for happiness. Essential for anyone seeking genuine well-being. Enjoy! Show notes + MORE Watch on YouTube Newsletter Sign-Up   Today's Sponsors: Lincoln Financial: Watch The Action Plan series and learn how Lincoln can help you make your pastimes last a lifetime