text
stringlengths 2.57k
160k
| hyperpartisan
bool 2
classes | bias
int64 0
4
| cleaned_text
stringlengths 1.79k
91.8k
| word_count
int64 512
12.5k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
<p>BEIJING — Donald Trump vowed a more “unpredictable” foreign policy when he campaigned for president. Mission accomplished, if the mood in Asia ahead of his first presidential trip to the region is any indication.</p>
<p>Much like the prelude to a bruising typhoon, Trump’s upcoming visit has inspired fear, resignation, indignation, morbid curiosity — even, according to one South Korean politician, feelings of national disgrace.</p>
<p>During his first months as president, Trump, who will visit Japan, South Korea and China before attending regional summits in Vietnam and the Philippines, has blended moments of flattery with vows to rip up trade deals, destroy a sovereign nation with nuclear weapons and generally crash long-standing norms of diplomacy anywhere it suits his aims.</p>
<p />
<p />
<p>He has wined and dined the leaders of China and Japan, and been fawned over in return, and his shaky ties with South Korea’s leader have led to worries that Washington could take military action against North Korea without Seoul’s approval.</p>
<p>Looming over his entire trip is one of the strangest relationships in the world — an often surreal exchange of threats of annihilation between North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and Trump, who has also occasionally offered praise and dialogue.</p>
<p>It’s something of a marvel then that despite Trump’s unpredictability and the torpedoing of an Obama-era trade deal, there may actually be more continuity than change in Washington’s Asia policy.</p>
<p>“People joke that Wagner’s music is better than it sounds. The same can be said for Trump’s Asia policy and relationships,” longtime Asia analyst Ralph Cossa said, referring to the notoriously complex German composer. “This will be put to the test when he goes to Asia, but I think the visit is likely to be more successful than many fear or predict.”</p>
<p>A look at some of the issues and leaders Trump will face during his trip, which begins when he arrives in Japan on Sunday:</p>
<p>North Korea</p>
<p>Unlike most of his recent predecessors, Trump will not visit the South Korean side of the Demilitarized Zone that looks out over North Korea.</p>
<p>Still, his quarrel with the North’s ruler will dominate the trip.</p>
<p>Amid North Korean nuclear and missile tests and a standard barrage of belligerent rhetoric, Trump has veered from threats to unleash “fire and fury” on the North to calling Kim a “pretty smart cookie” and saying he’d be “honored” to talk, under the right circumstances.</p>
<p>Trump’s comments have caused both confusion and fears of war, especially in Japan and South Korea, but it is unclear how seriously to take declarations that don’t appear to be policy pronouncements.</p>
<p>North Korea accused Trump of openly pursuing what it called a “crazy strategy.” The state newspaper said in a commentary Thursday that the American president regards the strategy as a powerful means to advance his “America first” policy.</p>
<p>Trump likes to say that a soft policy by his predecessor, Barack Obama, has allowed North Korea to stand on the brink of a viable arsenal of nuclear-armed missiles that can hit U.S. mainland cities.</p>
<p>Despite his criticism, Trump has yet to distinguish his own approach from Obama’s, Bruce Klingner, a North Korea specialist at the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington, told U.S. lawmakers in July.</p>
<p>“Trump’s policy of ‘maximum pressure’ to date has been anything but,” Klingner said, and sends mixed messages about whether Washington will pursue diplomacy or war to deal with Pyongyang.</p>
<p>South Korea</p>
<p>Trump’s ties with South Korea’s liberal president, Moon Jae-in, are causing some serious angst in the country.</p>
<p>Moon took office in May with hopes of reaching out to Pyongyang. But a parade of North Korean missile and nuclear tests has forced him to take a harder line.</p>
<p>While he has gone out of his way to emphasize coordination with Trump, a strain between the allies is evident.</p>
<p>Trump has suggested that Seoul should pay the entire cost of a U.S. missile defense system in the South that many there don’t even want. He also threatened to end a hard-won U.S.-South Korean free trade agreement that past American presidents had portrayed as an alliance bulwark.</p>
<p>Amid dueling threats by Trump and Kim Jong Un, Moon has issued pointed reminders that there can be no U.S. military action without Seoul’s consent.</p>
<p>South Koreans have long fretted about being pushed out of efforts to deal with the North — a fear so prevalent it has a name: “Korea Passing.” The headline on a recent editorial in the daily Dong-A Ilbo is telling: “If Moon becomes Trump’s ‘friend,’ Korea Passing will disappear.”</p>
<p>There has also been anxiety that Trump will spend more time in both China and Japan than in South Korea on his trip.</p>
<p>Ahn Cheol-soo, a South Korean opposition politician, said recently that it’s disappointing that Trump “stays just briefly in South Korea, the country directly involved in the Korean Peninsula problem that has the rapt attention of the world. This feels really bad — our country has been disgraced.”</p>
<p>China</p>
<p>Trump won cheers during the presidential campaign by attacking China for allegedly stealing American jobs and failing to use its influence to stop ally North Korea’s nuclear drive.</p>
<p>But as president, Trump has cozied up to Chinese leader Xi Jinping.</p>
<p>“People say we have the best relationship of any president-president,” Trump recently told Fox Business Network, referring to Xi, whom he called “a very good person.”</p>
<p>“Now, some people might call him the king of China. But he’s called president,” Trump said.</p>
<p>Trump has, in some ways, been good for the ruling Chinese Communist Party, according to Robert Dujarric, an Asia expert at Temple University Japan, because he has raised global doubts about Washington by undermining institutions that serve U.S. interests and impede those of China.</p>
<p>Trump, for instance, pulled the United States out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal Obama negotiated with 11 Pacific Rim countries that was pitched, in part, as a way to counter China.</p>
<p>During his trip, Trump may push China on trade barriers and to better implement U.N. sanctions on North Korea. But he can expect a royal reception in Beijing, including fawning press coverage and grand ceremonies aimed at boosting his impressions of Chinese power.</p>
<p>Japan</p>
<p>Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe may be the Asian leader most confident in his relationship with Trump.</p>
<p>He was one of the first to pay court to President-elect Trump, eager to forge a bond with Tokyo’s crucial ally. Trump, in turn, has raised an issue important to Abe: North Korea’s past abductions of Japanese citizens.</p>
<p>There’s worry in Tokyo about Trump’s tough talk on trade, and the possibility that U.S. military action against North Korea could endanger Japan. But Abe has generally avoided confronting Trump, at least in public.</p>
<p>From golf to private dinners to an audience with the emperor, Trump’s Japan “visit is designed to not only offer visual evidence of the close partnership, but also to avoid any uncomfortable issues, such as trade,” Daniel Sneider, an East Asia specialist at Stanford University, wrote recently.</p>
<p>Abe’s “senior advisers claim to wield an influence over Trump that is the envy of other U.S. allies,” Sneider said. “But that relationship depends on Abe consciously avoiding any challenge to Trump’s policies. Does his influence disappear the moment he crosses Trump?”</p> | false | 1 | beijing donald trump vowed unpredictable foreign policy campaigned president mission accomplished mood asia ahead first presidential trip region indication much like prelude bruising typhoon trumps upcoming visit inspired fear resignation indignation morbid curiosity even according one south korean politician feelings national disgrace first months president trump visit japan south korea china attending regional summits vietnam philippines blended moments flattery vows rip trade deals destroy sovereign nation nuclear weapons generally crash longstanding norms diplomacy anywhere suits aims wined dined leaders china japan fawned return shaky ties south koreas leader led worries washington could take military action north korea without seouls approval looming entire trip one strangest relationships world often surreal exchange threats annihilation north korean dictator kim jong un trump also occasionally offered praise dialogue something marvel despite trumps unpredictability torpedoing obamaera trade deal may actually continuity change washingtons asia policy people joke wagners music better sounds said trumps asia policy relationships longtime asia analyst ralph cossa said referring notoriously complex german composer put test goes asia think visit likely successful many fear predict look issues leaders trump face trip begins arrives japan sunday north korea unlike recent predecessors trump visit south korean side demilitarized zone looks north korea still quarrel norths ruler dominate trip amid north korean nuclear missile tests standard barrage belligerent rhetoric trump veered threats unleash fire fury north calling kim pretty smart cookie saying hed honored talk right circumstances trumps comments caused confusion fears war especially japan south korea unclear seriously take declarations dont appear policy pronouncements north korea accused trump openly pursuing called crazy strategy state newspaper said commentary thursday american president regards strategy powerful means advance america first policy trump likes say soft policy predecessor barack obama allowed north korea stand brink viable arsenal nucleararmed missiles hit us mainland cities despite criticism trump yet distinguish approach obamas bruce klingner north korea specialist conservative heritage foundation think tank washington told us lawmakers july trumps policy maximum pressure date anything klingner said sends mixed messages whether washington pursue diplomacy war deal pyongyang south korea trumps ties south koreas liberal president moon jaein causing serious angst country moon took office may hopes reaching pyongyang parade north korean missile nuclear tests forced take harder line gone way emphasize coordination trump strain allies evident trump suggested seoul pay entire cost us missile defense system south many dont even want also threatened end hardwon ussouth korean free trade agreement past american presidents portrayed alliance bulwark amid dueling threats trump kim jong un moon issued pointed reminders us military action without seouls consent south koreans long fretted pushed efforts deal north fear prevalent name korea passing headline recent editorial daily donga ilbo telling moon becomes trumps friend korea passing disappear also anxiety trump spend time china japan south korea trip ahn cheolsoo south korean opposition politician said recently disappointing trump stays briefly south korea country directly involved korean peninsula problem rapt attention world feels really bad country disgraced china trump cheers presidential campaign attacking china allegedly stealing american jobs failing use influence stop ally north koreas nuclear drive president trump cozied chinese leader xi jinping people say best relationship presidentpresident trump recently told fox business network referring xi called good person people might call king china hes called president trump said trump ways good ruling chinese communist party according robert dujarric asia expert temple university japan raised global doubts washington undermining institutions serve us interests impede china trump instance pulled united states transpacific partnership trade deal obama negotiated 11 pacific rim countries pitched part way counter china trip trump may push china trade barriers better implement un sanctions north korea expect royal reception beijing including fawning press coverage grand ceremonies aimed boosting impressions chinese power japan japanese prime minister shinzo abe may asian leader confident relationship trump one first pay court presidentelect trump eager forge bond tokyos crucial ally trump turn raised issue important abe north koreas past abductions japanese citizens theres worry tokyo trumps tough talk trade possibility us military action north korea could endanger japan abe generally avoided confronting trump least public golf private dinners audience emperor trumps japan visit designed offer visual evidence close partnership also avoid uncomfortable issues trade daniel sneider east asia specialist stanford university wrote recently abes senior advisers claim wield influence trump envy us allies sneider said relationship depends abe consciously avoiding challenge trumps policies influence disappear moment crosses trump | 725 |
<p>THE NEWS ABOUT THE NEWS: AMERICAN JOURNALISM IN PERIL by Leonard Downie Jr. and Robert G. Kaiser Alfred A. Knopf, 294 pp., $25 0 375 40874 6</p>
<p>When, back in 1985, the “Westland affair” almost brought down Mrs Thatcher’s government, I remember a curious statement by her then-defense minister, Michael Heseltine, who had started the whole thing. Westland was a small British manufacturer of helicopters which would have failed without the sale of a significant minority shareholding to either the Sikorsky company of America or a European consortium. Heseltine favored the Europeans, Mrs Thatcher and her trade secretary, Leon Brittan, favored the American bid. Heseltine ended up resigning from the cabinet on the grounds that Sikorsky’s stake would ultimately mean that Westland’s highly- skilled workforce would become just “metal-bashers for the Americans.” As it was, he said, Westland made “the best helicopters in the world.” They just couldn’t get enough people to buy them to stay in business.</p>
<p>Possibly he was right, but I wondered then and still wonder now about that use of the word “best.” Could it be possible that Westland was making a kind of ideal, Platonic helicopter, a helicopter that was nearer to God’s own idea of what a helicopter ought to be than any other helicopter on earth? If so, were considerations of price and functionality irrelevant? If someone sets up in business to manufacture steam-powered toothpicks and then finds that no one wants steam-powered toothpicks, is it a mitigation of his failure to say that he made the “best” steam-powered toothpicks in the world? Would not the “best” steam-powered toothpick be one that people actually wanted to buy? Likewise, the best helicopter could not really be the best — could not even be good — if hardly anyone wanted it, since to be good it would have to be salable to the public and profitable to its maker.</p>
<p>But the Heseltinian view of quality in helicopters also informs Leonard Downie Jr. and Robert G. Kaiser’s view of quality in journalism. The case made by these editors at the Washington Post that American journalism is “in peril” rests on an absolutist conception of journalism. To them, journalism, like art, exists for its own sake. Its quality, or lack of it, is not to be judged in the market place, by what kind and how much of the stuff people want to buy, or consume, but according to the “professional” judgment of connoisseurs like themselves. When the bad guys — large media corporations with many journalistic properties that are the alleged imperilers of this volume — press their employees to make those properties more profitable by reducing the size of the “news hole” and hiring fewer reporters, they are thought to be vitiating journalistic quality by creating something that they, or their advertisers, believe more people will want.</p>
<p>If they are wrong, the market will punish them. What is the point of thunderous moral condemnations? Downie and Kaiser seem to be saying on the one hand that the corporate philistines are wrong — and that the markets already are punishing them — and on the other that they are paying far too much attention to their “profit margins,” which is to say the market. Surely both things cannot be true? Yet the contradiction passes almost unnoticed because Downie and Kaiser do not see journalism as being something for use, like helicopters, but rather something to be judged only on its own terms. Every now and then they ask themselves, a question like this: “Does the mediocrity of local television news reflect what viewers want? Or have they merely become complacent about what they are given?” But they never really answer it, preferring on the whole to adopt the view of one of their “experts” that anyone pointing to all the obvious signs that ordinary people prefer sensationalism and gossip on TV to serious news is just “masking the subordination of the public’s interest to the short-term interest of investors.”</p>
<p>Finally, it is September 11th that seems to get them off the hook. “For much of the 1980s and 1990s,” they write, “American news organizations had drifted toward softer, sillier, less significant journalism in a society that didn’t seem to protest. Then an unanticipated national catastrophe reminded both the providers and consumers of news that good journalism was not just appealing, but absolutely necessary. Suddenly the choices between soft and hard, silly and serious news values came into clear focus.” The implication is that a mass audience temporarily seduced by Monica or Chandra or O.J. away from their natural love of ponderous, Washington Post-style discussions of national defense or foreign policy would henceforth do better in living up to Messrs. Downie and Kaiser’s expectations of it.</p>
<p>Yet readers of this book may have a different idea of why “serious” journalists like the authors do not attract more readers. For their writing is not just dull, it is paralytically dull. An ordinary journalism textbook (which this resembles) is a page-turner by comparison. Banality follows banality in a swiftly flowing stream, and we are told for the third or fourth time that “Television, like radio is a relatively inefficient conveyor of factual information” and that a typical evening news broadcast contains many fewer words and subjects than a daily newspaper. “So,” as if you didn’t know, “television has become enormously important in our national life, but it has never been a fully effective information medium.” Indeed, “in modern America television has become an opiate as well as an entertainment medium.”</p>
<p>Do tell! And why is that? Perhaps it has to do with the fact that, by the 1990s, “ours had become a celebrity-besotted culture, with television the single most powerful promoter and ratifier of celebrityhood”? It’s a theory, anyway. But then you may also be interested to know that “Americans have long been starstruck by celebrities” — as opposed, I guess, to being starstruck by nonentities. Oh, and here’s another news-flash: “Television allowed all of us to participate vicariously in great events all over the world” while its live coverage of breaking stories was “an important element in the voyeuristic culture of our times.” That’s because “it can be fascinating and sometimes highly informative to be able to see big news being made.” Well, now that you mention it, I guess it can.</p>
<p>True, this great mass of platitude and cliché is occasionally enlivened by a comically mixed metaphor, as when “the distance between the citizenry and ‘the news’” is said to have been “eviscerated” or we are told that “the money machine no longer worked on automatic pilot.” Also subject to “evisceration” by wicked corporate types were “the networks’ foreign staffs” which does indeed seem rather harsh punishment for not being profitable enough. But then those with an eye to the bottom line are presumably capable of anything. “The Philadelphia Inquirer,” for example, “has been deeply shaken by a steady drumbeat of cost cutting, upheavals in its newsroom management and the departures of dozens of talented staff members.” Yeah, that cutting drumbeat will shake you all right.</p>
<p>Such awful writing suggests that the real “peril” to American journalism lies at least as much in its not being lively enough as in its being too lively, as for instance on local TV news. It is telling when the authors write that “there is no obvious way to simultaneously shrink a newspaper and make it better.” Oh really? I fancy that there are more than a few readers of the Washington Post who could suggest an obvious way to them. But their obliviousness to their own prolixity, dullness and bad writing is owing to their insistence on regarding journalism as a “profession” rather than (as it properly is) a trade. A profession, like law or medicine or the cure of souls, has attached to it a body of real scholarship which its practitioners must master. The attempts by schools of journalism, like those of schools of education, to provide a body of learning in substantiation of their feeble claim to professionalism, only underline how much unlike their learned models they really are.</p>
<p>The important knowledge for a journalist is of what he is writing about, not knowledge of how to be a journalist, which is really a pretty simple thing. Downie and Kaiser quote Frank Magid, a broadcast consultant, on his worries about the new generation of broadcast journalists who, “while they may be trained to write and while they may be trained to articulate what is written. . . have no notion whatsoever about history, geography, political science, economics and other things about which an informed individual should have some grasp.” He adds that “unless and until the people in the profession come to grips with that, there will never be a change.” What he should have said was that nothing would change unless and until the people in the profession come to realize that they are not a profession and send their apprentices back to school to learn not journalism but “history, geography, political science, economics and other things.” And how to write.Then more people might want to read what they had to say.</p> | false | 1 | news news american journalism peril leonard downie jr robert g kaiser alfred knopf 294 pp 25 0 375 40874 6 back 1985 westland affair almost brought mrs thatchers government remember curious statement thendefense minister michael heseltine started whole thing westland small british manufacturer helicopters would failed without sale significant minority shareholding either sikorsky company america european consortium heseltine favored europeans mrs thatcher trade secretary leon brittan favored american bid heseltine ended resigning cabinet grounds sikorskys stake would ultimately mean westlands highly skilled workforce would become metalbashers americans said westland made best helicopters world couldnt get enough people buy stay business possibly right wondered still wonder use word best could possible westland making kind ideal platonic helicopter helicopter nearer gods idea helicopter ought helicopter earth considerations price functionality irrelevant someone sets business manufacture steampowered toothpicks finds one wants steampowered toothpicks mitigation failure say made best steampowered toothpicks world would best steampowered toothpick one people actually wanted buy likewise best helicopter could really best could even good hardly anyone wanted since good would salable public profitable maker heseltinian view quality helicopters also informs leonard downie jr robert g kaisers view quality journalism case made editors washington post american journalism peril rests absolutist conception journalism journalism like art exists sake quality lack judged market place kind much stuff people want buy consume according professional judgment connoisseurs like bad guys large media corporations many journalistic properties alleged imperilers volume press employees make properties profitable reducing size news hole hiring fewer reporters thought vitiating journalistic quality creating something advertisers believe people want wrong market punish point thunderous moral condemnations downie kaiser seem saying one hand corporate philistines wrong markets already punishing paying far much attention profit margins say market surely things true yet contradiction passes almost unnoticed downie kaiser see journalism something use like helicopters rather something judged terms every ask question like mediocrity local television news reflect viewers want merely become complacent given never really answer preferring whole adopt view one experts anyone pointing obvious signs ordinary people prefer sensationalism gossip tv serious news masking subordination publics interest shortterm interest investors finally september 11th seems get hook much 1980s 1990s write american news organizations drifted toward softer sillier less significant journalism society didnt seem protest unanticipated national catastrophe reminded providers consumers news good journalism appealing absolutely necessary suddenly choices soft hard silly serious news values came clear focus implication mass audience temporarily seduced monica chandra oj away natural love ponderous washington poststyle discussions national defense foreign policy would henceforth better living messrs downie kaisers expectations yet readers book may different idea serious journalists like authors attract readers writing dull paralytically dull ordinary journalism textbook resembles pageturner comparison banality follows banality swiftly flowing stream told third fourth time television like radio relatively inefficient conveyor factual information typical evening news broadcast contains many fewer words subjects daily newspaper didnt know television become enormously important national life never fully effective information medium indeed modern america television become opiate well entertainment medium tell perhaps fact 1990s become celebritybesotted culture television single powerful promoter ratifier celebrityhood theory anyway may also interested know americans long starstruck celebrities opposed guess starstruck nonentities oh heres another newsflash television allowed us participate vicariously great events world live coverage breaking stories important element voyeuristic culture times thats fascinating sometimes highly informative able see big news made well mention guess true great mass platitude cliché occasionally enlivened comically mixed metaphor distance citizenry news said eviscerated told money machine longer worked automatic pilot also subject evisceration wicked corporate types networks foreign staffs indeed seem rather harsh punishment profitable enough eye bottom line presumably capable anything philadelphia inquirer example deeply shaken steady drumbeat cost cutting upheavals newsroom management departures dozens talented staff members yeah cutting drumbeat shake right awful writing suggests real peril american journalism lies least much lively enough lively instance local tv news telling authors write obvious way simultaneously shrink newspaper make better oh really fancy readers washington post could suggest obvious way obliviousness prolixity dullness bad writing owing insistence regarding journalism profession rather properly trade profession like law medicine cure souls attached body real scholarship practitioners must master attempts schools journalism like schools education provide body learning substantiation feeble claim professionalism underline much unlike learned models really important knowledge journalist writing knowledge journalist really pretty simple thing downie kaiser quote frank magid broadcast consultant worries new generation broadcast journalists may trained write may trained articulate written notion whatsoever history geography political science economics things informed individual grasp adds unless people profession come grips never change said nothing would change unless people profession come realize profession send apprentices back school learn journalism history geography political science economics things writethen people might want read say | 779 |
<p>MOBILE, Ala. — Unlike the rest of the players auditioning for hundreds of NFL scouts and coaches at the Senior Bowl, Baker Mayfield did not arrive over the weekend or participate in Tuesday’s weigh-ins. Once the reigning <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Heisman_Trophy/" type="external">Heisman Trophy</a> winner did arrive, however, he quickly put to rest doubts about his ability to make the jump from the Big 12 to the NFL, delivering a sparkling debut similar to the one <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carson-Wentz/" type="external">Carson Wentz</a> enjoyed two years ago at Ladd-Peebles Stadium.</p>
<p>Taking snaps from under center as well as from the shotgun, and lining up opposite bigger, more prototypical quarterbacks like Wyoming’s rocket-armed 6-foot-5, 237-pound Josh Allen and Washington State’s Luke Falk, the Pac-12’s all-time leading passer, Mayfield stole the spotlight, leaving no doubt that he was the top signal-caller in this year’s Senior Bowl.</p>
<p>Mayfield delivered strikes to all levels of the field, zipping underneath passes to running backs and showing perfect trajectory on what would have been long touchdowns (despite tight coverage) to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Boise_State/" type="external">Boise State</a> wide receiver <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cedrick_Wilson/" type="external">Cedrick Wilson</a> and Central Michigan tight end Tyler Conklin. Of course, no one was keeping score in the early scrimmages and one-on-one practices — except for maybe the scouts in the stands, which included key decision-makers for the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cleveland-Browns/" type="external">Cleveland Browns</a> (including new general manager John Dorsey), <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New_York_Giants/" type="external">New York Giants</a> (including general manager Dave Gettleman and new head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pat-Shurmur/" type="external">Pat Shurmur</a>) and, of course, Broncos GM and Hall of Fame quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Elway/" type="external">John Elway</a>, owners of the No. 1, No. 2 and No. 5 overall picks in the 2018 draft and all thought to be considering taking a quarterback with their first selection.</p>
<p>Broncos head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Vance-Joseph/" type="external">Vance Joseph</a> did not sound overly concerned about Mayfield’s below-average height.</p>
<p>“I think that’s fine,” Joseph said via The Denver Post when asked about Mayfield’s height. “You watch <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Drew_Brees/" type="external">Drew Brees</a> play, he’s figured it out. He’s a very successful quarterback. Guys figure it out. Good players figure it out. I wouldn’t be concerned about that.”</p>
<p>It was not just that Mayfield threw the ball well — he did so with the same confidence and bravado that made him such a lightning rod for Oklahoma, literally slapping the behind (on multiple occasions) of the Broncos’ coach who served as his center and racing ahead of the other quarterbacks through drills, providing a buzz in the stands, that frankly, did not exist during the South Team’s practice earlier in the day.</p>
<p>While very good, Mayfield was not perfect. On a snap in which a Denver assistant coach repeatedly shouted, “Here’s the game!” to signify the final play of one-on-ones, Mayfield’s throw to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Notre_Dame/" type="external">Notre Dame</a> tight end Durham Smythe failed to connect, though in fairness, this was more due to a great break on the ball by <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Texas_A&amp;M/" type="external">Texas A&amp;M</a> safety Armani Watts, one of several North defensive backs who enjoyed strong debuts themselves on Tuesday.</p>
<p>While Mayfield’s lack of ideal size remains a concern (at least for some) when projecting to the NFL, his late arrival will not be. Senior Bowl executive (and former Cleveland Browns general manager) <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Phil_Savage/" type="external">Phil Savage</a> announced to the NFL personnel and media who attended the weigh-in early Tuesday morning that Mayfield would arrive late due to a family issue on Sunday, delaying his flight.</p>
<p>Mayfield’s height, weight, hand size, arm length and wingspan will be measured and distributed to scouts Wednesday morning.</p>
<p>Among other notable observations from Tuesday’s North practice:</p>
<p>–Allen provided the same helter-skelter play that characterized his career with the Cowboys, delivering some of the prettiest passes of the day but following soon after with misfires in which he and his new teammates at receiver were clearly not on the same page. Scouts do not expect Allen to be as polished as Mayfield (or Falk, for that matter) and if he shows improvement throughout the week of practice, as expected, his status as a first-round pick — and perhaps very early one — will be cemented.</p>
<p>–Falk also showed good accuracy on most of his throws but his lack of top-notch velocity was all-too apparent in comparison, at least in comparison to Mayfield and Allen. One particular throw to the left sideline intended for Penn State tight end Mike Gesicki showed the wind-up and average RPMs that should concern scouts when projecting Falk to the NFL — with Hawaii safety Trayvon Henderson making a terrific break on the ball, nearly intercepting the throw.</p>
<p>–While Allen was erratic at quarterback, two other former Mountain West stars enjoyed solid Senior Bowl debuts with Boise State’s Wilson and Colorado State’s Michael Gallup showing the body control to gain separation as well as soft hands to pluck outside of their frame. Unfortunately, Tuesday’s practice was not as kind to Iowa State’s Allen Lazard, who possesses an imposing frame for a split end at 6-foot-4, 227-pounds but he dropped a couple of passes that left scouts in the stands grumbling.</p>
<p>–Among running backs, North Carolina State’s Jaylen Samuels (5-11, 224) provided the highlights, showing burst to and through the hole to break what would have been a long run up the middle on one play and leaving linebackers in his dust with quick stutter-steps as a route-runner on others.</p>
<p>–Boston College cornerback Isaac Yiadom was one of the few to get the better of Mayfield, showing excellent awareness of the ball (and all of his 32 1/4-inch arms) to slap away a well-thrown deep ball down the right sideline to Miami wideout Braxton Berrios. West Virginia safety Kyzir White also enjoyed a splashy debut, recording an interception late in the practice.</p>
<p>–On the injury front, Western Michigan cornerback Darius Phillips was seen walking off the field with a trainer midway through practice. His status for the remainder of the practice week or Saturday’s game was not immediately clear.</p> | false | 1 | mobile ala unlike rest players auditioning hundreds nfl scouts coaches senior bowl baker mayfield arrive weekend participate tuesdays weighins reigning heisman trophy winner arrive however quickly put rest doubts ability make jump big 12 nfl delivering sparkling debut similar one carson wentz enjoyed two years ago laddpeebles stadium taking snaps center well shotgun lining opposite bigger prototypical quarterbacks like wyomings rocketarmed 6foot5 237pound josh allen washington states luke falk pac12s alltime leading passer mayfield stole spotlight leaving doubt top signalcaller years senior bowl mayfield delivered strikes levels field zipping underneath passes running backs showing perfect trajectory would long touchdowns despite tight coverage boise state wide receiver cedrick wilson central michigan tight end tyler conklin course one keeping score early scrimmages oneonone practices except maybe scouts stands included key decisionmakers cleveland browns including new general manager john dorsey new york giants including general manager dave gettleman new head coach pat shurmur course broncos gm hall fame quarterback john elway owners 1 2 5 overall picks 2018 draft thought considering taking quarterback first selection broncos head coach vance joseph sound overly concerned mayfields belowaverage height think thats fine joseph said via denver post asked mayfields height watch drew brees play hes figured hes successful quarterback guys figure good players figure wouldnt concerned mayfield threw ball well confidence bravado made lightning rod oklahoma literally slapping behind multiple occasions broncos coach served center racing ahead quarterbacks drills providing buzz stands frankly exist south teams practice earlier day good mayfield perfect snap denver assistant coach repeatedly shouted heres game signify final play oneonones mayfields throw notre dame tight end durham smythe failed connect though fairness due great break ball texas aampm safety armani watts one several north defensive backs enjoyed strong debuts tuesday mayfields lack ideal size remains concern least projecting nfl late arrival senior bowl executive former cleveland browns general manager phil savage announced nfl personnel media attended weighin early tuesday morning mayfield would arrive late due family issue sunday delaying flight mayfields height weight hand size arm length wingspan measured distributed scouts wednesday morning among notable observations tuesdays north practice allen provided helterskelter play characterized career cowboys delivering prettiest passes day following soon misfires new teammates receiver clearly page scouts expect allen polished mayfield falk matter shows improvement throughout week practice expected status firstround pick perhaps early one cemented falk also showed good accuracy throws lack topnotch velocity alltoo apparent comparison least comparison mayfield allen one particular throw left sideline intended penn state tight end mike gesicki showed windup average rpms concern scouts projecting falk nfl hawaii safety trayvon henderson making terrific break ball nearly intercepting throw allen erratic quarterback two former mountain west stars enjoyed solid senior bowl debuts boise states wilson colorado states michael gallup showing body control gain separation well soft hands pluck outside frame unfortunately tuesdays practice kind iowa states allen lazard possesses imposing frame split end 6foot4 227pounds dropped couple passes left scouts stands grumbling among running backs north carolina states jaylen samuels 511 224 provided highlights showing burst hole break would long run middle one play leaving linebackers dust quick stuttersteps routerunner others boston college cornerback isaac yiadom one get better mayfield showing excellent awareness ball 32 14inch arms slap away wellthrown deep ball right sideline miami wideout braxton berrios west virginia safety kyzir white also enjoyed splashy debut recording interception late practice injury front western michigan cornerback darius phillips seen walking field trainer midway practice status remainder practice week saturdays game immediately clear | 577 |
<p>At last Tuesday’s debate among the Republican presidential candidates, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and former U.S. senator Rick Santorum both <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2791642/posts" type="external">mentioned</a>&#160;that repeal of Obamacare could be accomplished through the special budgetary procedure known as “reconciliation” (see this <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/10/12/mitt-romney-commits-to-repealing-obamacare-via-reconciliation/" type="external">video clip</a>&#160;of the debate exchange, courtesy of Avik Roy’s enlightening Forbes.com post on the subject). This bit of Washington inside baseball was unusual in a presidential-debate setting; most of those in the audience watching at home probably have no earthly idea what the budget-reconciliation process is, nor should they. But in the long fight over Obamacare, what Romney and Santorum said about the use of reconciliation is a crucially important point that has the potential to dramatically affect the future of American health care.</p>
<p>First, what is “reconciliation”? Reconciliation is a special legislative process established by Congress to provide for expedited consideration of important budgetary legislation. The “expedited” designation is particularly important in the Senate. Most legislation of any consequence requires 60 votes in the Senate to pass, as that is the normal number needed to shut off debate (called “cloture”) when a determined minority is willing to stage an indefinite filibuster. But reconciliation bills can be debated only for a certain number of hours before the measure goes to a final vote. In other words, a reconciliation bill cannot be filibustered—and therefore can pass in the Senate with a simple majority, normally 51 votes, when all time for debate has expired.</p>
<p>Fast-forward now to 2013. If, in the 2012 election, Republicans are able to maintain control of the House, pick up the majority in the Senate (a real possibility) but not a 60-vote supermajority, and win the White House (looking more possible by the day), the GOP would be in position to set in motion a reconciliation bill to repeal and replace Obamacare—and they wouldn’t need any Democratic cooperation to make it happen. The fact that leading Republican presidential candidates have now said that reconciliation is an option is a big deal, as it makes it very clear to all concerned that there is a clear path to victory for Obamacare opponents.</p>
<p>Seeing the threat that the reconciliation option could pose, Obamacare’s apologists <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/10/will_romney_be_able_to_carry_o.html" type="external">have responded</a>&#160;by suggesting it would be the height of cynical partisanship for Republicans to undo Obamacare in this fashion, since reconciliation supposedly played only a minor role in the enactment of Obamacare. Obamacare’s defenders also claim that, in any event, the GOP may not be able to pull it off because some aspects of Obamacare are non-budgetary and therefore aren’t eligible for repeal in a reconciliation measure, which is supposed to deal exclusively with budgetary matters. Sen. Kent Conrad, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, took the argument further <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/187159-conrad-gop-would-be-misusing-reconciliation-to-repeal-health-law?utm_campaign=hillhealthwatch&amp;utm_source=twitterfeed&amp;utm_medium=twitter" type="external">and said</a>&#160;that using reconciliation for repeal would be inappropriate because reconciliation is supposed to be used for deficit-cutting efforts—and Obamacare’s full repeal would increase the deficit, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).</p>
<p>As usual, there’s a lot of smoke and misdirection in these arguments, and not much clarity.</p>
<p>For starters, it seems that some might need a refresher course on the history of Obamacare’s enactment. Reconciliation didn’t play a small role in Obamacare’s passage, as has been suggested. Without reconciliation, Obamacare would not have become law at all. It’s true that the main Obamacare structure was passed by the Senate in December 2009 under normal rules for legislative consideration. That’s because Democrats at that time had 60 votes (including two independent senators who caucus with them). They didn’t need to resort to reconciliation to pass the bill as long as all 60 of their senators stuck together and supported passage, which they did.</p>
<p>But then Scott Brown won the Massachusetts Senate race in January 2010; the Democrats lost their 60-vote supermajority and could no longer close off debate on legislation without the help of at least one Republican senator.</p>
<p>At that point, the president and his allies had two choices. They could compromise with Republicans and bring back a bill to the Senate that could garner a large bipartisan majority. Or they could ignore the election results in Massachusetts and pull an unprecedented legislative maneuver, essentially switching from regular order to reconciliation at the eleventh hour, thereby bypassing any need for Republican support. As they had done at every other step in the process, the Democrats chose the partisan route. They created a separate bill, with scores and scores of legislative changes that essentially became the vehicle for a House-Senate conference on the legislation. That bill was designated a reconciliation bill. Then they passed the original Senate bill through the House on the explicit promise that it would be immediately amended by this highly unusual reconciliation bill, which then passed both the House and Senate a few days later, on an entirely party-line vote.</p>
<p>So what goes around, comes around. Obamacare is in law—with all of its trillion-dollar spending and taxes now part of CBO’s “baseline” budget projections. Reconciliation was created for the express purpose of giving Congress an expedited process for making changes to just this kind of spending and tax policy. Obamacare is thus a very ripe target for budget cutting, and that means reconciliation.</p>
<p>It’s true that Obamacare includes some provisions that, on their own, might be considered non-budgetary, but not nearly as many as some may think. The entire machinery of the coverage provisions—the individual mandate, the Medicaid expansion, the employer requirements—is entirely fueled by federal money (in the form of both subsidies and penalties). Moreover, the state exchanges and the regulatory apparatus they are intended to impose are also financed by federal taxpayers. Repeal of all of these provisions, which are the guts of Obamacare, is plainly a budgetary matter, and therefore appropriate in reconciliation. For the rest, creative legislative drafting can solve many problems. Senator Conrad’s contention that Obamacare shouldn’t be repealed in reconciliation because Obamacare reduces, not increases, the budget deficit doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. For starters, the <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/AmendReconProp.pdf" type="external">supposed deficit reduction originally found by CBO</a>&#160;is vanishing rapidly. In the original cost estimate, CBO said the health-related provisions of Obamacare would reduce the deficit by $124 billion over ten years. Of that, $70 billion was supposed to come from an initial “surplus” of premiums paid into a voluntary long-term care insurance program, called “CLASS” (Community Living Assistance Services and Supports). Opponents said all along that this was a budget gimmick of the worst kind—which the Obama administration now implicitly admits, because they themselves have <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/white-house-kills-class/2011/10/14/gIQA15zWkL_blog.html" type="external">pulled the plug on the program</a>. There will be no CLASS surplus, or a CLASS program at all. So there goes more than half of the supposed ten-year deficit reduction from Obamacare.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Treasury’s inspector general tells us the tax collection from the so-called “tanning tax” is also <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-13/tanning-tax-income-pales-in-comparison-to-estimates-audit-finds.html" type="external">coming in way under projections</a>. Throw in the fact that the high-risk pools are massively underfunded, the Medicare cuts are unrealistic, and the employer dumping will far exceed what CBO projected, and you have a budget buster of enormous proportions.</p>
<p>But even if CBO continues to play along with the Obamacare-as-deficit-cutter fairy tale, that still doesn’t preclude Congress from repealing it in reconciliation. All the House and Senate would have to do is couple repeal with some strategic cuts in spending (including, perhaps, retention of some cuts that were enacted in Obamacare itself). The total package would then be estimated to cut the deficit and therefore fall well within the normal boundaries of a reconciliation bill.</p>
<p>Obamacare was jammed through Congress against the wishes of a majority of the electorate. Voters took it out on those controlling Congress in the 2010 midterm election, which was a Republican rout of historic magnitude. The opposition to Obamacare remains just as strong today as it was last year, which means the 2012 election could produce a similar result. Except that, unlike 2010, in the aftermath of the coming election there could very well be a straightforward and unimpeded path for delivering on repeal and replace, as the voters are demanding.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He was an associate director at the Office of Management and Budget from 2001 to 2004.</p> | false | 1 | last tuesdays debate among republican presidential candidates former massachusetts governor mitt romney former us senator rick santorum mentioned160that repeal obamacare could accomplished special budgetary procedure known reconciliation see video clip160of debate exchange courtesy avik roys enlightening forbescom post subject bit washington inside baseball unusual presidentialdebate setting audience watching home probably earthly idea budgetreconciliation process long fight obamacare romney santorum said use reconciliation crucially important point potential dramatically affect future american health care first reconciliation reconciliation special legislative process established congress provide expedited consideration important budgetary legislation expedited designation particularly important senate legislation consequence requires 60 votes senate pass normal number needed shut debate called cloture determined minority willing stage indefinite filibuster reconciliation bills debated certain number hours measure goes final vote words reconciliation bill filibusteredand therefore pass senate simple majority normally 51 votes time debate expired fastforward 2013 2012 election republicans able maintain control house pick majority senate real possibility 60vote supermajority win white house looking possible day gop would position set motion reconciliation bill repeal replace obamacareand wouldnt need democratic cooperation make happen fact leading republican presidential candidates said reconciliation option big deal makes clear concerned clear path victory obamacare opponents seeing threat reconciliation option could pose obamacares apologists responded160by suggesting would height cynical partisanship republicans undo obamacare fashion since reconciliation supposedly played minor role enactment obamacare obamacares defenders also claim event gop may able pull aspects obamacare nonbudgetary therefore arent eligible repeal reconciliation measure supposed deal exclusively budgetary matters sen kent conrad democratic chairman senate budget committee took argument said160that using reconciliation repeal would inappropriate reconciliation supposed used deficitcutting effortsand obamacares full repeal would increase deficit according congressional budget office cbo usual theres lot smoke misdirection arguments much clarity starters seems might need refresher course history obamacares enactment reconciliation didnt play small role obamacares passage suggested without reconciliation obamacare would become law true main obamacare structure passed senate december 2009 normal rules legislative consideration thats democrats time 60 votes including two independent senators caucus didnt need resort reconciliation pass bill long 60 senators stuck together supported passage scott brown massachusetts senate race january 2010 democrats lost 60vote supermajority could longer close debate legislation without help least one republican senator point president allies two choices could compromise republicans bring back bill senate could garner large bipartisan majority could ignore election results massachusetts pull unprecedented legislative maneuver essentially switching regular order reconciliation eleventh hour thereby bypassing need republican support done every step process democrats chose partisan route created separate bill scores scores legislative changes essentially became vehicle housesenate conference legislation bill designated reconciliation bill passed original senate bill house explicit promise would immediately amended highly unusual reconciliation bill passed house senate days later entirely partyline vote goes around comes around obamacare lawwith trilliondollar spending taxes part cbos baseline budget projections reconciliation created express purpose giving congress expedited process making changes kind spending tax policy obamacare thus ripe target budget cutting means reconciliation true obamacare includes provisions might considered nonbudgetary nearly many may think entire machinery coverage provisionsthe individual mandate medicaid expansion employer requirementsis entirely fueled federal money form subsidies penalties moreover state exchanges regulatory apparatus intended impose also financed federal taxpayers repeal provisions guts obamacare plainly budgetary matter therefore appropriate reconciliation rest creative legislative drafting solve many problems senator conrads contention obamacare shouldnt repealed reconciliation obamacare reduces increases budget deficit doesnt stand scrutiny starters supposed deficit reduction originally found cbo160is vanishing rapidly original cost estimate cbo said healthrelated provisions obamacare would reduce deficit 124 billion ten years 70 billion supposed come initial surplus premiums paid voluntary longterm care insurance program called class community living assistance services supports opponents said along budget gimmick worst kindwhich obama administration implicitly admits pulled plug program class surplus class program goes half supposed tenyear deficit reduction obamacare meanwhile treasurys inspector general tells us tax collection socalled tanning tax also coming way projections throw fact highrisk pools massively underfunded medicare cuts unrealistic employer dumping far exceed cbo projected budget buster enormous proportions even cbo continues play along obamacareasdeficitcutter fairy tale still doesnt preclude congress repealing reconciliation house senate would couple repeal strategic cuts spending including perhaps retention cuts enacted obamacare total package would estimated cut deficit therefore fall well within normal boundaries reconciliation bill obamacare jammed congress wishes majority electorate voters took controlling congress 2010 midterm election republican rout historic magnitude opposition obamacare remains strong today last year means 2012 election could produce similar result except unlike 2010 aftermath coming election could well straightforward unimpeded path delivering repeal replace voters demanding james c capretta fellow ethics public policy center associate director office management budget 2001 2004 | 760 |
<p>He once described his high-school years as a time in which he was “completely absorbed” by a passion for the theater. So it was fitting that Karol Jozef Wojtyla lived a very dramatic life. As a young man, he risked summary execution by leading clandestine acts of cultural resistance to the Nazi occupation of Poland. As a fledgling priest, he adopted a Stalin-era nom de guerre–Wujek, “uncle”–while creating zones of intellectual and spiritual freedom for college students; those students, now older men and women themselves, called him Wujek to the end. As archbishop of Krakow, he successfully fought the attempt by Poland’s communist overseers to erase the nation’s cultural memory. As Pope John Paul II, he came back to Poland in June 1979; and over nine days during which the history of the 20th century pivoted, he ignited a revolution of conscience that helped make possible the collapse of European communism a decade later.</p>
<p>The world will remember the drama of this life in the days ahead, even as it measures John Paul II’s many other accomplishments: his transformation of the papacy from a managerial office to one of evangelical witness; his voluminous teaching, touching virtually every aspect of contemporary life; his dogged pursuit of Christian unity; his success in blocking the Clinton administration’s efforts to have abortion-on-demand declared a basic human right; his remarkable magnetism for young people; his groundbreaking initiatives with Judaism; his robust defense of religious freedom as the first of human rights.</p>
<p>And, in the remembering, certain unforgettable images will come to mind: the young Pope bouncing infants in the air and the old Pope bowed in remembrance over the memorial flame at Yad Vashem, Jerusalem’s Holocaust memorial; the Pope wearing a Kenyan tribal chieftain’s feathered crown, the Pope waving his papal cross in defiance of Sandinista demonstrators in Managua, the Pope skiing, the Pope lost in prayer in countless venues; the Pope kneeling at the grave of murdered Solidarity chaplain Jerzy Popieluszko, the Pope slumped in pain in the Popemobile, seconds after taking two shots from a 9mm semi-automatic–and the Pope counseling and encouraging the would-be assassin in his Roman prison cell.</p>
<p>Some will dismiss him as hopelessly “conservative” in matters of doctrine and morals, although it is not clear how religious and moral truth can be parsed in liberal/conservative terms. The shadows cast upon his papacy by clerical scandal and the misgovernance of some bishops will focus others’ attention. John Paul II was the most visible human being in history, having been seen live by more men and women than any other man who ever lived; the remarkable thing is that millions of those people, who saw him only at a great distance, will think they have lost a friend. Those who knew him more intimately experience today a profound sense of personal loss at the death of a man who was so wonderfully, thoroughly, engagingly human–a man of intelligence and wit and courage whose humanity breathed integrity and sanctity.</p>
<p>So there are many ways of remembering and mourning him. Pope John Paul II should also be remembered, however, as a man with a penetrating insight into the currents that flow beneath the surface of history, currents that in fact create history, often in surprising ways.</p>
<p>In a 1968 letter to the French Jesuit theologian, Henri de Lubac, then-Cardinal Karol Wojtyla suggested that “a degradation, indeed a pulverization, of the fundamental uniqueness of each human person” was at the root of the 20th century’s grim record: two World Wars, Auschwitz and the Gulag, a Cold War threatening global disaster, oceans of blood and mountains of corpses. How had a century begun with such high hopes for the human future produced mankind’s greatest catastrophes? Because, Karol Wojtyla proposed, Western humanism had gone off the rails, collapsing into forms of self-absorption, and then self-doubt, so severe that men and women had begun to wonder whether there was any truth at all to be found in the world, or in themselves.</p>
<p>This profound crisis of culture, this crisis in the very idea of the human, had manifested itself in the serial crises that had marched across the surface of contemporary history, leaving carnage in their wake. But unlike some truly “conservative” critics of late modernity, Wojtyla’s counter-proposal was not rollback: rather, it was a truer, nobler humanism, built on the foundation of the biblical conviction that God had made the human creature in His image and likeness, with intelligence and free will, a creature capable of knowing the good and freely choosing it. That, John Paul II insisted in a vast number of variations on one great theme, was the true measure of man–the human capacity, in cooperation with God’s grace, for heroic virtue.</p>
<p>Here was an idea with consequences, and the Pope applied it to effect across a broad spectrum of issues.</p>
<p>One variant form of debased humanism was the notion that “history” is driven by the politics of willfulness (the Jacobin heresy) or by economics (the Marxist heresy). During his epic pilgrimage to Poland in June 1979, at a moment when “history” seemed frozen and Europe permanently divided into hostile camps, John Paul II demonstrated that “history” worked differently, because human beings aren’t just the by-products of politics or economics. He gave back to his people their authentic history and culture–their identity; and in doing so, he gave them tools of resistance that communist truncheons could not reach. Fourteen months after teaching that great lesson in dignity, the Pope watched and guided the emergence of Solidarity. And then the entire world began to see the communist tide recede, like the slow retreat of a plague.</p>
<p>After the Cold War, when more than a few analysts and politicians were in a state of barely restrained euphoria, imagining a golden age of inevitable progress for the cause of political and economic freedom, John Paul II saw more deeply and clearly. He quickly decoded new threats to what he had called, in that 1968 letter to Father de Lubac, the “inviolable mystery of the human person,” and so he spent much of the 1990s explaining that freedom untethered from moral truth risks self-destruction.</p>
<p>For if there is only your truth and my truth and neither one of us recognizes a transcendent moral standard (call it “the truth”) by which to settle our differences, then either you will impose your power on me or I will impose my power on you; Nietszche, great, mad prophet of the 20th century, got at least that right. Freedom uncoupled from truth, John Paul taught, leads to chaos and thence to new forms of tyranny. For, in the face of chaos (or fear), raw power will inexorably replace persuasion, compromise, and agreement as the coin of the political realm. The false humanism of freedom misconstrued as “I did it my way” inevitably leads to freedom’s decay, and then to freedom’s self-cannibalization. This was not the soured warning of an antimodern scold; this was the sage counsel of a man who had given his life to freedom’s cause from 1939 on.</p>
<p>Thus the key to the freedom project in the 21st century, John Paul urged, lay in the realm of culture: in vibrant public moral cultures capable of disciplining and directing the tremendous energies–economic, political, aesthetic, and, yes, sexual–set loose in free societies. A vibrant public moral culture is essential for democracy and the market, for only such a culture can inculcate and affirm the virtues necessary to make freedom work. Democracy and the free economy, he taught in his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus, are goods; but they are not machines that can cheerfully run by themselves. Building the free society certainly involves getting the institutions right; beyond that, however, freedom’s future depends on men and women of virtue, capable of knowing, and choosing, the genuinely good.</p>
<p>That is why John Paul relentlessly preached genuine tolerance: not the tolerance of indifference, as if differences over the good didn’t matter, but the real tolerance of differences engaged, explored, and debated within the bond of a profound respect for the humanity of the other. Many were puzzled that this Pope, so vigorous in defending the truths of Catholic faith, could become, over a quarter-century, the world’s premier icon of religious freedom and inter-religious civility. But here, too, John Paul II was teaching a crucial lesson about the future of freedom: Universal empathy comes through, not around, particular convictions. There is no Rawlsian veil of ignorance behind which the world can withdraw, to subsequently emerge with decency in its pocket.</p>
<p>There is only history. But that history, the Pope believed, is the story of God’s quest for man, and man then taking the same path as God. “History” is His-story. Believing that, Karol Józef Wojtyla, Pope John Paul II, changed history. The power of his belief empowered millions of others to do the same.</p>
<p>George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C. and holds EPPC’s William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.</p> | false | 1 | described highschool years time completely absorbed passion theater fitting karol jozef wojtyla lived dramatic life young man risked summary execution leading clandestine acts cultural resistance nazi occupation poland fledgling priest adopted stalinera nom de guerrewujek unclewhile creating zones intellectual spiritual freedom college students students older men women called wujek end archbishop krakow successfully fought attempt polands communist overseers erase nations cultural memory pope john paul ii came back poland june 1979 nine days history 20th century pivoted ignited revolution conscience helped make possible collapse european communism decade later world remember drama life days ahead even measures john paul iis many accomplishments transformation papacy managerial office one evangelical witness voluminous teaching touching virtually every aspect contemporary life dogged pursuit christian unity success blocking clinton administrations efforts abortionondemand declared basic human right remarkable magnetism young people groundbreaking initiatives judaism robust defense religious freedom first human rights remembering certain unforgettable images come mind young pope bouncing infants air old pope bowed remembrance memorial flame yad vashem jerusalems holocaust memorial pope wearing kenyan tribal chieftains feathered crown pope waving papal cross defiance sandinista demonstrators managua pope skiing pope lost prayer countless venues pope kneeling grave murdered solidarity chaplain jerzy popieluszko pope slumped pain popemobile seconds taking two shots 9mm semiautomaticand pope counseling encouraging wouldbe assassin roman prison cell dismiss hopelessly conservative matters doctrine morals although clear religious moral truth parsed liberalconservative terms shadows cast upon papacy clerical scandal misgovernance bishops focus others attention john paul ii visible human history seen live men women man ever lived remarkable thing millions people saw great distance think lost friend knew intimately experience today profound sense personal loss death man wonderfully thoroughly engagingly humana man intelligence wit courage whose humanity breathed integrity sanctity many ways remembering mourning pope john paul ii also remembered however man penetrating insight currents flow beneath surface history currents fact create history often surprising ways 1968 letter french jesuit theologian henri de lubac thencardinal karol wojtyla suggested degradation indeed pulverization fundamental uniqueness human person root 20th centurys grim record two world wars auschwitz gulag cold war threatening global disaster oceans blood mountains corpses century begun high hopes human future produced mankinds greatest catastrophes karol wojtyla proposed western humanism gone rails collapsing forms selfabsorption selfdoubt severe men women begun wonder whether truth found world profound crisis culture crisis idea human manifested serial crises marched across surface contemporary history leaving carnage wake unlike truly conservative critics late modernity wojtylas counterproposal rollback rather truer nobler humanism built foundation biblical conviction god made human creature image likeness intelligence free creature capable knowing good freely choosing john paul ii insisted vast number variations one great theme true measure manthe human capacity cooperation gods grace heroic virtue idea consequences pope applied effect across broad spectrum issues one variant form debased humanism notion history driven politics willfulness jacobin heresy economics marxist heresy epic pilgrimage poland june 1979 moment history seemed frozen europe permanently divided hostile camps john paul ii demonstrated history worked differently human beings arent byproducts politics economics gave back people authentic history culturetheir identity gave tools resistance communist truncheons could reach fourteen months teaching great lesson dignity pope watched guided emergence solidarity entire world began see communist tide recede like slow retreat plague cold war analysts politicians state barely restrained euphoria imagining golden age inevitable progress cause political economic freedom john paul ii saw deeply clearly quickly decoded new threats called 1968 letter father de lubac inviolable mystery human person spent much 1990s explaining freedom untethered moral truth risks selfdestruction truth truth neither one us recognizes transcendent moral standard call truth settle differences either impose power impose power nietszche great mad prophet 20th century got least right freedom uncoupled truth john paul taught leads chaos thence new forms tyranny face chaos fear raw power inexorably replace persuasion compromise agreement coin political realm false humanism freedom misconstrued way inevitably leads freedoms decay freedoms selfcannibalization soured warning antimodern scold sage counsel man given life freedoms cause 1939 thus key freedom project 21st century john paul urged lay realm culture vibrant public moral cultures capable disciplining directing tremendous energieseconomic political aesthetic yes sexualset loose free societies vibrant public moral culture essential democracy market culture inculcate affirm virtues necessary make freedom work democracy free economy taught 1991 encyclical centesimus annus goods machines cheerfully run building free society certainly involves getting institutions right beyond however freedoms future depends men women virtue capable knowing choosing genuinely good john paul relentlessly preached genuine tolerance tolerance indifference differences good didnt matter real tolerance differences engaged explored debated within bond profound respect humanity many puzzled pope vigorous defending truths catholic faith could become quartercentury worlds premier icon religious freedom interreligious civility john paul ii teaching crucial lesson future freedom universal empathy comes around particular convictions rawlsian veil ignorance behind world withdraw subsequently emerge decency pocket history history pope believed story gods quest man man taking path god history hisstory believing karol józef wojtyla pope john paul ii changed history power belief empowered millions others george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center washington dc holds eppcs william e simon chair catholic studies | 845 |
<p>Since the Supreme Court handed down its historic Roe decision in 1973, the debate about abortion has been conducted primarily on two levels: legal and moral. Recently, the debate has moved to a third level, as defenders of legal abortion have added a new twist: pragmatic, utilitarian arguments regarding the alleged social benefit of terminating pregnancies. One highly publicized study, released last September by a prominent legal theorist and a university economist, suggests that legal abortions in the 1970s are responsible for lowering the crime rate in the 1990s.1</p>
<p>Opponents of abortion are understandably cautious about being drawn into this kind of exchange. As they have long argued, the main point of laws against the taking of human life is that each person is unique, and unrepeatable creation. Utilitarian arguments essentially hinge on the notion that people are interchangeable or even that some people (or some things) are more important than other people. Therefore, the moral and legal arguments will, and should, remain paramount. At the same time, those who oppose legal abortion should welcome this new phase of the discussion. The utilitarian arguments in favor of abortion, though well publicized, are miserably weak. Furthermore, the profound social and economic changes set in motion by legalized abortion — changes which will steadily mushroom as long as abortion continues — provide practical, empirical reasons for seeking a reversal of Roe v. Wade.</p>
<p>After nearly thirty years, the data suggest that abortion has been anything but good for the United States. By reducing the size of the population, abortion has correspondingly reduced the size of the economy; over time, it will undercut one main cause of the American economy’s current dynamism: innovation. By contributing to a sharp drop in the net marriage rate, legalized abortion has already reduced the standard of living of the average American household. Legalized abortion is also single-handedly responsible for anticipated imbalances in the Social Security retirement system (see sidebar, back cover). Taken in its entirety, legal abortion is perhaps the single largest American economic event of the past century, more significant than the Great Depression or the Second World War. Tracing the extent of this impact demonstrates that, had abortion remained illegal, the American population would be significantly larger, it would contain a larger share of intact marriages and two-parent families, and average living standards would be higher. In addition, the analysis warns that if it continues unchecked, legal abortion will progressively erode both America’s relative economic importance and her average absolute standard of living.</p>
<p>Downsizing the Population</p>
<p>A review of the number of abortions relative to the population is the first step to understanding the social and economic consequences of legal abortion. Because several states had liberalized their abortion laws in the late 1960s, the annual number of abortions in the United States had reached almost 200,000 by 1970.2 In 1973, the year Roe v. Wade was decided, some 744,600 legal abortions were reported. The number more than doubled to 1,553,900 in 1980 and hit an absolute peak of 1,608,600 in 1990 before declining to 1,365,700 in 1996.3 The 1996 figure represented 26.1 percent of conceptions (legal abortions and live births), down from a peak of about 30 percent in the early 1980s.</p>
<p>Assuming that abortions have continued at the same rate since 1996, a cumulative total of at least 39.7 million legal abortions have been “performed” in America from the late 1960s through 1999. If all these abortions had instead been live births of children who lived normal lives, the population (taking into account the small fraction of natural deaths that might have been expected) would today be about 38.9 million — or 14 percent — larger than the actual population of 275 million.4</p>
<p>Estimating the impact of abortion on the population is more complex, however, for two reasons. First, counting only the number of abortions ignores the fact that an abortion not only prevents a child from being born, but also removes all of his or her children, grandchildren, and more remote descendants. Since the country has already entered the second generation of legalized abortion, the potential offspring of aborted children need to be added to the calculation. The oldest among the 38.9 million aborted children would already have had about 6.5 million surviving children. That would have increased the American population to about 320 million people.</p>
<p>Bur this introduces the second complication. Assuming that all pregnancies that actually did occur would have occurred — and would have resulted in live births — ignores the profound behavioral changes brought about by legal abortion. The legalization of abortion did far more than simply grant women an option that they did not have before. As George A. Akerlof and Janet L. Yellen of the Brookings Institution write, it contributed to a retreat from marriage: “Although many observers expected liberalized abortion and contraception to lead to fewer out-of wedlock births, in fact the opposite happened [particularly] because of the erosion of the custom of ‘shotgun marriages.'”5 By making the birth of a child the physical choice of the mother, Akerlof and Yellen point out, the legalization of abortion had the unanticipated result of making acceptance of the responsibilities of marriage and child support also a choice of the father, not the ordinary consequence. While the number and rate of abortions soared and the live birth rate declined immediately, over time the number and proportion of both out-of-wedlock pregnancies and out-or-wedlock births also rose sharply.</p>
<p>The loosening of divorce laws and restraints on contraception at about the same time as abortion was legalized seems to make sorting cause from effect difficult. But the driving role of legal abortion is clear when the rise in the abortion rate is compared with the net marriage rate (the marriage rate minus the divorce rate): the net marriage rate fell by 35 percent between 1968 and 1976, exactly the period of the most rapid increase of the abortion rate and decline of the live birth rate. Since 1976, the net marriage rare has fallen an additional 4 percent compared with the rate in 1968.6</p>
<p>Excluding miscarriages (for which data are not available before 1976, but which occur in about 13 percent of all pregnancies), 91 percent of conceptions in 1967 resulted in live births to married women, the remaining 9 percent being live births to unmarried women. By 1980, the percentage dropped to less than 60 percent; by 1995 only 52 percent of pregnancies resulted in live births to married women. Before 1980, most of the decline of live births was the result of legal abortions. About 84 percent of abortions are induced upon women who are not married.7 But over time, the number of live births to unmarried women has also risen, from 339,000 to 1,257,000 between 1967 and 1997; the proportion of pregnancies resulting in live births to unmarried mothers rose from 9 percent to 23.8 percent between 1967 and 1996.8 Thus, the proportion of pregnancies resulting in live births or legal abortions to unmarried women rose from 9 percent to 45.8 percent between 1967 and 1996.</p>
<p>Recent research confirms Akerlof and Yellens surmise that legal abortion affected these trends by bringing about the decline of the “shotgun marriage.” A 1999 survey of women who were fifteen to twenty-nine years old when they first gave birth reveals that between 1960 and 1964, 10.3 percent of first births were premarital. The rest were born to married women; 15.5 percent were conceived before marriage and 74.3 percent were conceived after marriage. Between 1975 and 1979, 25.7 percent of first births were premarital: 12.0 percent conceived before marriage and 62.2 percent conceived after marriage. Between 1990 and 1994, 40.5 percent of first births were premarital; 12.3 percent were conceived before while 47.2 percent conceived after marriage. This indicates that among women who became pregnant before marriage, the share marrying before birth dropped from 60.0 percent in the early 1960s to 31.8 percent in the late 1970s and to only 23.3 percent in the early 1990s.9</p>
<p>Abortion and Live Birth Rates</p>
<p>Legalized abortion, therefore, had two effects upon the live birth rate: it reduced the number of pregnancies resulting in live births, while contributing to an increase in pregnancies, mostly among unmarried women. The pregnancy rate of women of different ages fully reveals this two-fold legacy. Among teenagers, the pregnancy rate rose after the legalization of abortion to exceed the peak levels of the 1950s, the height of the baby boom. But while the average rate of conception for teenagers from 1975 through 1996 was 38.9 percent higher than it had been in 1967-68, the average rate of live births to teenagers fell by 18.4 percent. This suggests that less than one-third of the abortions of teenage mothers actually lowered the birth rate; more than two-thirds were the result of behavior changes associated with the legalization of abortion.</p>
<p>For older women, the average pregnancy rate between 1975 and 1996 was almost exactly the same as in 1967-68. For women twenty to twenty-nine years of age (the group with the highest rate of conception), the pregnancy rate remained at about the same level as in the late 1960s, while the live birth rate declined sharply, one-for-one with the rise of legal abortions. For women in their thirties, the live birth rate fell sharply until 1975, but has since recovered to about the 1967-68 average. Including legal abortions, the total pregnancy rate in this age group is at levels seen in the late 1940s and early 1960s, at the leading and trailing edges of the baby boom. For women in their forties, the total pregnancy rate initially fell below, but then recovered in the 1990s to about, the level of the late 1960s, so the live birth rate remains sharply lower.</p>
<p>Comparing the average for the years between 1975 and 1996 with 1967-68, about 32 percent of abortions among teenagers and 100 percent of abortions among women more than twenty years old reduced the live birth rate. Thus, on balance, about 83 percent of legal abortions reduced the number of live births. But comparing the 1967-68 average only with the most recent year, the net longer-term impact appears to be somewhat smaller. Comparing 1995 with 1967-68, the figures for teenagers are similar: 34.9 percent of abortions reduce live births. But for women more than twenty years old, the net impact of abortion on the live birth rate drops from 100 percent to 79.3 percent, as a result of the recovery of the birth rate among women in their thirties and the rise in births outside of wedlock. Thus, 70.6 percent of abortions reduced the live birth rate for all ages in 1995, compared with 1967-68.</p>
<p>The total fertility rate, a hypothetical measure of lifetime events per woman based on the experience of all women of childbearing age in a given year, puts these factors in perspective. The total fertility rate is usually based on live births, but also can be used to describe life-time pregnancies per woman including legal abortions. After peaking at about 3.7 live births per woman in the late 1950s, the total fertility rate dropped after the baby boom, but before legal abortion, to about 2.6 live births in 1967-68. The fertility rate including legal abortions continued to fluctuate around the same level, dipping to 2.34 in 1976 and then rising as high as 2.9 in the early 1990s. Counting only live births, the rate dropped from 2.6 in 1967-68 to a low of 1.7 in 1976, after which it recovered to just more than 2.0 in the 1990s. But the recovery was more than accounted for by the rise in out-of-wedlock births. The portion of the fertility rate accounted for by live births to married mothers dropped from 2.3 in 1967-68 to 1.5 in 1976 and then fell further to 1.4 in 1995. The portion of the total fertility rate accounted for by live births to unmarried mothers rose from 0.2 in 1967-68 to 0.7 in 1995.</p>
<p>This leads to a refinement of the preliminary estimate of the impact of abortion on the U.S. population. Though some 39.7 million abortions have been carried out since the late 1960s, the legalization of abortion decreased the number of live births by some 31.1 million since the 1960s, after taking behavioral changes into account. Allowing for the small number that could have been expected to die of natural causes, the net decrease comes to about 30.5 million. But the oldest among these could be expected to have given birth to 4.4 million surviving children. Therefore, if abortion had not been legalized, the U.S. population this year would be 35 million people larger — 310 million instead of 275 million. Put another way, three decades of abortion have reduced the U.S. population by 11.3 percent from what it would have been if abortion had not been legalized. The difference is larger than the population of Canada.</p>
<p>Future Population Growth</p>
<p>Estimating the impact of continued abortion on the future population requires estimating the number of future abortions. The absolute number is the product of the number of women in each age group and the behavior of women within each age group. The behavior of women in most age and social groups (except teenagers) shows a great deal of continuity, while the number of women in those groups can change quite a bit. If behavior in all age groups had remained unchanged, the absolute number of abortions would have leveled off from about 1980 through 2010 because the number of women of childbearing age will have been flat during this period. However, the total number of women of childbearing age should begin rising again after 2010, as the relatively small Generation X will be succeeded by what has been called the baby boom echo, which is about the same size as the baby boom generation. The number of women is also expected to increase because of immigration. Most of the drop in the rate of abortions since the mid-1990s has been among teenagers, but only one in three of the conceptions in this group actually affects the net number of live births. Among older women, for whom abortions have had two to three times as much impact on the net number of live births, the abortion rate has remained steady since the 1970s. Since the practice of abortion is likely to continue without some change in the law and in attitudes, the most reasonable forecast would seem to be to project the current abortion rate into the future.</p>
<p>According to the Census Bureau, the population will grow to about 394 million by 2050. Because the birth rate is currently close to the replacement rate — the birth rate that will ultimately result in a stable population — this increase is largely due to the assumption that immigration will continue at about 880,000 a year on top of the natural change in population due to births and deaths. If women in each age group continue to have abortions at the same rate as in 1995, the annual number of abortions, after having fallen below 1.5 million in 1994, will stay at about 1.4 million for several years, then rise again steadily to 1.5 million in about 2015, reaching about 1.8 million in the year 2050.</p>
<p>Under these assumptions, American women will have undergone about 120 million legal abortions between 1970 and 2050. Taking into account the behavioral changes brought about by legal abortion, abortion will have reduced the net number of live births by about 87 million, of whom 81 million could be expected to be living in 2050, along with 130 million surviving descendants. The cumulative reduction in U.S. population due to legal abortion will have reached about 211 million by the year 2050, more than three quarters the current population of the United States. In other words, the Census Bureau’s estimated population of 394 million in 2050 would represent a reduction of about 35 percent compared to what the population would be if abortion had not been legalized.</p>
<p>If Roe Had Been Decided in 1900</p>
<p>Because population projections are difficult to grasp, another method of assessing the socioeconomic impact of abortion is to consider how the country would look today if Roe v. Wade had been decided much earlier, say, in 1900, when the population was only 76 million. Assume that abortions occurred among each age group of women at the rate they did in 1995, except for those years in which the actual abortion rate was higher. Assume also that people were born, died, and migrated at the rates that actually occurred over the past century. Under these assumptions, the number of legal abortions would have started at just under a half million in 1900, since the number of women at the time was much smaller.</p>
<p>Beginning with a halt a million abortions in 1990, and counting for the lost offspring of aborted children, by 1930 the country would have reached a population of 110 million, instead of the actual 123 million. The difference of 13 million below the actual population equals the current size of New York City and Boston combined. The proportional reduction in population — 10.6 percent —&#160;would have been about the same as estimated earlier for the year 2000, three decades after the actual legalization of abortion. By 1950, the U.S. population would have been reduced by 21 percent or 31 million people; instead of reaching the actual 152 million, the population would have been only 121 million. By 1975, the loss to the population through abortion would have reached 75 million people or 35 percent of the actual population of 216 million. If abortion had not been legalized in 1973, the loss from abortion since 1900 would be even greater, about 78 million or 36 percent of an abortion-free population of 219 million. This seventy-five year estimate, from 1900 to 1975, is proportionally very similar to the earlier projection, using the Census Bureau’s population estimates, for the impact of actual abortions between 1970 and 2050.</p>
<p>Therefore, if abortion had been legalized for the entire century, the U.S. population would today stand at 156 million, 43 percent lower than the actual 275 million. That figure would represent a reduction in population of almost 50 percent from the no-abortion baseline of 311 million. Based on the Census Bureau’s middle population projection, by 2050, after 150 years of legal abortion, the U.S. population would be reduced by 69 percent compared with what the population would be if abortion had never been legalized. Roughly speaking, then, legal abortion cumulatively reduces the population by about 11 percent every generation.</p>
<p>As abortion has been practiced for just thirty years — not a full century — a population of 275 million people makes the United States the third most populous nation; only China, with a population of 1.3 billion, and India, with 1 billion people, are larger. Indonesia (219 million) and Brazil (178 million) rank fourth and fifth. However, had America started the deadly practice of abortion in 1900, her abortion-adjusted population of 156 million people today would rank only fifth, scarcely larger than Russia (146 million) and only two-fifths as large as the fifteen-nation European Union (375 million).</p>
<p>The Economic Impact</p>
<p>While the role of abortion in lowering the American population is clear, its role in weakening the economy may not be as clear. Economists of all stripes agree that, as a first approximation, the effect of population changes on the economy is approximately proportional. That is, if the population is reduced by 10 percent, the size of the economy will correspondingly be reduced by about 10 percent. No evidence suggests, in a modern economy at least, that a larger population has any adverse impact on per capita income. To the contrary, advanced countries with faster growing populations appear to have more rapidly increasing standards of living.10</p>
<p>What this means to abortion is revealing. Almost three decades of legal abortion have reduced the U.S. population by about 11 percent. Therefore, since total output and total income in the United States amounted to about $9.2 trillion in 1999, this figure represents a net loss of at least $1.17 trillion compared to what it would have been if the U.S. population had not been reduced by abortion. The difference, the current size of the economy of California, will continue to grow, as the proportional diminution of the economy due to abortion will more than triple over the next fifty years.</p>
<p>The absolute size of a nation’s economy, of course, depends not only on population, but also on average living standard. China and India, for example, have much larger populations than the United States, but much smaller economies. Measured in dollars with the same buying power, the U.S. gross national product in 1998 was twice as large as China’s economy and about five times as large as India’s.11 The reason: Chinas and India’s average living standards are far lower than that of the United States. But the effect of legal abortion is to reduce America’s relative economic importance by reducing the relative size of the population. Had it been legal for a century instead of three decades, abortion would have reduced the U.S. population by one-half instead of one-ninth. In that case, the U.S. economy would be about the same size of China’s, instead of twice as large.</p>
<p>A similar calculation can be applied to the relative economic importance of the United States and the newly formed European Union. Though the European Union represents a population of 375 million, its larger population is offset by a lower average living standard. The 1997 per capita gross domestic product (GDP) was $29,326 in the United States; $20,546 for the European Union. As a result, U.S. GDP in 1997 was $7.8 trillion, compared with $7.7 trillion for the European Union.12 If the U.S. population had not been reduced by 11 percent by three decades of legal abortion, the U.S. economy might have been as large as $8.8 trillion in 1997. If abortion had been practiced for a full century, the size of the U.S. economy would have been only $3.9 trillion in 1997, barely half the size of the economy of the European Union.</p>
<p>While economists agree about the long-term impact of population change on the size of the economy, they disagree as to how and when this comes about. Some economists hold to the neoclassical theory that most people are largely passive recipients of economic progress. In their view, the impact of the population on the economy comes about primarily through its effect on the size of the labor force. Taking the labor force as a given, they assume that output and income per worker are largely determined by the ratio of the stock of nonhuman capital (plant and equipment) to the number of workers and by advances in technology. According to this theory, a change in the population, brought about by a difference in the rate of live births, affects the economy only after a couple of decades, after the change in births translates into change in the size of the labor force. For example, the three-quarters of a million abortions that occurred in 1973 cut the annual growth of the labor force by up to 400,000 workers beginning in 1989. Now nearly one million fewer workers enter the labor force annually because ot abortions sixteen years earlier, which means fewer goods and services produced and information processed as well as less money earned.</p>
<p>Abortion’s Immediate Impact</p>
<p>Other economists argue that the impact of legal abortion on population triggers economic consequences much sooner than neoclassical economists think. Changes in the rate of real economic growth in the United States over the past seventy years closely paralleled changes in the fertility rate.13 Changes in fertility seem to cause changes in the economy immediately, not after a couple of decades. This newer “total capital” theory takes into consideration both nonhuman and human capital. This theory maintains that investments made (mostly by parents) in human capital — child rearing and education, health, safety, and mobility — add to output and income right away, long before those investments could possibly being to reap a return in the form of compensation earned after the children became adults and found employment for the skills in which the earlier investments had been made. This total capital model is more consistent with the U.S. economic boom from the late 1940s to the late 1960s, as well as with the sharp slowdown in the growth of output per worker that began in 1973. The model also helps explain the re-acceleration of the economy in the 1990s, which has coincided with rising birth rates. Other factors are at work, of course, but the relationship works both ways. A larger population does not merely represent so many new mouths to feed or so many workers for whom jobs must somehow be created. It also represents an immediate investment in the number and quality of future workers, investors, employers, inventors, and entrepreneurs.</p>
<p>As with nonhuman capital, the economic value of human capital should equal the value of the current and future income it generates. The stock of tangible nonhuman capital is today worth roughly three times the gross national product (GNP); it takes more than $27 trillion worth of physical wealth to produce today’s annual $9.2 trillion American economy. According to John Kendrick, a leader in the total capital school of economics, the human capital that contributes to the GNP can be valued at roughly two-and-one-half times the stock of human capital.14 Therefore, it the current human capital stock is worth $69 trillion and if the drag on the economy by past abortions is roughly 11.3 percent, the value of human capital lost to past abortions is about $7.9 trillion. By 2050, the lost output will total about $24 trillion ($69 trillion times 35 percent) in today’s dollars, almost three times the value of today’s GNP.</p>
<p>But the economic impact of abortion is more than quantitative. A large body of literature argues that technological progress is more dynamic in an economy with a growing population than in one with a stagnant or shrinking population. A commonsense way to see this advantage is to list four creative Americans in any field: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt; Samuel Morse, George Washington Carver, Thomas Edison, and Jonas Salk; Nathaniel Hawthorne, Louisa May Alcott, Mark Twain, and Toni Morrison; George Gershwin, Scott Joplin, Duke Ellington, and Aaron Copland. Take away one person from each group and imagine the difference. By the law of averages, one out of each four would not have existed if current abortion practices had existed in the past. Consequently, American life and culture would have suffered without the contributions of these creative Americans.</p>
<p>This means that over time, legal abortion undermines a primary source of America’s high standard of living relative to the rest of the world: innovation. Several European countries have per capita living standards almost as high as the United States yet trail in information technology. The United States leads the revolution in information technology, not merely because she had higher living standards to take advantage of new technology when it came along, but also because her companies enjoy the economies of scale that come from a large domestic market. By developing those technologies within a large and growing market, U.S. companies acquired the financial strength, know-how, and trained personnel necessary to leverage these advantages. But these advantages relative to other advanced countries will diminish if legal abortion continues.</p>
<p>Countries that legalized abortion earlier than the United States teach lessons about the long-term consequences of abortion. Japans legalization of abortion in 1948, a generation earlier than the United States, is the main reason why Japan did not have an extended postwar baby boom, as did the United States. Yet Japan’s experience during the 1940s and 1950s was much like what the United States experienced after Roe v. Wade, the rate of conceptions stayed about the same after abortion was introduced, but the birth rate fell sharply.15 The demographic imbalances resulting from Japan’s more rapidly aging population are a large part of the reason for Japans spectacularly diminished economic performance in recent years. Those born in the late 1940s, before legal abortion, remain Japan’s largest age group, which is now in the phase of peak pre-retirement saving; but because the population below fifteen years of age averages only about three-fifths as large, the demand for domestic investment of that retirement saving is railing. The population is expected to shrink by 20 percent in the next fifty years.16 A similar prospect looms for most countries of Europe. Though America’s greater openness to immigration also plays an important role, much of the difference, demographically speaking, is simply the time at which abortion was legalized.</p>
<p>Lower Living Standards</p>
<p>Though legal abortion is beginning to reflect slippage in America’s relative economic importance, its impact is already apparent in America’s standard of living as measured by average household income. Comparisons using the broader measure of gross product per capita are useful only if other things remain the same. But legal abortion not only led to a decline in the net marriage rate, it also increased the rate of births outside of marriage. These social changes have had profound negative consequences for the level and buying power of average household income.</p>
<p>Consider what happens when a man and a woman divorce after marrying or fail to marry in the first place. Assume at first that they have the same education and, therefore, the same earning power as before. Living together, their income is combined into one household; after divorce, or as separate individuals, their income is split between two households. The difference is more than merely mathematical, however, because two people can live in one household more cheaply than in two separate households. The official poverty level in 1998 for an adult living alone was $8,478; for a household of two adults it was $10,634, far less than the poverty level for two separate households, which would be $16,956.17 Thus, with the same income in both cases, the combined standard of living declines by at least $6,322 after a couple divorces or fails to marry, even if they have no children. (The difference in the cost of living will normally be larger for those above the poverty line, so this estimate represents a minimum.)</p>
<p>The decline in living standards hurts the woman more than the man, as average lifetime earnings for men are nearly twice as high as for women. For those born in 1955, the average married man can expect lifetime earnings to average about $29,809 in 1998 dollars; the average married woman, $14,714. Together, the couple can expect a combined average lifetime income of $44,523.18 For two unmarried people with the same age and education, average expected lifetime earnings are $26,620 for the man and $15,785 for the woman, a total of $42,405. The differences are due to the fact that married men work more hours than unmarried or divorced men; unmarried or divorced women work more hours in the labor market than married women. Thus, as the result of failing to marry or getting a divorce, the average annual lifetime standard of living of such a couple would decline by at least $8,440, or 19 percent, due to lower earnings and a higher cost of living.</p>
<p>When children are present, the problem is especially acute for households headed by divorced or unmarried mothers. The poverty threshold for a married couple with two children was $16,530 in 1998. For the same four people split into two households, the combined poverty threshold was $21,449: $8,316 for a man living alone, and $13,133 for a mother with two children. The woman’s earnings are a little higher than when married because she is forced to work more hours in the labor market, but her share of the family’s cost of living is substantially higher. In this example, the mother and children typically go from a household with income equal to 269 percent of the poverty level to a household with income only 112 percent of the poverty line. All these reasons explain why the poverty rate is much higher for female-headed households than for married-couple households or for households headed by unmarried men. In many cases, compensation from the father is either nonexistent or poorly enforced. But even enforcement of child support or alimony, or any division of income, cannot prevent a decline in this family’s combined standard of living, which falls by at least $7,037, or 15.8 percent of the family’s initial income.</p>
<p>One might argue that the decline in the net marriage rate and the birth rate which were associated with legal abortion have produced some compensating effects. First, by freeing women to pursue education for a longer time, it would increase their earning capacity. Second, with fewer children, women would also be free to spend more time in the labor market. Third, the decision to have fewer children — half a child per family, on average, according to the total fertility rate — would lower living costs.</p>
<p>But such considerations do not change the conclusion. U.S. Census data suggest that average educational attainment for those born in 1955 is about 13.4 years, compared with 12.3 years for those born in 1935, who would have been too old to be affected by legal abortion.19 But that increase was only about half as large as for those born in 1935, compared with the 10.4 years of education of those born in 1915 — indicating that the improvement in educational attainment actually slowed down for the first generation exposed to legal abortion. Moreover, attributing the whole increase in educational attainment to the impact of legal abortion is implausible, since the steady increase in life expectancy must also have played an important role, by increasing the lifetime value of the earnings resulting from education. Life expectancy at birth increased from 54.5 years for those born in 1915 to 61.7 years for those born in 1935 and to 69.6 years for those born in 1955, an increase of about 13 percent in each twenty-year interval.20 But even if the whole increase in educational attainment for women could be attributed to legal abortion, the difference in average lifetime earnings would be $1,162, only one-sixth as large as the drop in the standard of living in the example above.</p>
<p>What about the other factors? The example already took into account the changes in labor force participation. Having an average of half a child fewer per family only lowers the poverty threshold by $1,462. Taking all this into account, the standard of living for the average family still declines by a minimum of $4,483, about 10 percent. The drop in the net marriage rare thus far suggests that in the long run, 39 percent of American households will be affected this way. Therefore, the social changes triggered by legal abortion are lowering the average standard of living for all Americans by at least 3.9 percent.</p>
<p>Taken in its entirety, the foregoing demographic and economic analysis suggests that pragmatic arguments are strongly against legal abortion. Legal abortion has begun drastically to reduce the relative economic importance of the United States, lowered the average standard of living of American households, and unleashed socially destructive behavior. After three decades of such destruction, these changes may appear irreversible; nothing can bring back 40 million Americans, their hopes and creativity, or their children and grandchildren. But the country can keep from compounding the terrible mistake to ensure that over the next fifty years her population will not continue to hemorrhage. If the legalization of abortion were reversed twenty-seven years after Roe v. Wade, the United States would be able to begin repairing the damage to her economic foundation caused by legalized abortion.</p>
<p>The scenario in which Roe v. Wade had been decided in 1900 helps explain how reversing legalized abortion would help the country. Had abortion been practiced only from 1900 to 1930, the population would have been reduced by about 11 percent, but the impact would have continued to grow because of abortion’s effect in removing not only the children aborted, but also their children and grandchildren. Yet the proportional impact of abortion on the U.S. population would have peaked at about 15 percent after seventy-five years, instead of reaching 35 percent had abortion remained legal. Thanks to the baby boom, the net impact on population would actually have declined to about 11 percent by 2050, instead of rising to 69 percent.</p>
<p>The results of ending abortion today, however, would not be as favorable, because the hypothetical example of ending abortion in 1930 implicitly assumed that abortion would not have been practiced by the baby boom generation. Since abortion actually began to be practiced by the largest generation in U.S. history, even if abortion were made illegal today, its drag on population growth, now about 11 percent, would increase to about 23 percent in 2050. Ultimately, the population would be reduced by about 25 percent, compared with what it would have become without legal abortion. If abortion continued, however, the population and economy of the country would decrease by 35 percent by 2050, 50 percent by 2075, and 70 percent by 2100. Therefore, although the socioeconomic effects of abortion are profound and lasting, ending legal abortion even after three decades would significantly lessen its permanent impact, keeping a firm foundation for what is now the world’s pre-eminent economy.</p>
<p>____________________________ NOTES</p>
<p>1. John J. Donohue, III, and Steven D. Levitt, “Legalized Abortion and Crime,” unpublished paper, September 1999.</p>
<p>2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Abortion Surveillance, in CDC Surveillance Summaries, September 4,1992, pp. 1-34.</p>
<p>3. Stanley K. Henshow, “Abortion Incidence and Services in the United States, 1995-1996,” Family Planning Perspectives 30(1998); 263-270,287.</p>
<p>4. Jennifer Cheesemon Day, Population Projections of the United States by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1995 to 2050, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports (Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1996).</p>
<p>5. George A. Akerlof and Janet L Yellen, “An Analysis of Out-of-Wedlock Births in the United States,” Policy Brief’ #5, The Brookings Institution, 1996. The original article appeared in the May 1996 issue of the Quarterly Journal of Economics.</p>
<p>6. U.S. National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Statistics of the United States.</p>
<p>7. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1998 (118th edition), Washington, D.C., 1998, p. 92.</p>
<p>8. National Center for Health Statistics, “United States Health, 1999, With Health and Aging Chartbook,” Hyottsville, Maryland, 1999.</p>
<p>9. Amara Bachu, Trends in Premarital Wearing: 1930 to 1994, Current Population Report. P23-197 (Washington: U.S. Census Bureau, 1999).</p>
<p>10. The evidence is summarized in John R. Weeks, Population: An Introduction to Concepts and Issues, fifth edition, (Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1994), ch. 13.</p>
<p>11. Guy de Jonquieres and James Kynge, “Beijing’s Big Gamble,” The Financial Times, November 16,1999.</p>
<p>12. Main Economic Aggregates: 1960-1997 (Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1999), appendix.</p>
<p>13. See John D. Mueller, “A Flat Tax That’s Good for Families, Not Just for Business,” Family Policy, November-December 1998.</p>
<p>14. John W. Kendrick, “Total Capital and Economic Growth,” Atlantic Economic Journal 22 (March 1994): 1-18.</p>
<p>15. Weeks, Population, p. 147.</p>
<p>16. U.S. Bureau of the Census, International Data Base.</p>
<p>17. U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Labor, Current Population Survey, March 1999 Supplement.</p>
<p>18. These examples are derived from U.S. Census data described in John Mueller, “Winners and Losers from ‘Privatizing’ Social Security,” National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, March 1999.</p>
<p>19. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Educational Attainment in the United States: March 1998 (Update), Current Population Report, P20-513, Washington, D.C, 1998.</p>
<p>20. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970, Washington, D.C., 1975, part 1, p. 55.</p> | false | 1 | since supreme court handed historic roe decision 1973 debate abortion conducted primarily two levels legal moral recently debate moved third level defenders legal abortion added new twist pragmatic utilitarian arguments regarding alleged social benefit terminating pregnancies one highly publicized study released last september prominent legal theorist university economist suggests legal abortions 1970s responsible lowering crime rate 1990s1 opponents abortion understandably cautious drawn kind exchange long argued main point laws taking human life person unique unrepeatable creation utilitarian arguments essentially hinge notion people interchangeable even people things important people therefore moral legal arguments remain paramount time oppose legal abortion welcome new phase discussion utilitarian arguments favor abortion though well publicized miserably weak furthermore profound social economic changes set motion legalized abortion changes steadily mushroom long abortion continues provide practical empirical reasons seeking reversal roe v wade nearly thirty years data suggest abortion anything good united states reducing size population abortion correspondingly reduced size economy time undercut one main cause american economys current dynamism innovation contributing sharp drop net marriage rate legalized abortion already reduced standard living average american household legalized abortion also singlehandedly responsible anticipated imbalances social security retirement system see sidebar back cover taken entirety legal abortion perhaps single largest american economic event past century significant great depression second world war tracing extent impact demonstrates abortion remained illegal american population would significantly larger would contain larger share intact marriages twoparent families average living standards would higher addition analysis warns continues unchecked legal abortion progressively erode americas relative economic importance average absolute standard living downsizing population review number abortions relative population first step understanding social economic consequences legal abortion several states liberalized abortion laws late 1960s annual number abortions united states reached almost 200000 19702 1973 year roe v wade decided 744600 legal abortions reported number doubled 1553900 1980 hit absolute peak 1608600 1990 declining 1365700 19963 1996 figure represented 261 percent conceptions legal abortions live births peak 30 percent early 1980s assuming abortions continued rate since 1996 cumulative total least 397 million legal abortions performed america late 1960s 1999 abortions instead live births children lived normal lives population taking account small fraction natural deaths might expected would today 389 million 14 percent larger actual population 275 million4 estimating impact abortion population complex however two reasons first counting number abortions ignores fact abortion prevents child born also removes children grandchildren remote descendants since country already entered second generation legalized abortion potential offspring aborted children need added calculation oldest among 389 million aborted children would already 65 million surviving children would increased american population 320 million people bur introduces second complication assuming pregnancies actually occur would occurred would resulted live births ignores profound behavioral changes brought legal abortion legalization abortion far simply grant women option george akerlof janet l yellen brookings institution write contributed retreat marriage although many observers expected liberalized abortion contraception lead fewer outof wedlock births fact opposite happened particularly erosion custom shotgun marriages5 making birth child physical choice mother akerlof yellen point legalization abortion unanticipated result making acceptance responsibilities marriage child support also choice father ordinary consequence number rate abortions soared live birth rate declined immediately time number proportion outofwedlock pregnancies outorwedlock births also rose sharply loosening divorce laws restraints contraception time abortion legalized seems make sorting cause effect difficult driving role legal abortion clear rise abortion rate compared net marriage rate marriage rate minus divorce rate net marriage rate fell 35 percent 1968 1976 exactly period rapid increase abortion rate decline live birth rate since 1976 net marriage rare fallen additional 4 percent compared rate 19686 excluding miscarriages data available 1976 occur 13 percent pregnancies 91 percent conceptions 1967 resulted live births married women remaining 9 percent live births unmarried women 1980 percentage dropped less 60 percent 1995 52 percent pregnancies resulted live births married women 1980 decline live births result legal abortions 84 percent abortions induced upon women married7 time number live births unmarried women also risen 339000 1257000 1967 1997 proportion pregnancies resulting live births unmarried mothers rose 9 percent 238 percent 1967 19968 thus proportion pregnancies resulting live births legal abortions unmarried women rose 9 percent 458 percent 1967 1996 recent research confirms akerlof yellens surmise legal abortion affected trends bringing decline shotgun marriage 1999 survey women fifteen twentynine years old first gave birth reveals 1960 1964 103 percent first births premarital rest born married women 155 percent conceived marriage 743 percent conceived marriage 1975 1979 257 percent first births premarital 120 percent conceived marriage 622 percent conceived marriage 1990 1994 405 percent first births premarital 123 percent conceived 472 percent conceived marriage indicates among women became pregnant marriage share marrying birth dropped 600 percent early 1960s 318 percent late 1970s 233 percent early 1990s9 abortion live birth rates legalized abortion therefore two effects upon live birth rate reduced number pregnancies resulting live births contributing increase pregnancies mostly among unmarried women pregnancy rate women different ages fully reveals twofold legacy among teenagers pregnancy rate rose legalization abortion exceed peak levels 1950s height baby boom average rate conception teenagers 1975 1996 389 percent higher 196768 average rate live births teenagers fell 184 percent suggests less onethird abortions teenage mothers actually lowered birth rate twothirds result behavior changes associated legalization abortion older women average pregnancy rate 1975 1996 almost exactly 196768 women twenty twentynine years age group highest rate conception pregnancy rate remained level late 1960s live birth rate declined sharply oneforone rise legal abortions women thirties live birth rate fell sharply 1975 since recovered 196768 average including legal abortions total pregnancy rate age group levels seen late 1940s early 1960s leading trailing edges baby boom women forties total pregnancy rate initially fell recovered 1990s level late 1960s live birth rate remains sharply lower comparing average years 1975 1996 196768 32 percent abortions among teenagers 100 percent abortions among women twenty years old reduced live birth rate thus balance 83 percent legal abortions reduced number live births comparing 196768 average recent year net longerterm impact appears somewhat smaller comparing 1995 196768 figures teenagers similar 349 percent abortions reduce live births women twenty years old net impact abortion live birth rate drops 100 percent 793 percent result recovery birth rate among women thirties rise births outside wedlock thus 706 percent abortions reduced live birth rate ages 1995 compared 196768 total fertility rate hypothetical measure lifetime events per woman based experience women childbearing age given year puts factors perspective total fertility rate usually based live births also used describe lifetime pregnancies per woman including legal abortions peaking 37 live births per woman late 1950s total fertility rate dropped baby boom legal abortion 26 live births 196768 fertility rate including legal abortions continued fluctuate around level dipping 234 1976 rising high 29 early 1990s counting live births rate dropped 26 196768 low 17 1976 recovered 20 1990s recovery accounted rise outofwedlock births portion fertility rate accounted live births married mothers dropped 23 196768 15 1976 fell 14 1995 portion total fertility rate accounted live births unmarried mothers rose 02 196768 07 1995 leads refinement preliminary estimate impact abortion us population though 397 million abortions carried since late 1960s legalization abortion decreased number live births 311 million since 1960s taking behavioral changes account allowing small number could expected die natural causes net decrease comes 305 million oldest among could expected given birth 44 million surviving children therefore abortion legalized us population year would 35 million people larger 310 million instead 275 million put another way three decades abortion reduced us population 113 percent would abortion legalized difference larger population canada future population growth estimating impact continued abortion future population requires estimating number future abortions absolute number product number women age group behavior women within age group behavior women age social groups except teenagers shows great deal continuity number women groups change quite bit behavior age groups remained unchanged absolute number abortions would leveled 1980 2010 number women childbearing age flat period however total number women childbearing age begin rising 2010 relatively small generation x succeeded called baby boom echo size baby boom generation number women also expected increase immigration drop rate abortions since mid1990s among teenagers one three conceptions group actually affects net number live births among older women abortions two three times much impact net number live births abortion rate remained steady since 1970s since practice abortion likely continue without change law attitudes reasonable forecast would seem project current abortion rate future according census bureau population grow 394 million 2050 birth rate currently close replacement rate birth rate ultimately result stable population increase largely due assumption immigration continue 880000 year top natural change population due births deaths women age group continue abortions rate 1995 annual number abortions fallen 15 million 1994 stay 14 million several years rise steadily 15 million 2015 reaching 18 million year 2050 assumptions american women undergone 120 million legal abortions 1970 2050 taking account behavioral changes brought legal abortion abortion reduced net number live births 87 million 81 million could expected living 2050 along 130 million surviving descendants cumulative reduction us population due legal abortion reached 211 million year 2050 three quarters current population united states words census bureaus estimated population 394 million 2050 would represent reduction 35 percent compared population would abortion legalized roe decided 1900 population projections difficult grasp another method assessing socioeconomic impact abortion consider country would look today roe v wade decided much earlier say 1900 population 76 million assume abortions occurred among age group women rate 1995 except years actual abortion rate higher assume also people born died migrated rates actually occurred past century assumptions number legal abortions would started half million 1900 since number women time much smaller beginning halt million abortions 1990 counting lost offspring aborted children 1930 country would reached population 110 million instead actual 123 million difference 13 million actual population equals current size new york city boston combined proportional reduction population 106 percent 160would estimated earlier year 2000 three decades actual legalization abortion 1950 us population would reduced 21 percent 31 million people instead reaching actual 152 million population would 121 million 1975 loss population abortion would reached 75 million people 35 percent actual population 216 million abortion legalized 1973 loss abortion since 1900 would even greater 78 million 36 percent abortionfree population 219 million seventyfive year estimate 1900 1975 proportionally similar earlier projection using census bureaus population estimates impact actual abortions 1970 2050 therefore abortion legalized entire century us population would today stand 156 million 43 percent lower actual 275 million figure would represent reduction population almost 50 percent noabortion baseline 311 million based census bureaus middle population projection 2050 150 years legal abortion us population would reduced 69 percent compared population would abortion never legalized roughly speaking legal abortion cumulatively reduces population 11 percent every generation abortion practiced thirty years full century population 275 million people makes united states third populous nation china population 13 billion india 1 billion people larger indonesia 219 million brazil 178 million rank fourth fifth however america started deadly practice abortion 1900 abortionadjusted population 156 million people today would rank fifth scarcely larger russia 146 million twofifths large fifteennation european union 375 million economic impact role abortion lowering american population clear role weakening economy may clear economists stripes agree first approximation effect population changes economy approximately proportional population reduced 10 percent size economy correspondingly reduced 10 percent evidence suggests modern economy least larger population adverse impact per capita income contrary advanced countries faster growing populations appear rapidly increasing standards living10 means abortion revealing almost three decades legal abortion reduced us population 11 percent therefore since total output total income united states amounted 92 trillion 1999 figure represents net loss least 117 trillion compared would us population reduced abortion difference current size economy california continue grow proportional diminution economy due abortion triple next fifty years absolute size nations economy course depends population also average living standard china india example much larger populations united states much smaller economies measured dollars buying power us gross national product 1998 twice large chinas economy five times large indias11 reason chinas indias average living standards far lower united states effect legal abortion reduce americas relative economic importance reducing relative size population legal century instead three decades abortion would reduced us population onehalf instead oneninth case us economy would size chinas instead twice large similar calculation applied relative economic importance united states newly formed european union though european union represents population 375 million larger population offset lower average living standard 1997 per capita gross domestic product gdp 29326 united states 20546 european union result us gdp 1997 78 trillion compared 77 trillion european union12 us population reduced 11 percent three decades legal abortion us economy might large 88 trillion 1997 abortion practiced full century size us economy would 39 trillion 1997 barely half size economy european union economists agree longterm impact population change size economy disagree comes economists hold neoclassical theory people largely passive recipients economic progress view impact population economy comes primarily effect size labor force taking labor force given assume output income per worker largely determined ratio stock nonhuman capital plant equipment number workers advances technology according theory change population brought difference rate live births affects economy couple decades change births translates change size labor force example threequarters million abortions occurred 1973 cut annual growth labor force 400000 workers beginning 1989 nearly one million fewer workers enter labor force annually ot abortions sixteen years earlier means fewer goods services produced information processed well less money earned abortions immediate impact economists argue impact legal abortion population triggers economic consequences much sooner neoclassical economists think changes rate real economic growth united states past seventy years closely paralleled changes fertility rate13 changes fertility seem cause changes economy immediately couple decades newer total capital theory takes consideration nonhuman human capital theory maintains investments made mostly parents human capital child rearing education health safety mobility add output income right away long investments could possibly reap return form compensation earned children became adults found employment skills earlier investments made total capital model consistent us economic boom late 1940s late 1960s well sharp slowdown growth output per worker began 1973 model also helps explain reacceleration economy 1990s coincided rising birth rates factors work course relationship works ways larger population merely represent many new mouths feed many workers jobs must somehow created also represents immediate investment number quality future workers investors employers inventors entrepreneurs nonhuman capital economic value human capital equal value current future income generates stock tangible nonhuman capital today worth roughly three times gross national product gnp takes 27 trillion worth physical wealth produce todays annual 92 trillion american economy according john kendrick leader total capital school economics human capital contributes gnp valued roughly twoandonehalf times stock human capital14 therefore current human capital stock worth 69 trillion drag economy past abortions roughly 113 percent value human capital lost past abortions 79 trillion 2050 lost output total 24 trillion 69 trillion times 35 percent todays dollars almost three times value todays gnp economic impact abortion quantitative large body literature argues technological progress dynamic economy growing population one stagnant shrinking population commonsense way see advantage list four creative americans field george washington thomas jefferson abraham lincoln franklin delano roosevelt samuel morse george washington carver thomas edison jonas salk nathaniel hawthorne louisa may alcott mark twain toni morrison george gershwin scott joplin duke ellington aaron copland take away one person group imagine difference law averages one four would existed current abortion practices existed past consequently american life culture would suffered without contributions creative americans means time legal abortion undermines primary source americas high standard living relative rest world innovation several european countries per capita living standards almost high united states yet trail information technology united states leads revolution information technology merely higher living standards take advantage new technology came along also companies enjoy economies scale come large domestic market developing technologies within large growing market us companies acquired financial strength knowhow trained personnel necessary leverage advantages advantages relative advanced countries diminish legal abortion continues countries legalized abortion earlier united states teach lessons longterm consequences abortion japans legalization abortion 1948 generation earlier united states main reason japan extended postwar baby boom united states yet japans experience 1940s 1950s much like united states experienced roe v wade rate conceptions stayed abortion introduced birth rate fell sharply15 demographic imbalances resulting japans rapidly aging population large part reason japans spectacularly diminished economic performance recent years born late 1940s legal abortion remain japans largest age group phase peak preretirement saving population fifteen years age averages threefifths large demand domestic investment retirement saving railing population expected shrink 20 percent next fifty years16 similar prospect looms countries europe though americas greater openness immigration also plays important role much difference demographically speaking simply time abortion legalized lower living standards though legal abortion beginning reflect slippage americas relative economic importance impact already apparent americas standard living measured average household income comparisons using broader measure gross product per capita useful things remain legal abortion led decline net marriage rate also increased rate births outside marriage social changes profound negative consequences level buying power average household income consider happens man woman divorce marrying fail marry first place assume first education therefore earning power living together income combined one household divorce separate individuals income split two households difference merely mathematical however two people live one household cheaply two separate households official poverty level 1998 adult living alone 8478 household two adults 10634 far less poverty level two separate households would 1695617 thus income cases combined standard living declines least 6322 couple divorces fails marry even children difference cost living normally larger poverty line estimate represents minimum decline living standards hurts woman man average lifetime earnings men nearly twice high women born 1955 average married man expect lifetime earnings average 29809 1998 dollars average married woman 14714 together couple expect combined average lifetime income 4452318 two unmarried people age education average expected lifetime earnings 26620 man 15785 woman total 42405 differences due fact married men work hours unmarried divorced men unmarried divorced women work hours labor market married women thus result failing marry getting divorce average annual lifetime standard living couple would decline least 8440 19 percent due lower earnings higher cost living children present problem especially acute households headed divorced unmarried mothers poverty threshold married couple two children 16530 1998 four people split two households combined poverty threshold 21449 8316 man living alone 13133 mother two children womans earnings little higher married forced work hours labor market share familys cost living substantially higher example mother children typically go household income equal 269 percent poverty level household income 112 percent poverty line reasons explain poverty rate much higher femaleheaded households marriedcouple households households headed unmarried men many cases compensation father either nonexistent poorly enforced even enforcement child support alimony division income prevent decline familys combined standard living falls least 7037 158 percent familys initial income one might argue decline net marriage rate birth rate associated legal abortion produced compensating effects first freeing women pursue education longer time would increase earning capacity second fewer children women would also free spend time labor market third decision fewer children half child per family average according total fertility rate would lower living costs considerations change conclusion us census data suggest average educational attainment born 1955 134 years compared 123 years born 1935 would old affected legal abortion19 increase half large born 1935 compared 104 years education born 1915 indicating improvement educational attainment actually slowed first generation exposed legal abortion moreover attributing whole increase educational attainment impact legal abortion implausible since steady increase life expectancy must also played important role increasing lifetime value earnings resulting education life expectancy birth increased 545 years born 1915 617 years born 1935 696 years born 1955 increase 13 percent twentyyear interval20 even whole increase educational attainment women could attributed legal abortion difference average lifetime earnings would 1162 onesixth large drop standard living example factors example already took account changes labor force participation average half child fewer per family lowers poverty threshold 1462 taking account standard living average family still declines minimum 4483 10 percent drop net marriage rare thus far suggests long run 39 percent american households affected way therefore social changes triggered legal abortion lowering average standard living americans least 39 percent taken entirety foregoing demographic economic analysis suggests pragmatic arguments strongly legal abortion legal abortion begun drastically reduce relative economic importance united states lowered average standard living american households unleashed socially destructive behavior three decades destruction changes may appear irreversible nothing bring back 40 million americans hopes creativity children grandchildren country keep compounding terrible mistake ensure next fifty years population continue hemorrhage legalization abortion reversed twentyseven years roe v wade united states would able begin repairing damage economic foundation caused legalized abortion scenario roe v wade decided 1900 helps explain reversing legalized abortion would help country abortion practiced 1900 1930 population would reduced 11 percent impact would continued grow abortions effect removing children aborted also children grandchildren yet proportional impact abortion us population would peaked 15 percent seventyfive years instead reaching 35 percent abortion remained legal thanks baby boom net impact population would actually declined 11 percent 2050 instead rising 69 percent results ending abortion today however would favorable hypothetical example ending abortion 1930 implicitly assumed abortion would practiced baby boom generation since abortion actually began practiced largest generation us history even abortion made illegal today drag population growth 11 percent would increase 23 percent 2050 ultimately population would reduced 25 percent compared would become without legal abortion abortion continued however population economy country would decrease 35 percent 2050 50 percent 2075 70 percent 2100 therefore although socioeconomic effects abortion profound lasting ending legal abortion even three decades would significantly lessen permanent impact keeping firm foundation worlds preeminent economy ____________________________ notes 1 john j donohue iii steven levitt legalized abortion crime unpublished paper september 1999 2 centers disease control prevention abortion surveillance cdc surveillance summaries september 41992 pp 134 3 stanley k henshow abortion incidence services united states 19951996 family planning perspectives 301998 263270287 4 jennifer cheesemon day population projections united states age sex race hispanic origin 1995 2050 us bureau census current population reports washington us government printing office 1996 5 george akerlof janet l yellen analysis outofwedlock births united states policy brief 5 brookings institution 1996 original article appeared may 1996 issue quarterly journal economics 6 us national center health statistics vital statistics united states 7 us bureau census statistical abstract united states 1998 118th edition washington dc 1998 p 92 8 national center health statistics united states health 1999 health aging chartbook hyottsville maryland 1999 9 amara bachu trends premarital wearing 1930 1994 current population report p23197 washington us census bureau 1999 10 evidence summarized john r weeks population introduction concepts issues fifth edition belmont california wadsworth publishing company 1994 ch 13 11 guy de jonquieres james kynge beijings big gamble financial times november 161999 12 main economic aggregates 19601997 paris organization economic cooperation development 1999 appendix 13 see john mueller flat tax thats good families business family policy novemberdecember 1998 14 john w kendrick total capital economic growth atlantic economic journal 22 march 1994 118 15 weeks population p 147 16 us bureau census international data base 17 us census bureau us department labor current population survey march 1999 supplement 18 examples derived us census data described john mueller winners losers privatizing social security national committee preserve social security medicare march 1999 19 us bureau census educational attainment united states march 1998 update current population report p20513 washington dc 1998 20 us bureau census historical statistics united states colonial times 1970 washington dc 1975 part 1 p 55 | 3,919 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Washington is buzzing with talk of Watergate. In a town nostalgic for the days when reporters didn’t run in packs and Republicans and Democrats would raise a pint together, many cannot resist the temptation to compare President Donald Trump’s abrupt firing of FBI Director James Comey to President Richard Nixon’s 1973 Saturday Night Massacre, when a besieged executive fired a special prosecutor, prompting the resignations of the top two officials at the Justice Department.</p>
<p>Deputy press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders did not want to feed the press corps’ yearning to be Woodward and Bernstein (Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, whose investigation of Watergate for the Washington Post inspired a generation of would-be journalists) when she walked into a jammed briefing room Wednesday. The press corps wanted to know why Trump had soured on Comey.</p>
<p>After all, days before the 2016 election Trump praised Comey for having the “guts” to reopen an investigation, closed in July, into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s “extremely careless” — Comey’s words — handling of classified emails. Two days before the election Comey announced the reopened investigation found nothing.</p>
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p>And in January, Trump said he respected Comey.</p>
<p>So why did the president fire Comey Tuesday after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein wrote in a memo that Comey was in essence too gutsy?</p>
<p>Sanders answered that Trump liked Comey’s guts when “he was a candidate for president, not the president. Those are two very different things.” Trump had been thinking about replacing Comey since Election Day, she said.</p>
<p>Sanders later added that if Clinton had won in November, “she would have fired Comey immediately — and the very Democrats that are criticizing the president today would be dancing in the streets celebrating.”</p>
<p>Sanders has a point. Earlier this month, Clinton told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, “I was on the way to winning until the combination of Jim Comey’s letter on Oct. 28 (to Congress announcing the reopening of the investigation) and Russian WikiLeaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me but got scared off.”</p>
<p>In December, then Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Comey cost Clinton the election and should resign. In November, now Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., told the Huffington Post he had lost confidence in Comey and that he found the Oct. 28 letter “appalling.”</p>
<p>Comey also angered the right. The Wall Street Journal editorial page was appalled in July when Comey talked to the media about why the FBI would not charge Clinton. The Journal editorialized, “Mrs. Clinton deliberately sought to evade the Federal Records Act, recklessly flouted laws on handling classified information, spent a year lying about it, and will now have escaped accountability.” In short, partisans on both sides of the aisle thought Comey was a highly placed train wreck.</p>
<p>Comey didn’t help himself last week when he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that former Clinton aide Huma Abedin “forwarded hundreds and thousands” of Clinton emails to the laptop of her husband, former Rep. Anthony Weiner. Comey got it wrong. On Tuesday the FBI sent a letter to Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, to correct the record and stipulate that Abedin had forwarded or backed up 12 classified emails.</p>
<p>That error provided a solid opening for Trump to call out Comey — maybe even look him in the eye and fire him.</p>
<p>Instead, the president sent a nastygram across the country that was seen in the Los Angeles FBI office where Comey was about to speak. The breaking news announcement that Trump had canned him was so unexpected that Comey is said to have laughed at what he thought was a practical joke. When the top G-man got into a motorcade to the airport, local media trailed the motorcade as if Comey were O.J. Simpson.</p>
<p>Schumer and company do look like hypocrites for lamenting Trump’s firing of their former target. Perhaps the hypocrisy label would stick better to others if Trump had not praised Comey when it helped his campaign.</p>
<p>Worst of all, in firing the man in charge of the investigation into allegations that Trump campaign associates colluded with Russians, Trump brought into question the independence of federal law enforcement. In one impulsive act, the president gave credence to Democrats who have been calling for a special prosecutor.</p>
<p>The Comey dismissal, after all, followed Trump’s sacking of former acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who opposed his travel ban, and former New York U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, who also was in a position to investigate Trump. Three is rarely a good number in politics.</p>
<p>A person can believe that the Russian collusion story is unsubstantiated and that Comey deserved to be fired — and still wonder just what Trump was thinking.</p>
<p>Here is a timeline of the events that preceded his firing:</p>
<p>July 5, 2016: Comey announces he has recommended no criminal charges filed against Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for her handling of classified information while she was secretary of state but calls her use of a private email server “extremely careless.”</p>
<p>July 5, 2016: Trump responds news on Twitter, calling Comey’s decision an example of a “rigged system” in the United States. “Very very unfair! As usual, bad judgment,” he tweets.</p>
<p>Oct. 28, 2016: Less than two weeks before the Nov. 8 presidential election, Comey announces in a letter to Congress that the FBI had learned of the existence of additional emails that appeared to pertain to the Clinton investigation and they would be reviewed to determine whether they contained classified information.</p>
<p>Oct. 31, 2016: Campaigning in Michigan, Trump exults over news of the reopened probe. “That was so bad what happened originally, and it took guts for Director Comey to make the move that he made in light of the kind of opposition he had where they’re trying to protect her from criminal prosecution,” Trump said.</p>
<p>Feb. 13, 2017: Trump fires his national security adviser, Michael Flynn, after only 24 days in office following disclosures that Flynn misled Vice President Mike Pence about the contacts he had with Russian ambassador to the United States Sergei Kislyak.</p>
<p>March 20, 2017: Comey, in testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, says the FBI had been investigating possible coordination between the Trump presidential campaign and Russia.</p>
<p>May 2, 2017: After Clinton said in New York that the Comey announcement threw the election for Trump, the president responds with a late-night series of tweets. “FBI Director Comey was the best thing that ever happened to Hillary Clinton in that he gave her a free pass for many bad deeds!” he says.</p>
<p>May 4, 2017: Comey, in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, says it made him “mildly nauseous” to think his announcement of the reopening of an investigation into Clinton’s emails affected the 2016 presidential election, but he had no regrets and would make the same decision again. He also defends his decision to reopen the Clinton probe.</p>
<p>May 9, 2017: White House spokesman Sean Spicer announces that Trump has accepted the recommendation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to fire Comey. A letter provided to the news media from Rosenstein cites Comey’s handling of the Clinton probe.</p>
<p>Contact Debra J. Saunders at [email protected] or at 202-662-7391. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/debrajsaunders" type="external">@DebraJSaunders</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>RELATED</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Trump abruptly fires FBI Director James Comey</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Trump says Comey ‘wasn’t doing a good job’</a></p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington washington buzzing talk watergate town nostalgic days reporters didnt run packs republicans democrats would raise pint together many resist temptation compare president donald trumps abrupt firing fbi director james comey president richard nixons 1973 saturday night massacre besieged executive fired special prosecutor prompting resignations top two officials justice department deputy press secretary sarah huckabee sanders want feed press corps yearning woodward bernstein bob woodward carl bernstein whose investigation watergate washington post inspired generation wouldbe journalists walked jammed briefing room wednesday press corps wanted know trump soured comey days 2016 election trump praised comey guts reopen investigation closed july former secretary state hillary clintons extremely careless comeys words handling classified emails two days election comey announced reopened investigation found nothing january trump said respected comey president fire comey tuesday deputy attorney general rod rosenstein wrote memo comey essence gutsy sanders answered trump liked comeys guts candidate president president two different things trump thinking replacing comey since election day said sanders later added clinton november would fired comey immediately democrats criticizing president today would dancing streets celebrating sanders point earlier month clinton told cnns christiane amanpour way winning combination jim comeys letter oct 28 congress announcing reopening investigation russian wikileaks raised doubts minds people inclined vote got scared december senate minority leader harry reid dnev said comey cost clinton election resign november senate minority leader chuck schumer dny told huffington post lost confidence comey found oct 28 letter appalling comey also angered right wall street journal editorial page appalled july comey talked media fbi would charge clinton journal editorialized mrs clinton deliberately sought evade federal records act recklessly flouted laws handling classified information spent year lying escaped accountability short partisans sides aisle thought comey highly placed train wreck comey didnt help last week testified senate judiciary committee former clinton aide huma abedin forwarded hundreds thousands clinton emails laptop husband former rep anthony weiner comey got wrong tuesday fbi sent letter committee chairman chuck grassley riowa correct record stipulate abedin forwarded backed 12 classified emails error provided solid opening trump call comey maybe even look eye fire instead president sent nastygram across country seen los angeles fbi office comey speak breaking news announcement trump canned unexpected comey said laughed thought practical joke top gman got motorcade airport local media trailed motorcade comey oj simpson schumer company look like hypocrites lamenting trumps firing former target perhaps hypocrisy label would stick better others trump praised comey helped campaign worst firing man charge investigation allegations trump campaign associates colluded russians trump brought question independence federal law enforcement one impulsive act president gave credence democrats calling special prosecutor comey dismissal followed trumps sacking former acting attorney general sally yates opposed travel ban former new york us attorney preet bharara also position investigate trump three rarely good number politics person believe russian collusion story unsubstantiated comey deserved fired still wonder trump thinking timeline events preceded firing july 5 2016 comey announces recommended criminal charges filed democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton handling classified information secretary state calls use private email server extremely careless july 5 2016 trump responds news twitter calling comeys decision example rigged system united states unfair usual bad judgment tweets oct 28 2016 less two weeks nov 8 presidential election comey announces letter congress fbi learned existence additional emails appeared pertain clinton investigation would reviewed determine whether contained classified information oct 31 2016 campaigning michigan trump exults news reopened probe bad happened originally took guts director comey make move made light kind opposition theyre trying protect criminal prosecution trump said feb 13 2017 trump fires national security adviser michael flynn 24 days office following disclosures flynn misled vice president mike pence contacts russian ambassador united states sergei kislyak march 20 2017 comey testimony house intelligence committee says fbi investigating possible coordination trump presidential campaign russia may 2 2017 clinton said new york comey announcement threw election trump president responds latenight series tweets fbi director comey best thing ever happened hillary clinton gave free pass many bad deeds says may 4 2017 comey testimony senate judiciary committee says made mildly nauseous think announcement reopening investigation clintons emails affected 2016 presidential election regrets would make decision also defends decision reopen clinton probe may 9 2017 white house spokesman sean spicer announces trump accepted recommendation attorney general jeff sessions deputy attorney general rod rosenstein fire comey letter provided news media rosenstein cites comeys handling clinton probe contact debra j saunders dsaundersreviewjournalcom 2026627391 follow debrajsaunders twitter related trump abruptly fires fbi director james comey trump says comey wasnt good job | 751 |
<p>Western leaders’ and media commentators’ eulogies for Shimon Peres obscure his true legacy of further entrenching the Israeli occupation regime.</p>
<p>The recent death of Shimon Peres is notable in several respects that are additional to his salient, contradictory, and ambiguous legacy, which may help explain why there has been such an effort to clarify how best to remember the man. Basically, the question posed is whether to celebrate Peres’ death as that of a man dedicated to peace and reconciliation or to portray him as a wily opportunist, a skillful image-maker, and in the end, a harsh Zionist and ambitious Israeli leader.</p>
<p>My contention is that the way Peres is being perceived and presented at the time of his death serves as a litmus test of how those on opposite sides of the Israeli/Palestinian divide experienced Peres and beyond this, how various prominent personalities for their own purposes position themselves by either championing the well-orchestrated ‘Peres myth’ or seeking to depict the ‘Peres reality.’ This rich obscurity of perceptual interpretation is part of what led the death of Shimon Peres to be taken so much more seriously than that of Ariel Sharon or Moshe Dayan, who were both much more instrumental figures in the history of the Zionist project and the evolution of the state of Israel. As Shakespeare taught us, especially in Julius Caesar, it is the quality of opaqueness that creates heightened dramatic tension in reaction to a historically significant death.</p>
<p>These divergent assessments of the life of Shimon Peres can be roughly divided into three categories, although there are overlaps and variations within each. What can we learn from these divergences? (1) the rich, famous, and politically powerful in the West who have been bewitched by Peres’s formidable charms; (2) the rich, famous, and politically influential who know better the moral and complexity of Peres, but put on blinders while walking the path of politically correctness, which overlooks, or at least minimizes, his blemishes; (3) the marginalized, often embittered, whose self-appointed mission it is to be witnesses to what is deemed the truth behind the myth, and especially those on the Palestinian side of the fence.</p>
<p>Peres is unique among those recently active in Israel as his long life spans the entire Zionist experience, but more than longevity is the credibility associated with the claim that Peres should be set apart from other Israeli politicians as someone genuinely dedicated to establishing peaceful relations with the Palestinians via the realization of the two-state solution, and achieving, more generally, good relations with the wider Arab world. Peres’ own presentation of self along these lines, especially in his later years, during which he served as President of Israel, provided international personalities with an excellent opportunity to exhibit the quality of attachment not only to the man, but to Israel as a country and Zionism as a movement. Allowing Peres’ idealist persona to epitomize the true nature of Israel created the political space needed to affirm contemporary Israel without being forced to admit that Israel as a political player was behaving in a manner that defied law and morality.</p>
<p>As already suggested, those praising Peres without any reservations fall into two of the categories set forth above. There are those like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton who seem to believe that Peres is truly a heroic embodiment of everything they hoped Israel would become, and to some extent is; in effect, the embodiment of the better angels of the Israeli experience. As well, displaying unreserved admiration and affection for Peres presents Western leaders with a subtle opportunity to express indirectly their displeasure with Netanyahu and their concerns about the recent drift of Israeli diplomacy in the direction of a de facto foreclosure of Palestinian aspirations and rights.</p>
<p>Of course, such politicians are also eager to be seen at the same time as unconditionally pro-Israeli. Obama made this abundantly clear in his fawning and demeaning farewell meeting with Netanyahu at the UN, which Israel reciprocated by a provocative approval of a controversial settlement expansion, basically one more slap in Obama’s face.</p>
<p>Clinton, as well, seems understandably eager to make sure that no daylight appears between his solidarity with Israel and that of his presidential candidate spouse who has topped all American politicians, which says a lot, by tightening her embrace of everything Netanyahu’s Israel currently hopes for in Washington, including even an explicit commitment to join the fight against BDS. By so doing, Hillary Clinton has committed her presidency to favor what appear to be unconstitutional encroachments on freedom of expression that should be an occasion to vent public outrage, but has so far survived the gaze of the gatekeepers without eliciting the slightest critical comments from her opponents and even the media.</p>
<p>In the second category of fulsome praise for the departed Peres a variety of private motives is evident. There are those self-important braggarts like Tom Friedman, who clearly knows all about the complexity of the Peres story, but pretends to be gazing wide eyed at the brilliant blue of a cloudless sky as he describes his supposedly idyllic friendship with Peres over a period of 35 years. Friedman is definitely informed and intelligent enough not to be taken in by the Peres myth, and despite his signature demeanor of fearless candor, his views tend to be in total alignment with the liberal pro-Jewish mainstream, whether the topic is assessing Peres’s life or for that matter, assessing America’s global role or the current race for the presidency. He is as anti-Trump and as he is pro-Peres, exhibiting his mentoring stature as the guru of centrist political correctness, which is slightly disguised to the unwary by his brash tone that purports to be telling it like it is even when it isn’t.</p>
<p>And then in this same category, strange bedfellows to be sure, are quasi-collaborationist Palestinian leaders, most notably, Mahmoud Abbas who showed up in Jerusalem at the Peres funeral, described in the media as a rare visit to Israel, and seized the opportunity of Peres’ death to demonstrate that the Palestinian leadership is not hostile to Israeli leaders who the world recognizes as committed to peace based on the two-state solution. Abbas was presumably seeking, as well, to enhance his image as a reasonable, moderate, and trustworthy partner in the search for peace, which of course understandably infuriated not only Hamas but all those Palestinians who know better, given the daily ordeal that Palestinians are enduring as a result of policies that Peres never opposed, and in some instances, as with settlements and occupation, helped to establish. The portrayal of Peres by the respected Israeli historian Tom Segev can hardly be news to Abbas, who has endured firsthand the long Palestinian ordeal: “Mr. Peres certainly would have liked to enter history as a peacemaker, but that’s not how he should be remembered: indeed his greatest contributions were to Israel’s military might and victories.”</p>
<p>Hanan Ashrawi, a Palestinian Christian who has had important positions with the PLO for many years, and has long worked for a real peace in a spirit of dedication, but without succumbing to the deceptions surrounding the Oslo diplomacy. Ashrawi has managed to keep her eyes open to the reality of Palestinian suffering, making her inevitably more critical of Peres and suspicious of those who would whitewash is life story. She writes of Peres after his death, as follows: “Palestinians’ faith in Mr. Peres had been tested before. Not forgotten by Palestinians and others in the region is the role that he played arming the Israeli forces that expelled some 750,000 Palestinians during the establishment of Israel in 1948; the regional nuclear arms race he incited by initiating Israel’s secret atomic weapons program in the 1950s and ’60s; his responsibility for establishing some of the first Jewish settlements on occupied Palestinian land in the ’70s; his public discourse as a minister in Likud-led coalitions, justifying Israeli violations of Palestinian rights and extremist ideology; and his final role in Israeli politics as president, serving as a fig leaf for the radically pro-settler government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.” [NY Times (international edition, Oct 3, 2016)]</p>
<p>Above all, this overly elaborate observance of Peres’ death serves as an informal litmus test useful for determining degrees of devotion to Israel and its policies without bothering to weigh in the balance the country’s obligations under international law or the cruel reality being imposed on the Palestinian people year after year. Those who praise Peres unreservedly are deemed trustworthy within the Beltway, scoring high marks from AIPAC, and those who point to his shortcomings or to policies that went awry are viewed as unredeemably hostile to Israel. They are correctly assumed to be critics of the Special Relationship and of the over the top flows of U.S. military assistance (at least $3.8 billion over the next ten years), or worse, identified as sympathizers with the Palestinian struggle. This description fits such respected and influential critics of the Peres myth as Robert Fisk (British journalist), Uri Avnery (Israeli peace activist, former Knesset member), Gideon Levy (Israeli journalist), and Ilan Pappé (noted Israeli revisionist historian living in Britain).</p>
<p>In my view only those who see the dark sides of Shimon Peres are to be trusted, although it is excusable to be an innocent devotee in the manner of Obama. In this regard the knowledgeable liberal enthusiast is the least acceptable of the three categories because of the willful deception involved in painting a picture of Peres that is known to feed a misleading myth that is itself part of the Israeli hasbara manipulating international public awareness of the Palestinian ordeal, and thus encouraging a false public belief that the leadership in Israel, even the Netanyahu crowd, is sincere in their off again on again advocacy of a two-state solution or of the establishment of a truly independent Palestinian state. Remember that even Netanyahu joined the chorus at the funeral by treating Peres with a moral deference that should be reserved for the gods.</p>
<p>There is another aspect of what was signified by the ardent eulogies delivered by Western leaders at the Peres funeral that was dramatically underlined by the renowned Israeli columnist Gideon Levy, yet entirely overlooked in the extensive commentary: “Anti-Semitism died on Friday — or at least, its use as an excuse by Israel. On the eve of Rosh Hashanah 5777, the world proved that while anti-Semitism remains in certain limited circles, it can no longer frame most of the world’s governments. Also, hatred of Israel is not what it is said to be, or what Israel says it is.” Levy’s observation is timely and relevant. It goes beyond an expression of the view that Peres was partly lauded because he was ‘not Netanyahu.’ Far deeper is Levy’s understanding that the Peres funeral gave the West an opportunity to express their affection and admiration for a prominent Jew being celebrated because he fashioned for himself and others the image of a ‘man of peace.’ Independent of whether or not this is a true appreciation, it allows a distinction to be sharply drawn between rejecting Jews as a people and criticizing Israel and its leaders for their practices and policies. In effect, if Israel were to embody the supposed worldview of Peres, and bring peace, then Israel would be welcomed into the community of states without any resistance arising from the Jewish identity of its majority population.</p>
<p>We in the United States are particularly grateful to Gideon Levy for making this point so clearly. We are faced with the opposite syndrome. Namely, criticisms of Israel’s policies and practices with respect to the Palestinian people are being deliberately treated as ‘hate speech’ and worse, as a new virulent form of post-Holocaust anti-Semitism. Such attacks have been recently mounted with hurtful fury against pro-Palestinian activists and supporters of the BDS Campaign.</p>
<p>May Shimon Peres rest in peace, and may the Palestinian people through their representatives intensify their struggle to achieve a real peace with Israel based on law, justice, and mutual empathy.</p> | false | 1 | western leaders media commentators eulogies shimon peres obscure true legacy entrenching israeli occupation regime recent death shimon peres notable several respects additional salient contradictory ambiguous legacy may help explain effort clarify best remember man basically question posed whether celebrate peres death man dedicated peace reconciliation portray wily opportunist skillful imagemaker end harsh zionist ambitious israeli leader contention way peres perceived presented time death serves litmus test opposite sides israelipalestinian divide experienced peres beyond various prominent personalities purposes position either championing wellorchestrated peres myth seeking depict peres reality rich obscurity perceptual interpretation part led death shimon peres taken much seriously ariel sharon moshe dayan much instrumental figures history zionist project evolution state israel shakespeare taught us especially julius caesar quality opaqueness creates heightened dramatic tension reaction historically significant death divergent assessments life shimon peres roughly divided three categories although overlaps variations within learn divergences 1 rich famous politically powerful west bewitched peress formidable charms 2 rich famous politically influential know better moral complexity peres put blinders walking path politically correctness overlooks least minimizes blemishes 3 marginalized often embittered whose selfappointed mission witnesses deemed truth behind myth especially palestinian side fence peres unique among recently active israel long life spans entire zionist experience longevity credibility associated claim peres set apart israeli politicians someone genuinely dedicated establishing peaceful relations palestinians via realization twostate solution achieving generally good relations wider arab world peres presentation self along lines especially later years served president israel provided international personalities excellent opportunity exhibit quality attachment man israel country zionism movement allowing peres idealist persona epitomize true nature israel created political space needed affirm contemporary israel without forced admit israel political player behaving manner defied law morality already suggested praising peres without reservations fall two categories set forth like barack obama bill clinton seem believe peres truly heroic embodiment everything hoped israel would become extent effect embodiment better angels israeli experience well displaying unreserved admiration affection peres presents western leaders subtle opportunity express indirectly displeasure netanyahu concerns recent drift israeli diplomacy direction de facto foreclosure palestinian aspirations rights course politicians also eager seen time unconditionally proisraeli obama made abundantly clear fawning demeaning farewell meeting netanyahu un israel reciprocated provocative approval controversial settlement expansion basically one slap obamas face clinton well seems understandably eager make sure daylight appears solidarity israel presidential candidate spouse topped american politicians says lot tightening embrace everything netanyahus israel currently hopes washington including even explicit commitment join fight bds hillary clinton committed presidency favor appear unconstitutional encroachments freedom expression occasion vent public outrage far survived gaze gatekeepers without eliciting slightest critical comments opponents even media second category fulsome praise departed peres variety private motives evident selfimportant braggarts like tom friedman clearly knows complexity peres story pretends gazing wide eyed brilliant blue cloudless sky describes supposedly idyllic friendship peres period 35 years friedman definitely informed intelligent enough taken peres myth despite signature demeanor fearless candor views tend total alignment liberal projewish mainstream whether topic assessing peress life matter assessing americas global role current race presidency antitrump properes exhibiting mentoring stature guru centrist political correctness slightly disguised unwary brash tone purports telling like even isnt category strange bedfellows sure quasicollaborationist palestinian leaders notably mahmoud abbas showed jerusalem peres funeral described media rare visit israel seized opportunity peres death demonstrate palestinian leadership hostile israeli leaders world recognizes committed peace based twostate solution abbas presumably seeking well enhance image reasonable moderate trustworthy partner search peace course understandably infuriated hamas palestinians know better given daily ordeal palestinians enduring result policies peres never opposed instances settlements occupation helped establish portrayal peres respected israeli historian tom segev hardly news abbas endured firsthand long palestinian ordeal mr peres certainly would liked enter history peacemaker thats remembered indeed greatest contributions israels military might victories hanan ashrawi palestinian christian important positions plo many years long worked real peace spirit dedication without succumbing deceptions surrounding oslo diplomacy ashrawi managed keep eyes open reality palestinian suffering making inevitably critical peres suspicious would whitewash life story writes peres death follows palestinians faith mr peres tested forgotten palestinians others region role played arming israeli forces expelled 750000 palestinians establishment israel 1948 regional nuclear arms race incited initiating israels secret atomic weapons program 1950s 60s responsibility establishing first jewish settlements occupied palestinian land 70s public discourse minister likudled coalitions justifying israeli violations palestinian rights extremist ideology final role israeli politics president serving fig leaf radically prosettler government prime minister benjamin netanyahu ny times international edition oct 3 2016 overly elaborate observance peres death serves informal litmus test useful determining degrees devotion israel policies without bothering weigh balance countrys obligations international law cruel reality imposed palestinian people year year praise peres unreservedly deemed trustworthy within beltway scoring high marks aipac point shortcomings policies went awry viewed unredeemably hostile israel correctly assumed critics special relationship top flows us military assistance least 38 billion next ten years worse identified sympathizers palestinian struggle description fits respected influential critics peres myth robert fisk british journalist uri avnery israeli peace activist former knesset member gideon levy israeli journalist ilan pappé noted israeli revisionist historian living britain view see dark sides shimon peres trusted although excusable innocent devotee manner obama regard knowledgeable liberal enthusiast least acceptable three categories willful deception involved painting picture peres known feed misleading myth part israeli hasbara manipulating international public awareness palestinian ordeal thus encouraging false public belief leadership israel even netanyahu crowd sincere advocacy twostate solution establishment truly independent palestinian state remember even netanyahu joined chorus funeral treating peres moral deference reserved gods another aspect signified ardent eulogies delivered western leaders peres funeral dramatically underlined renowned israeli columnist gideon levy yet entirely overlooked extensive commentary antisemitism died friday least use excuse israel eve rosh hashanah 5777 world proved antisemitism remains certain limited circles longer frame worlds governments also hatred israel said israel says levys observation timely relevant goes beyond expression view peres partly lauded netanyahu far deeper levys understanding peres funeral gave west opportunity express affection admiration prominent jew celebrated fashioned others image man peace independent whether true appreciation allows distinction sharply drawn rejecting jews people criticizing israel leaders practices policies effect israel embody supposed worldview peres bring peace israel would welcomed community states without resistance arising jewish identity majority population united states particularly grateful gideon levy making point clearly faced opposite syndrome namely criticisms israels policies practices respect palestinian people deliberately treated hate speech worse new virulent form postholocaust antisemitism attacks recently mounted hurtful fury propalestinian activists supporters bds campaign may shimon peres rest peace may palestinian people representatives intensify struggle achieve real peace israel based law justice mutual empathy | 1,088 |
<p>The world needs to act to end Israel's impunity for its violent crimes against the Palestinians.</p>
<p>“Whether he made a mistake or not, is a trivial question,” said an Israeli Jewish man who joined large protests throughout Israel in support of a soldier who calmly, and with precision, <a href="http://www.juancole.com/2016/04/autopsy-confirms-bullet-fired-by-israeli-soldier-at-point-blank-range-killed-al-sharif.html" type="external">killed a wounded Palestinian man</a> in al-Khalil (Hebron). The protesting Jewish man <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rF48wdxBvbQ" type="external">described Palestinians as ‘barbaric’</a>, ‘bestial’, who should not be perceived as people.</p>
<p>This is hardly a fringe view in Israel. The vast majority of Israelis, <a href="http://972mag.com/israeli-public-opinion-solidly-backs-hebron-soldier/118179/" type="external">68%, support the killing of Abdel Fatah Yusri al-Sharif</a>, 21, by the solider who had reportedly announced before firing at the wounded Palestinian that the “terrorist had to die.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?id=770833" type="external">The killing scene</a> would have been relegated to the annals of the many ‘contested’ killings by Israeli soldiers, were it not for a Palestinian field worker with Israel’s human rights group, <a href="https://theintercept.com/2016/03/24/israeli-rights-group-releases-video-soldier-executing-wounded-palestinian-suspect/" type="external">B’Tselem</a>, who filmed the bloody event.</p>
<p>The incident, once more, highlights <a href="http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?id=742475" type="external">a culture of impunity that exists in the Israeli army</a>, which is not a new phenomenon.</p>
<p>Not only is <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/04/israel-rallies-around-killer-soldier.html" type="external">Israeli society supportive of the soldier</a>behind this particular bloody incident, almost a vast majority is in support of field executions as well.</p>
<p>In fact, <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.628698" type="external">the culture of impunity in Israel</a> is linked both to political leanings and religious beliefs. According to the latest Peace Index released by Tel Aviv University’s Israel Democracy Institute, <a href="http://www.palestinechronicle.com/over-66-of-jewish-israelis-agree-with-rabbis-controversial-statement/" type="external">nearly 67% of the country’s Jewish population</a> believes that “it is a commandment to kill a terrorist who comes at you with a knife”.</p>
<p>Killing Palestinians as a form of religious duty goes back to the early days of the Jewish state, and such beliefs are constantly corroborated by the country’s high spiritual institutions, similar to the recent decree issued by the country’s Chief Sephardic Rabbi, Yitzhak Yosef. While 94% of ultra-Orthodox agree with the murder edict of Yosef, 52% of the country’s secularists do, too.</p>
<p>In fact, dehumanizing Palestinians—describing them as ‘beasts’, ‘cockroaches’, or treating them as dispensable inferiors—has historically been a common denominator in Israeli society, uniting Jews from various political, ideological and religious backgrounds.</p>
<p>Rabbi Yosef’s decree, for example, is not much different from statements made by Israeli Defense Minister, Moshe Ya’alon, and other army and government official, <a href="http://www.ch10.co.il/news/103587/#.VwgyRaQrKM9" type="external">who made similar calls,</a> albeit without utilizing a strongly worded religious discourse.</p>
<p>Using the same logic, the quote above describing Palestinians as beasts is not divergent from a recent statement made by Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. “At the end, in the State of Israel, as I see it, there will be a fence that spans it all,” <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.702318" type="external">Netanyahu said in February</a>. “In the area that we live, we must defend ourselves against the wild beasts,” he added.</p>
<p>While pro-Israeli pundits labor to explain the widespread Israeli perception of Palestinians—and Arabs, in general—on rational grounds, logic and commonsense continues to evade them. For instance, Netanyahu’s last war on Gaza in the summer of 2014 killed a total of 2,251 Palestinians—including 1,462 civilians, among them 551 children, according to a <a href="https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/balance-un-gaza-report-cant-hide-massive-israeli-war-crimes" type="external">report prepared by the UN Human Rights Council</a>. During that war, only six Israeli civilians were killed, and 60 soldiers.</p>
<p>Who, then, is truly the ‘wild beast’?</p>
<p>However, Palestinians are not made into beasts because of their supposedly murderous intent for, not once, statistically, in the history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict did Palestinians ever kill more Israelis, as opposed to the other way round.&#160; The ailment is not the number, but a common Israeli cultural perception that is utterly racist and dehumanizing.</p>
<p>Nor is the Israeli perception of Palestinians ever linked to a specific period of time, for example, a popular uprising or a war. Consider this <a href="http://muftah.org/a-culture-of-impunity/#.Vwg07aQrKM9" type="external">eyewitness account</a> from August 2012, <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/in-suspected-jerusalem-lynch-dozens-of-jewish-youths-attack-3-palestinians-1.459002" type="external">cited in the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz</a>, years before the current uprising in the West Bank and Jerusalem:</p>
<p>“Today I saw a lynch with my own eyes, in Zion Square, the center of the city of Jerusalem … and shouts of ‘A Jew is a soul and Arab is a son of a –,’ were shouted loudly and dozens of youths ran and gathered and started to really beat to death three Arab youths who were walking quietly in the Ben Yehuda street,” the witness wrote.</p>
<p>“When one of the Palestinian youths fell to the ground, the youths continued to hit him in the head; he lost consciousness, his eyes rolled, his angled head twitched, and then those who were kicking him fled while the rest gathered around in a circle, with some still shouting with hate in their eyes.”</p>
<p>Imagine this graphic account repeated, in different manifestations, every day in Occupied Palestine, and consider this: rarely does anyone pay a price for it. Indeed, this is how Israel’s culture of impunity has evolved over the years.</p>
<p>According to <a href="http://www.yesh-din.org/cat.asp?catid=2" type="external">Israeli human rights group, Yesh Din</a>, “approximately 94% of criminal investigations launched by the IDF against soldiers suspected of criminal violent activity against Palestinians and their property are closed without any indictments. In the rare cases that indictments are served, conviction leads to very light sentencing.”</p>
<p>And no one is immune. Israel’s <a href="http://972mag.com/challenging-israeli-impunity-in-the-icc/114659/" type="external">972Mag wrote in December 2015</a> about the hundreds of violent incidents of Israeli forces targeting Palestinian medical staff. Palestinian rights group, Al-Haq, documented 56 cases in which “ambulances were attacked”, and 116 assaults against medical staff while on duty.</p>
<p>How about violence meted out by illegal settlers whose population in the Occupied Territories is constantly on the increase?</p>
<p>Armed settlers rampage daily through villages of the Occupied West Bank and the neighborhoods of East Jerusalem. The number of their violent crimes has grown tremendously in recent years, and even doubled since 2009.</p>
<p>In August 2015, months before the current uprising, Human Rights Watch senior researcher, <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/08/26/how-israeli-impunity-threatens-palestinian-children" type="external">Bill Van Esveld, wrote</a>:</p>
<p>“Settlers attack Palestinians and their property on a near-daily basis—there were more than 300 such attacks last year, but few attackers faced justice. In the past decade, less than two percent of investigations into settler attacks ended with convictions.”</p>
<p>In case one is still fooled by the ‘rational’ argument used to justify the murder of militarily occupied, oppressed and besieged Palestinians, Batzalel Smotrich, from the Jewish Home Party, which is part of Netanyhu’s ruling coalition, protested via Twitter that his wife was expected to give birth in the same hospital room where Arab babies are born.</p>
<p>His written ‘rationale’, after declaring that his wife “is not a racist’, “It’s natural that my wife wouldn’t want to lie next to someone whose baby son might want to murder my son.”</p>
<p>The likes of Smotrich, and the majority of Israelis are morally blind to their own wrongdoing. They have long been sold on the idea that Israel, despite its brutality is a ‘villa in the jungle’. According to a recent Pew survey, <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/plurality-of-jewish-israelis-want-to-expel-arabs-study-shows/" type="external">nearly half of Israelis want to expel Palestinians Arabs</a>—Muslims and Christians, from their ancestral homeland.</p>
<p>The danger of impunity is not merely the lack of legal accountability, but the fact that it is the very foundation of most violent crimes against humanity, including genocide.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.palestinechronicle.com/execution-of-palestinian-exposes-israels-military-culture/" type="external">This impunity</a> began seven decades ago and it will not end without <a href="https://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/heres-what-happens-when-us-senator-calls-israel-be-held-accountable-atrocities" type="external">international intervention</a>, with concerted efforts to hold Israel accountable in order to bring the agony of Palestinians to a halt.</p> | false | 1 | world needs act end israels impunity violent crimes palestinians whether made mistake trivial question said israeli jewish man joined large protests throughout israel support soldier calmly precision killed wounded palestinian man alkhalil hebron protesting jewish man described palestinians barbaric bestial perceived people hardly fringe view israel vast majority israelis 68 support killing abdel fatah yusri alsharif 21 solider reportedly announced firing wounded palestinian terrorist die killing scene would relegated annals many contested killings israeli soldiers palestinian field worker israels human rights group btselem filmed bloody event incident highlights culture impunity exists israeli army new phenomenon israeli society supportive soldierbehind particular bloody incident almost vast majority support field executions well fact culture impunity israel linked political leanings religious beliefs according latest peace index released tel aviv universitys israel democracy institute nearly 67 countrys jewish population believes commandment kill terrorist comes knife killing palestinians form religious duty goes back early days jewish state beliefs constantly corroborated countrys high spiritual institutions similar recent decree issued countrys chief sephardic rabbi yitzhak yosef 94 ultraorthodox agree murder edict yosef 52 countrys secularists fact dehumanizing palestiniansdescribing beasts cockroaches treating dispensable inferiorshas historically common denominator israeli society uniting jews various political ideological religious backgrounds rabbi yosefs decree example much different statements made israeli defense minister moshe yaalon army government official made similar calls albeit without utilizing strongly worded religious discourse using logic quote describing palestinians beasts divergent recent statement made israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu end state israel see fence spans netanyahu said february area live must defend wild beasts added proisraeli pundits labor explain widespread israeli perception palestiniansand arabs generalon rational grounds logic commonsense continues evade instance netanyahus last war gaza summer 2014 killed total 2251 palestiniansincluding 1462 civilians among 551 children according report prepared un human rights council war six israeli civilians killed 60 soldiers truly wild beast however palestinians made beasts supposedly murderous intent statistically history palestinianisraeli conflict palestinians ever kill israelis opposed way round160 ailment number common israeli cultural perception utterly racist dehumanizing israeli perception palestinians ever linked specific period time example popular uprising war consider eyewitness account august 2012 cited israeli newspaper haaretz years current uprising west bank jerusalem today saw lynch eyes zion square center city jerusalem shouts jew soul arab son shouted loudly dozens youths ran gathered started really beat death three arab youths walking quietly ben yehuda street witness wrote one palestinian youths fell ground youths continued hit head lost consciousness eyes rolled angled head twitched kicking fled rest gathered around circle still shouting hate eyes imagine graphic account repeated different manifestations every day occupied palestine consider rarely anyone pay price indeed israels culture impunity evolved years according israeli human rights group yesh din approximately 94 criminal investigations launched idf soldiers suspected criminal violent activity palestinians property closed without indictments rare cases indictments served conviction leads light sentencing one immune israels 972mag wrote december 2015 hundreds violent incidents israeli forces targeting palestinian medical staff palestinian rights group alhaq documented 56 cases ambulances attacked 116 assaults medical staff duty violence meted illegal settlers whose population occupied territories constantly increase armed settlers rampage daily villages occupied west bank neighborhoods east jerusalem number violent crimes grown tremendously recent years even doubled since 2009 august 2015 months current uprising human rights watch senior researcher bill van esveld wrote settlers attack palestinians property neardaily basisthere 300 attacks last year attackers faced justice past decade less two percent investigations settler attacks ended convictions case one still fooled rational argument used justify murder militarily occupied oppressed besieged palestinians batzalel smotrich jewish home party part netanyhus ruling coalition protested via twitter wife expected give birth hospital room arab babies born written rationale declaring wife racist natural wife wouldnt want lie next someone whose baby son might want murder son likes smotrich majority israelis morally blind wrongdoing long sold idea israel despite brutality villa jungle according recent pew survey nearly half israelis want expel palestinians arabsmuslims christians ancestral homeland danger impunity merely lack legal accountability fact foundation violent crimes humanity including genocide impunity began seven decades ago end without international intervention concerted efforts hold israel accountable order bring agony palestinians halt | 683 |
<p />
<p>In an interview on the Fox Business Network, a retired U.S. intelligence officer accused the official in charge of the 9/11 Commission of a cover-up of intelligence failures leading up to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.</p>
<p>Appearing on the political talk show Freedom Watch, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer and the author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Operation-Dark-Heart-Frontlines-Afghanistan/dp/031260369X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1286873726&amp;sr=1-1" type="external">Operation Dark Heart</a>, a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/10/us/10books.html" type="external">much-hyped</a> new book on the war in Afghanistan, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6n2FgwWg7A" type="external">spoke</a> about his mid-October 2003 encounter with Dr. Philip Zelikow, then executive director of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States.</p>
<p>During a fact-finding mission to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, Zelikow’s team was briefed by Shaffer on <a href="http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?before_9/11=abledanger&amp;timeline=complete_911_timeline" type="external">Able Danger</a>, a DIA data mining project that had allegedly identified Mohammed Atta as a threat to the U.S. a year before 9/11.</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">&lt;img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-7473" style="margin: 5px;" title="operation-dark-heart" src="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/operation-dark-heart-300x168.jpg" alt="Operation Dark Heart" width="300" height="168" /&gt;</a>Parenthetically, the “Mohammed Atta” identified by Able Danger may have been an imposter operating under a stolen identity, as <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/17/dubai-assassins-stolen-british-identities" type="external">occurred</a> in the assassination of a senior Hamas official in Dubai. In an interview with a German newspaper, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/sep/02/september11.usa" type="external">reported</a> by the Guardian, Mohammed Atta’s father claimed that his son had nothing to do with the attacks and was still alive a year after 9/11.</p>
<p>Whichever Mohammed Atta was referred to by Shaffer in Bagram, Zelikow <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3952395,00.html" type="external">reportedly</a> “fell silent with shock at the news.”</p>
<p>According to Shaffer, Zelikow came to him at the end of the meeting, gave him his card, and said: “What you said today is critically important, very important. Please come see me when you return to Washington D.C.”</p>
<p>On his return to Washington in January 2004, Shaffer immediately contacted Zelikow’s office and was told to “stand by.” After a week passed, Shaffer called again, and this time was told by Zelikow’s staff: “We don’t need you to come in. We have all the information on Able Danger we need. Thank you anyway.”</p>
<p>None of the information provided by Shaffer appeared in the 9/11 Commission’s <a href="http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf" type="external">585-page report</a>, however.</p>
<p>In September 2005, more than a year after the publication of the 9/11 report, Shaffer said he met with one of the 9/11 commissioners in Philadelphia. Over lunch, he told the commissioner what he had told Zelikow in Afghanistan. The commissioner said that “he had never heard any of this,” adding that, “had he heard of it, it would have been something that was very much of interest to he [sic] and the commission.”</p>
<p>“So there’s a lot of things that never made it in that 9/11 report?” asked Judge Andrew Napolitano, the host of Freedom Watch.</p>
<p>“Things were either by negligence left out, or, and I believe, by purpose left out,” Shaffer replied.</p>
<p>Another guest on the show, Michael Scheuer, who headed the CIA’s bin Laden unit from 1996 to 1999, spoke of a similarly frustrating experience with the 9/11 Commission staff director.</p>
<p>Describing the 9/11 Commission Report as “a whitewash, and a lie from top to bottom,” Scheuer said he provided Zelikow with over 400 pages of official government documents detailing intelligence failures before 9/11.</p>
<p>“I never heard one word back from Zelikow,” he said.</p>
<p>“They all seemed very interested in what you had to say,” the former CIA officer added, referring to meetings he had with Zelikow and his staff, “but at the end of the day, it didn’t make it into the report.”</p>
<p>This is not the first time that questions have been raised about Zelikow’s handling of the 9/11 Commission.</p>
<p>In his 2009 book, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Commission-WHAT-DIDNT-KNOW-ABOUT/dp/0446699519/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1286862111&amp;sr=8-1#reader_0446699519" type="external">The Commission</a>, Philip Shenon, an investigative reporter for the New York Times, wrote about “how tightly Zelikow was able to control the flow of information on the commission,” and that “everything” was “run through” him.</p>
<p>While Zelikow’s tight control of the commission excluded disturbing evidence from national security experts like Shaffer and Scheuer, a <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.bergen.html" type="external">dubious scholar</a> like Laurie Mylroie was afforded ample opportunity to promote the most spurious justification for the Iraq war. Mylroie, whose major booster in government was Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, argued that Iraq had been involved in every major terrorist attack against the United States since the early 1990s, including 9/11. During commission hearings on al-Qaeda, Zelikow, writes Shenon, “made sure that she had a prominent place at the witness table.”</p>
<p>And why wouldn’t he? After all, Zelikow had an important role in, as Shenon puts it, “developing the scholarly underpinnings for the Iraq war.” It was Zelikow who had authored a thirty-one-page “preemptive war” doctrine which George W. Bush announced to the world in 2002 as “ <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/20/politics/20STEXT_FULL.html" type="external">The National Security Strategy of the United States</a>.”</p>
<p>“Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us?” Zelikow asked an audience at the University of Virginia in September 2002. In a rare moment of candor, Zelikow proceeded to <a href="http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=23083" type="external">explain</a> that the real reason for preemptive war against Iraq was “the threat against Israel.”</p>
<p>Judge Napolitano asked Lt. Col. Shaffer if the commissioner in Philadelphia had said whether anyone on the 9/11 Commission “had an agenda, or was covering up for somebody, or was protecting somebody.” The commissioner’s reply was, according to Shaffer: “Everybody on the commission was covering for someone.”</p>
<p>Given the <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/helen-thomas-you-cannot-criticize-israel-in-the-u-s-and-survive-1.318705" type="external">fatal career implications</a> of broaching such a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mO0HD5RE_uM&amp;feature=related" type="external">taboo</a> <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/christison09062004.html" type="external">subject</a>, not to mention Rupert Murdoch’s well-known <a href="http://www.wrmea.com/archives/june2003/0306024.html" type="external">devotion to the State of Israel</a>, it’s hardly surprising that the Fox presenter didn’t probe too deeply into <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Terror-Enigma-11-Israeli-Connection/dp/0595296823/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1287215052&amp;sr=8-2" type="external">who Philip Zelikow might have been covering for</a>.</p> | false | 1 | interview fox business network retired us intelligence officer accused official charge 911 commission coverup intelligence failures leading terrorist attacks september 11 2001 appearing political talk show freedom watch lt col anthony shaffer former defense intelligence agency officer author operation dark heart muchhyped new book war afghanistan spoke midoctober 2003 encounter dr philip zelikow executive director national commission terrorist attacks upon united states factfinding mission bagram air base afghanistan zelikows team briefed shaffer able danger dia data mining project allegedly identified mohammed atta threat us year 911 ltimg classalignleft sizemedium wpimage7473 stylemargin 5px titleoperationdarkheart srchttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201010operationdarkheart300x168jpg altoperation dark heart width300 height168 gtparenthetically mohammed atta identified able danger may imposter operating stolen identity occurred assassination senior hamas official dubai interview german newspaper reported guardian mohammed attas father claimed son nothing attacks still alive year 911 whichever mohammed atta referred shaffer bagram zelikow reportedly fell silent shock news according shaffer zelikow came end meeting gave card said said today critically important important please come see return washington dc return washington january 2004 shaffer immediately contacted zelikows office told stand week passed shaffer called time told zelikows staff dont need come information able danger need thank anyway none information provided shaffer appeared 911 commissions 585page report however september 2005 year publication 911 report shaffer said met one 911 commissioners philadelphia lunch told commissioner told zelikow afghanistan commissioner said never heard adding heard would something much interest sic commission theres lot things never made 911 report asked judge andrew napolitano host freedom watch things either negligence left believe purpose left shaffer replied another guest show michael scheuer headed cias bin laden unit 1996 1999 spoke similarly frustrating experience 911 commission staff director describing 911 commission report whitewash lie top bottom scheuer said provided zelikow 400 pages official government documents detailing intelligence failures 911 never heard one word back zelikow said seemed interested say former cia officer added referring meetings zelikow staff end day didnt make report first time questions raised zelikows handling 911 commission 2009 book commission philip shenon investigative reporter new york times wrote tightly zelikow able control flow information commission everything run zelikows tight control commission excluded disturbing evidence national security experts like shaffer scheuer dubious scholar like laurie mylroie afforded ample opportunity promote spurious justification iraq war mylroie whose major booster government deputy defense secretary paul wolfowitz argued iraq involved every major terrorist attack united states since early 1990s including 911 commission hearings alqaeda zelikow writes shenon made sure prominent place witness table wouldnt zelikow important role shenon puts developing scholarly underpinnings iraq war zelikow authored thirtyonepage preemptive war doctrine george w bush announced world 2002 national security strategy united states would iraq attack america use nuclear weapons us zelikow asked audience university virginia september 2002 rare moment candor zelikow proceeded explain real reason preemptive war iraq threat israel judge napolitano asked lt col shaffer commissioner philadelphia said whether anyone 911 commission agenda covering somebody protecting somebody commissioners reply according shaffer everybody commission covering someone given fatal career implications broaching taboo subject mention rupert murdochs wellknown devotion state israel hardly surprising fox presenter didnt probe deeply philip zelikow might covering | 517 |
<p>By <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chris_Knight/" type="external">Chris Knight</a>, NASCAR Wire Service</p>
<p>Distributed by The Sports Xchange</p>
<p>BRISTOL, Tenn. — Not even a NASCAR overtime could stop <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kyle_Busch/" type="external">Kyle Busch</a> from rallying back from a speeding penalty at the end of Stage 2 to win Wednesday night’s UNOH 200 at Bristol Motor Speedway.</p>
<p>Busch, forced to the back of the field under penalty to start the final stage, put on a clinic on a Lap 119 restart and utilized the high line to roar through the field and find himself back in the top-10 by Lap 136.</p>
<p>Nearly 30 laps later, Busch found himself on the tails of leaders Johnny Sauter and Matt Crafton. Taking second from Sauter on Lap 163, Busch moved back into the lead four laps later slicing and dicing through lap traffic.</p>
<p>When Austin Wayne Self and Justin Haley tangled with five laps, the final restart left the field one more attempt to swipe the lead away from Busch.</p>
<p>The now five-time Bristol Truck Series winner, however, would have none of it pulling away from Crafton at the Lap 201 restart and cruised to his third NASCAR Camping World Truck Series win of the year and 49th of his career.</p>
<p>“I knew once I got that penalty that I had to go somewhere, other than where everyone else was,” said Busch. “I just started grooming the top and it took about 15 laps for it to come in and then it started going, it was pretty fast.”</p>
<p>“I can’t say enough about all these guys on this Banfield Pet Hospital Tundra, it was awesome. It was awesome when we unloaded. We made some fine-tune adjustments to it. She was really good all-day long.”</p>
<p>Looking like a superhero with his comeback, Busch, who isn’t expected to compete in anymore Camping World Truck Series races this season, said he learned enough from the penalty that could give him a potential advantage towards earning a second triple-weekend sweep at Bristol. The first came in August 2010.</p>
<p>“It was a lot of fun to come through the field like that, it kinda gave me some ideas about the rest of the week,” added Busch. “Probably showed a bunch of stuff too. That’s what it’s all about. This is the start of the triple, hopefully we can get it.”</p>
<p>While many welcomed the event’s final caution, Crafton didn’t want to see the yellow flag, as he was sure he was catching Busch as the final laps counted away.</p>
<p>“I searched the top, searched the bottom, and went back to the old faithful bottom,” said Crafton. “One thing I’ve done, I’ve finished second to Kyle way too many times here. All in all, it was a very good truck and we have nothing to hang our heads about.</p>
<p>“We were running him down there at the end. I didn’t want to see that yellow because we were running him down, we were so good on old tires. And then that restart, when you are starting on the outside you’re going ‘oh man this could be really really bad’ and he has that grip to take off on the bottom and I was sitting up there spinning the tires.”</p>
<p>Busch led the field to green after nearly a two-hour rain delay and dominated the first stage leading all 55 laps.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brad_Keselowski/" type="external">Brad Keselowski</a> Racing trucks of Chase Briscoe and Austin Cindric pitted on Lap 27 and restarted 1-2 for the Lap 64 restart, but Matt Crafton used the bump and run on Cindric and took control a lap after the beginning of Stage 2 and led until Busch caught Crafton in lap traffic and re-inherited the lead at Lap 105 and sailed away to the Stage 2 win.</p>
<p>Busch led the field off pit road but was busted by NASCAR for speeding in section 4 handing the lead back to Crafton for the start of Stage 3 and the eventual comeback for Busch.</p>
<p>The Truck Series will take a one-week break before returning to action north of the border at Canadian Tire Motorsport Park for the running of the Silverado 250 on Sun., Sept. 3.</p>
<p>NASCAR Camping World Truck Series Race — UNOH 200</p>
<p>Bristol Motor Speedway</p>
<p>Bristol, Tennessee</p>
<p>Wednesday, August 16, 2017</p>
<p>1. (1) Kyle Busch(i), Toyota, 203.</p>
<p>2. (6) Matt Crafton, Toyota, 203.</p>
<p>3. (14) John H. Nemechek, Chevrolet, 203.</p>
<p>4. (7) Grant Enfinger #, Toyota, 203.</p>
<p>5. (9) <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ben_Rhodes/" type="external">Ben Rhodes</a>, Toyota, 203.</p>
<p>6. (3) Johnny Sauter, Chevrolet, 203.</p>
<p>7. (2) Christopher Bell, Toyota, 203.</p>
<p>8. (16) Parker Kligerman, Toyota, 203.</p>
<p>9. (18) Austin Cindric #, Ford, 203.</p>
<p>10. (5) <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brandon_Jones/" type="external">Brandon Jones</a>(i), Chevrolet, 203.</p>
<p>11. (12) Justin Haley #, Chevrolet, 203.</p>
<p>12. (15) Chase Briscoe #, Ford, 203.</p>
<p>13. (10) Jesse Little, Toyota, 202.</p>
<p>14. (19) <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Regan_Smith/" type="external">Regan Smith</a>, Ford, 202.</p>
<p>15. (4) Noah Gragson #, Toyota, 202.</p>
<p>16. (17) Ryan Truex, Toyota, 202.</p>
<p>17. (8) Cody Coughlin #, Toyota, 202.</p>
<p>18. (13) Harrison Burton, Toyota, 202.</p>
<p>19. (25) JJ Yeley(i), Chevrolet, 202.</p>
<p>20. (21) Landon Huffman, Chevrolet, 201.</p>
<p>21. (26) TJ Bell, Chevrolet, 200.</p>
<p>22. (22) Austin Hill, Ford, 199.</p>
<p>23. (28) Wendell Chavous #, Chevrolet, 196.</p>
<p>24. (27) Austin Wayne Self, Chevrolet, Parked, 194.</p>
<p>25. (29) Josh Reaume, Chevrolet, 186.</p>
<p>26. (23) Clay Greenfield, Chevrolet, 183.</p>
<p>27. (32) Jordan Anderson, Chevrolet, Engine, 136.</p>
<p>28. (11) Kaz Grala #, Chevrolet, Engine, 113.</p>
<p>29. (20) Stewart Friesen #, Chevrolet, Overheating, 103.</p>
<p>30. (30) Jennifer Jo Cobb, Chevrolet, Too Slow, 76.</p>
<p>31. (31) Norm Benning, Chevrolet, Too Slow, 12.</p>
<p>32. (24) <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Nemechek/" type="external">Joe Nemechek</a>, Chevrolet, Vibration, 3.</p>
<p>Average Speed of Race Winner: 88.829 mph.</p>
<p>Time of Race: 01 Hrs, 13 Mins, 05 Secs. Margin of Victory: 0.962 Seconds.</p>
<p>Caution Flags: 5 for 31 laps.</p>
<p>Lead Changes: 6 among 4 drivers.</p>
<p>Lap Leaders: K. Busch(i) 1-61; A. Cindric # 62-64; M. Crafton 65-104; K. Busch(i) 105-115; B. Rhodes 116; M. Crafton 117-166; K. Busch(i) 167-203.</p>
<p>Leaders Summary (Driver, Times Lead, Laps Led): K. Busch(i) 3 times for 109 laps; M. Crafton 2 times for 90 laps; A. Cindric # 1 time for 3 laps; B. Rhodes 1 time for 1 lap.</p>
<p>Stage #1 Top Ten: 46,18,88,4,98,99,27,21,24,75</p>
<p>Stage #2 Top Ten: 46,88,19,27,4,18,21,24,98,8</p> | false | 1 | chris knight nascar wire service distributed sports xchange bristol tenn even nascar overtime could stop kyle busch rallying back speeding penalty end stage 2 win wednesday nights unoh 200 bristol motor speedway busch forced back field penalty start final stage put clinic lap 119 restart utilized high line roar field find back top10 lap 136 nearly 30 laps later busch found tails leaders johnny sauter matt crafton taking second sauter lap 163 busch moved back lead four laps later slicing dicing lap traffic austin wayne self justin haley tangled five laps final restart left field one attempt swipe lead away busch fivetime bristol truck series winner however would none pulling away crafton lap 201 restart cruised third nascar camping world truck series win year 49th career knew got penalty go somewhere everyone else said busch started grooming top took 15 laps come started going pretty fast cant say enough guys banfield pet hospital tundra awesome awesome unloaded made finetune adjustments really good allday long looking like superhero comeback busch isnt expected compete anymore camping world truck series races season said learned enough penalty could give potential advantage towards earning second tripleweekend sweep bristol first came august 2010 lot fun come field like kinda gave ideas rest week added busch probably showed bunch stuff thats start triple hopefully get many welcomed events final caution crafton didnt want see yellow flag sure catching busch final laps counted away searched top searched bottom went back old faithful bottom said crafton one thing ive done ive finished second kyle way many times good truck nothing hang heads running end didnt want see yellow running good old tires restart starting outside youre going oh man could really really bad grip take bottom sitting spinning tires busch led field green nearly twohour rain delay dominated first stage leading 55 laps brad keselowski racing trucks chase briscoe austin cindric pitted lap 27 restarted 12 lap 64 restart matt crafton used bump run cindric took control lap beginning stage 2 led busch caught crafton lap traffic reinherited lead lap 105 sailed away stage 2 win busch led field pit road busted nascar speeding section 4 handing lead back crafton start stage 3 eventual comeback busch truck series take oneweek break returning action north border canadian tire motorsport park running silverado 250 sun sept 3 nascar camping world truck series race unoh 200 bristol motor speedway bristol tennessee wednesday august 16 2017 1 1 kyle buschi toyota 203 2 6 matt crafton toyota 203 3 14 john h nemechek chevrolet 203 4 7 grant enfinger toyota 203 5 9 ben rhodes toyota 203 6 3 johnny sauter chevrolet 203 7 2 christopher bell toyota 203 8 16 parker kligerman toyota 203 9 18 austin cindric ford 203 10 5 brandon jonesi chevrolet 203 11 12 justin haley chevrolet 203 12 15 chase briscoe ford 203 13 10 jesse little toyota 202 14 19 regan smith ford 202 15 4 noah gragson toyota 202 16 17 ryan truex toyota 202 17 8 cody coughlin toyota 202 18 13 harrison burton toyota 202 19 25 jj yeleyi chevrolet 202 20 21 landon huffman chevrolet 201 21 26 tj bell chevrolet 200 22 22 austin hill ford 199 23 28 wendell chavous chevrolet 196 24 27 austin wayne self chevrolet parked 194 25 29 josh reaume chevrolet 186 26 23 clay greenfield chevrolet 183 27 32 jordan anderson chevrolet engine 136 28 11 kaz grala chevrolet engine 113 29 20 stewart friesen chevrolet overheating 103 30 30 jennifer jo cobb chevrolet slow 76 31 31 norm benning chevrolet slow 12 32 24 joe nemechek chevrolet vibration 3 average speed race winner 88829 mph time race 01 hrs 13 mins 05 secs margin victory 0962 seconds caution flags 5 31 laps lead changes 6 among 4 drivers lap leaders k buschi 161 cindric 6264 crafton 65104 k buschi 105115 b rhodes 116 crafton 117166 k buschi 167203 leaders summary driver times lead laps led k buschi 3 times 109 laps crafton 2 times 90 laps cindric 1 time 3 laps b rhodes 1 time 1 lap stage 1 top ten 4618884989927212475 stage 2 top ten 468819274182124988 | 693 |
<p>American leadership has destroyed the image of US sovereignty with its anti-Russia propaganda, as well as destroyed the formerly vibrant American economy.</p>
<p>It must be wonderful being Vladimir Putin and being the most powerful person on earth. And not even have to say so yourself. The US Democratic Party is saying it for Putin along with the entirety of the Western presstitute media and the CIA and FBI also. The Russian media doesn’t have to brag about Putin’s power. Megyn Kelly, the Western presstitutes, and Western leaders are doing it for them: Putin is so powerful that he is able to place in office his choice for the President of the United States.</p>
<p>I mean, Wow! What power! Americans are simply out of the game. Americans, despite a massive intelligence budget and 16 separate intelligence services plus those of its NATO vassals, are no match whatsoever for Vladimir Putin.</p>
<p />
<p />
<p>When the Democrats, CIA, and media decided to launch their PR campaign against Trump, they didn’t realize how inconsequential it would make the United States appear by putting American democracy into Putin’s pocket. What were they thinking? They weren’t. They were fixated on making sure Trump did not endanger the massive military/security complex budget by restoring normal relations with Russia.</p>
<p>There is no sign that American leadership in any area is actually capable of thought. Consider Wall Street and corporate leadership. To boost share prices Wall Street forced all corporations to desert their home country and move the production of goods and services sold to Americans offshore to where labor and regulatory costs were lower. The lower costs raised profits and share prices. Wall Street threatened resistant corporations with takeovers of the companies if they refused to move abroad in order to increase their profits.</p>
<p>Neither Wall Street nor corporate boards and CEOs were smart enough to understand that moving jobs offshore also moved US consumer incomes and purchasing power offshore. In other words, the financial and business leadership were too stupid to comprehend that without the incomes from high value-added, high productivity US jobs, the American consumer would not have the discretionary income to continue in his role as the economy’s driver.</p>
<p>The Federal Reserve caught on to Wall Street’s mistake. To rectify the mistake, the Fed expanded credit, allowing a buildup in consumer debt to keep the economy going on credit purchases. However, once consumer debt is high relative to income, the ability to buy more stuff departs. In other words, credit expansion is not a permanent fix for the lack of consumer income growth.</p>
<p>A country whose financial and business leadership is too stupid to understand that a population increasingly employed in part-time minimum wage jobs is not a big spending population is a country whose leadership has failed.</p>
<p>It is strictly impossible to boost profits by offshoring jobs without also offshoring US consumer incomes. Therefore, the profits from offshoring are temporary. Once enough jobs have been moved offshore that aggregate demand is stymied, the domestic market stagnates and then declines.</p>
<p>As I have demonstrated so many times for so many years, as has John Williams ( <a href="http://shadowstats.com" type="external">shadowstats.com</a>), the jobs reports from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics are nonsense. The jobs in the alleged recovery from June 2009 are largely low income domestic service jobs and the product of the theoretical birth/death model. The alleged recovery from the 2007-08 financial crisis is the first recovery in history in which the labor force participation rate declined. Labor force participation rates decline when the economy offers scant job opportunities, not when employment opportunities are rising.</p>
<p>What we know about US jobs is that the jobs are increasingly part-time minimum wage jobs. According to a presstitute news <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/08/minimum-wage-affordable-housing-rentals-study" type="external">report</a> that might or might not be true, there are only 12 counties in the entirely of the United States in which a person can rent a one-bedroom home on a minimum wage income.</p>
<p>In response to this report, a professor at Virginia Tech suggested that the government offer increased rental assistance and boost programs such as the National Housing Trust Fund, which invests in affordable housing.</p>
<p>In other words, taxpayers are to pick up the costs to Americans of US corporations deserting the US labor force. Those Americans who still have middle class incomes will be taxed to cover the lost incomes that the offshoring corporations and Wall Street have snatched away from American workers who can no longer earn enough to pay for their own housing.</p>
<p>In other words, capitalism has reached the point in its descent that it cannot exist without public subsidies for the people dispossessed by capitalism.</p>
<p>On a number of occasions I have written about how many costs of production are imposed on third parties, such as the environment. A significant percentage of the profits of capitalist corporations comes from the political and legal ability of the corporations to impose their costs of production on third parties. In other words, capitalism makes money because it can impose its costs of production on the environment and on people who do not share in the profits. I have provided many examples of this, especially in the area of real estate development. The developer is able to shift a large part of his costs to others.</p>
<p>This cost shifting has now reached the level of inducing Armageddon. There is an effort to impeach Trump and put the warmonger VP Pence in the presidency. As Trump campaigned on restoring normal relations with Russia, a defeat of the attempt to reduce tensions would reinforce <a href="" type="internal">the recent conclusion of the Russian military high command</a> that Washington is planning a first strike nuclear attack on Russia.</p>
<p>This is the risk that the entire world faces due to the dependence of the power and profit of the US military/security complex on war and enemies.</p>
<p>In other words, there is only one remaining rationale for the existence of the United States of America — the interests of the military/security complex — and these interests require a powerful enemy whether real or orchestrated.</p>
<p>Former CIA official John Stockwell wrote: “It is the function of the CIA to keep the world unstable, and to propagandize and teach the American people to hate, so we will let the Establishment spend any amount of money on arms.” The hatred and distrust of Russia that the West is currently being force-fed reflects Stockwell’s revelation, as does the orchestrated hatred and distrust of Muslims that has supported Washington’s destruction in whole or part of seven countries and trillions of dollars in new US war debt.</p>
<p>Globalism, that is, labor arbitrage across national boundaries, and financialization, the diversion of consumers’ incomes into interest and fees to banks, have wrecked the US economy. The “opportunity society” has vanished. Children have poorer economic prospects than their parents. The offshoring of manufacturing and professional service jobs such as IT and software engineering has collapsed the growth of aggregate demand in the US. The Federal Reserve’s credit expansion was only a temporary reprieve.</p>
<p>Formerly prosperous areas are in ruins. States’ budgets and pension systems are failing. There is no payoff to a university education. Americans’ economic prospects have been erased by globalism. Getting ahead requires connections as it did in the aristocratic systems. The high concentration of income and wealth has negated democracy. The government is only accountable to the rich.</p>
<p>American political and business leadership not only destroyed the image of US sovereignty by placing American democracy in Putin’s pocket, but also destroyed the formerly vibrant American economy, once the envy of the world.</p>
<p>Where can Americans find leadership? Certainly not in the Democratic Party, nor in the Republican Party, nor in the media, nor in the corporate community. How then does the US compete with Russia and China, two countries with good leadership? Is war the only answer to the question?</p>
<p>This article was originally published at <a href="http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/06/12/vladimir-putin-powerful-person-world/" type="external">PaulCraigRoberts.org</a>.</p> | false | 1 | american leadership destroyed image us sovereignty antirussia propaganda well destroyed formerly vibrant american economy must wonderful vladimir putin powerful person earth even say us democratic party saying putin along entirety western presstitute media cia fbi also russian media doesnt brag putins power megyn kelly western presstitutes western leaders putin powerful able place office choice president united states mean wow power americans simply game americans despite massive intelligence budget 16 separate intelligence services plus nato vassals match whatsoever vladimir putin democrats cia media decided launch pr campaign trump didnt realize inconsequential would make united states appear putting american democracy putins pocket thinking werent fixated making sure trump endanger massive militarysecurity complex budget restoring normal relations russia sign american leadership area actually capable thought consider wall street corporate leadership boost share prices wall street forced corporations desert home country move production goods services sold americans offshore labor regulatory costs lower lower costs raised profits share prices wall street threatened resistant corporations takeovers companies refused move abroad order increase profits neither wall street corporate boards ceos smart enough understand moving jobs offshore also moved us consumer incomes purchasing power offshore words financial business leadership stupid comprehend without incomes high valueadded high productivity us jobs american consumer would discretionary income continue role economys driver federal reserve caught wall streets mistake rectify mistake fed expanded credit allowing buildup consumer debt keep economy going credit purchases however consumer debt high relative income ability buy stuff departs words credit expansion permanent fix lack consumer income growth country whose financial business leadership stupid understand population increasingly employed parttime minimum wage jobs big spending population country whose leadership failed strictly impossible boost profits offshoring jobs without also offshoring us consumer incomes therefore profits offshoring temporary enough jobs moved offshore aggregate demand stymied domestic market stagnates declines demonstrated many times many years john williams shadowstatscom jobs reports us bureau labor statistics nonsense jobs alleged recovery june 2009 largely low income domestic service jobs product theoretical birthdeath model alleged recovery 200708 financial crisis first recovery history labor force participation rate declined labor force participation rates decline economy offers scant job opportunities employment opportunities rising know us jobs jobs increasingly parttime minimum wage jobs according presstitute news report might might true 12 counties entirely united states person rent onebedroom home minimum wage income response report professor virginia tech suggested government offer increased rental assistance boost programs national housing trust fund invests affordable housing words taxpayers pick costs americans us corporations deserting us labor force americans still middle class incomes taxed cover lost incomes offshoring corporations wall street snatched away american workers longer earn enough pay housing words capitalism reached point descent exist without public subsidies people dispossessed capitalism number occasions written many costs production imposed third parties environment significant percentage profits capitalist corporations comes political legal ability corporations impose costs production third parties words capitalism makes money impose costs production environment people share profits provided many examples especially area real estate development developer able shift large part costs others cost shifting reached level inducing armageddon effort impeach trump put warmonger vp pence presidency trump campaigned restoring normal relations russia defeat attempt reduce tensions would reinforce recent conclusion russian military high command washington planning first strike nuclear attack russia risk entire world faces due dependence power profit us militarysecurity complex war enemies words one remaining rationale existence united states america interests militarysecurity complex interests require powerful enemy whether real orchestrated former cia official john stockwell wrote function cia keep world unstable propagandize teach american people hate let establishment spend amount money arms hatred distrust russia west currently forcefed reflects stockwells revelation orchestrated hatred distrust muslims supported washingtons destruction whole part seven countries trillions dollars new us war debt globalism labor arbitrage across national boundaries financialization diversion consumers incomes interest fees banks wrecked us economy opportunity society vanished children poorer economic prospects parents offshoring manufacturing professional service jobs software engineering collapsed growth aggregate demand us federal reserves credit expansion temporary reprieve formerly prosperous areas ruins states budgets pension systems failing payoff university education americans economic prospects erased globalism getting ahead requires connections aristocratic systems high concentration income wealth negated democracy government accountable rich american political business leadership destroyed image us sovereignty placing american democracy putins pocket also destroyed formerly vibrant american economy envy world americans find leadership certainly democratic party republican party media corporate community us compete russia china two countries good leadership war answer question article originally published paulcraigrobertsorg | 736 |
<p />
<p>As we have demonstrated in previous articles, the bullion banks (primarily JP Morgan, HSBC, ScotiaMocatta, Barclays, UBS, and Deutsche Bank), most likely acting as agents for the Federal Reserve, have been systematically forcing down the price of gold since September 2011. Suppression of the gold price protects the US dollar against the extraordinary explosion in the growth of dollars and dollar-denominated debt.</p>
<p>It is possible to suppress the price of gold despite rising demand, because the price is not determined in the physical market in which gold is actually purchased and carried away. Instead, the price of gold is determined in a speculative futures market in which bets are placed on the direction of the gold price. Practically all of the bets made in the futures market are settled in cash, not in gold. Cash settlement of the contracts serves to remove price determination from the physical market.</p>
<p>Cash settlement makes it possible for enormous amounts of uncovered or “naked” futures contracts — paper gold — to be printed and dumped all at once for sale in the futures market at times when trading is thin. By increasing the supply of paper gold, the enormous sales drive down the futures price, and it is the futures price that determines the price at which physical quantities of bullion can be purchased.</p>
<p>The fact that the price of gold is determined in a paper market, in which there is no limit to the supply of paper contracts that can be created, produces the strange result that the demand for physical bullion is at an all time high, outstripping world production, but the price continues to fall! Asian demand is heavy, especially from China, and silver and gold eagles are flying off the shelves of the US Mint in record quantities. Bullion stocks are being depleted; yet the prices of gold and silver fall day after day.</p>
<p>The only way that this makes sense is that the price of bullion is not determined in a real market, but in a rigged paper market in which there is no limit to the ability to print paper gold.</p>
<p>The Chinese, Russians, and Indians are delighted that the corrupt American authorities make it possible for them to purchase ever larger quantities of gold at ever lower prices. The rigged market is perfectly acceptable to purchasers of bullion, just as it is to US authorities who are committed to protecting the dollar from a rising price of gold.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, an honest person would think that the incompatibility of high demand with constrained supply and falling price would arouse the interest of economists, the financial media, financial authorities, and congressional committees.</p>
<p>Where are the class action suits from gold mining companies against the Federal Reserve, its bullion bank agents, and all who are harming the interest of the mining companies by short-selling gold with uncovered contracts? Rigged markets–especially on the basis of inside information–are illegal and highly unethical. The naked short-selling is causing damage to mining interests. Once the price of gold is driven below $1,200 per ounce, many mines become uneconomical. They shut down. Miners are unemployed. Shareholders lose money. How can such an obviously rigged and manipulated price be permitted to continue? The answer is that the US political and financial system is engulfed with corruption and criminality. The Federal Reserve’s policy of rigging bond and gold prices and providing liquidity for stock market speculation has damaged the US economy and tens of millions of US citizens in order to protect four mega-banks from their mistakes and crimes. This private use of public policy is unprecedented in history. Those responsible should be arrested and put on trial and they should simultaneously be sued for damages.</p>
<p>US authorities use the Plunge Protection Team, the Exchange Stabilization Fund, currency swaps, Federal Reserve policy, and purchases of S&amp;P futures to support an artificial exchange value of the dollar and to provide the liquidity needed to support stock and bond prices, with the latter so artificially high that savers receive negative real interest rates on their saving.</p>
<p>The authorities have created a financial system totally out of sync with reality. When the authorities can no longer keep the house of cards standing, the collapse will be extreme.</p>
<p>It is a testament to the complicity of economists, the incompetence of financial media, and the corruption of public authorities and private institutions that this house of cards was constructed. The executives of the handful of mega-banks that caused the problem are the people who are running the US Treasury, the New York Fed, and the US financial regulatory agencies. They are using their control over public policy to protect themselves and their institutions from their own reckless behavior. The price for this protection is being paid by the economy and ordinary Americans – and that price is rising.</p>
<p>The latest orchestrated takedown of the gold price is related to two events (see the graphs below). One is that the Federal Reserve decided to boost the upward spike in the dollar’s exchange rate from the Fed’s announcement of the end of Quantitative Easing (QE). The Fed’s announcement of the end of dollar creation in order to support bond prices lessened the rising anxiety in the world about the US dollar’s value when the supply of new dollars continued to increase faster than the US output of goods and services. The Fed reinforced the boost that its announcement gave to the dollar by having its bullion bank agents drive down the gold price with naked short-selling.</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">&lt;img class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-23730" src="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-600x405.png" alt="Comex Gold Futures" width="600" height="405" srcset="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-600x405.png 600w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-150x101.png 150w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-300x203.png 300w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-73x50.png 73w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-500x337.png 500w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-280x189.png 280w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-60x40.png 60w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-118x79.png 118w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-479x323.png 479w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures.png 634w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" /&gt;</a></p>
<p>Naked short selling was also used to offset the effect on the gold price by the Bank of Japan’s surprise announcement on October 31 of a massive new program of QE. Apparently, the Bank of Japan either has been pressured by Washington to inflate Japan’s currency in order to support the dollar’s value or is applying a policy based on the Keynesian Phillips Curve that 2-3% inflation stimulates economic growth. Japan has been in the economic doldrums for a long time and is now reduced to pre-Reagan “snake oil” prescriptions in a desperate attempt to revive its economy.</p>
<p>Japan’s announcement of infinite money creation should have caused the price of gold to rise. To prevent a rise, at 3:00 AM US Eastern Time, during one of the least active trading periods for gold futures, the electronic futures market (Globex) was hit with a sale of 25 tonnes of uncovered Comex paper gold contracts, which dropped the gold price $20 dollars. No legitimate seller would destroy his own capital by selling a position in this way.</p>
<p>The gold price stabilized and moved higher, but at 8 AM US Eastern Time, and 20 minutes prior to the opening of the New York futures market (Comex), another 38 tonnes of uncovered paper gold futures were sold. The only possible purpose of such a sale is to drive down the price of gold. Again, no legitimate investor would unload a huge amount of his holdings in this way, thereby wiping out his own wealth.</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">&lt;img class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-23731" src="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-600x403.png" alt="Comex Gold Futures (image 2)" width="600" height="403" srcset="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-600x403.png 600w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-150x101.png 150w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-300x202.png 300w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-73x50.png 73w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-500x336.png 500w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-280x188.png 280w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-60x40.png 60w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-118x79.png 118w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract-479x321.png 479w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/comex-gold-futures-december-contract.png 604w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" /&gt;</a></p>
<p>Allegedly, the United States is the home of scientific economics with the predominance of winners of the Nobel Prize in economics. Despite these high qualifications, the price of gold, silver, equities, and bonds that are set in the US bear no relationship to economic reality, and American economists do not notice.</p>
<p>The divergence of markets from economic reality disturbs neither public policymakers nor economists, who promote the interests of the government and its allied interest groups. The result is an economy that is a house of cards.</p>
<p>For additional reading, <a href="http://investmentresearchdynamics.com/the-system-is-terminally-broken/" type="external">see here</a>.</p>
<p>This article was originally published at&#160; <a href="http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/11/04/american-financial-markets-relationship-reality-paul-craig-roberts-dave-kranzler/" type="external">PaulCraigRoberts.org</a>&#160;and has been used here with permission.</p> | false | 1 | demonstrated previous articles bullion banks primarily jp morgan hsbc scotiamocatta barclays ubs deutsche bank likely acting agents federal reserve systematically forcing price gold since september 2011 suppression gold price protects us dollar extraordinary explosion growth dollars dollardenominated debt possible suppress price gold despite rising demand price determined physical market gold actually purchased carried away instead price gold determined speculative futures market bets placed direction gold price practically bets made futures market settled cash gold cash settlement contracts serves remove price determination physical market cash settlement makes possible enormous amounts uncovered naked futures contracts paper gold printed dumped sale futures market times trading thin increasing supply paper gold enormous sales drive futures price futures price determines price physical quantities bullion purchased fact price gold determined paper market limit supply paper contracts created produces strange result demand physical bullion time high outstripping world production price continues fall asian demand heavy especially china silver gold eagles flying shelves us mint record quantities bullion stocks depleted yet prices gold silver fall day day way makes sense price bullion determined real market rigged paper market limit ability print paper gold chinese russians indians delighted corrupt american authorities make possible purchase ever larger quantities gold ever lower prices rigged market perfectly acceptable purchasers bullion us authorities committed protecting dollar rising price gold nevertheless honest person would think incompatibility high demand constrained supply falling price would arouse interest economists financial media financial authorities congressional committees class action suits gold mining companies federal reserve bullion bank agents harming interest mining companies shortselling gold uncovered contracts rigged marketsespecially basis inside informationare illegal highly unethical naked shortselling causing damage mining interests price gold driven 1200 per ounce many mines become uneconomical shut miners unemployed shareholders lose money obviously rigged manipulated price permitted continue answer us political financial system engulfed corruption criminality federal reserves policy rigging bond gold prices providing liquidity stock market speculation damaged us economy tens millions us citizens order protect four megabanks mistakes crimes private use public policy unprecedented history responsible arrested put trial simultaneously sued damages us authorities use plunge protection team exchange stabilization fund currency swaps federal reserve policy purchases sampp futures support artificial exchange value dollar provide liquidity needed support stock bond prices latter artificially high savers receive negative real interest rates saving authorities created financial system totally sync reality authorities longer keep house cards standing collapse extreme testament complicity economists incompetence financial media corruption public authorities private institutions house cards constructed executives handful megabanks caused problem people running us treasury new york fed us financial regulatory agencies using control public policy protect institutions reckless behavior price protection paid economy ordinary americans price rising latest orchestrated takedown gold price related two events see graphs one federal reserve decided boost upward spike dollars exchange rate feds announcement end quantitative easing qe feds announcement end dollar creation order support bond prices lessened rising anxiety world us dollars value supply new dollars continued increase faster us output goods services fed reinforced boost announcement gave dollar bullion bank agents drive gold price naked shortselling ltimg classaligncenter sizelarge wpimage23730 srchttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures600x405png altcomex gold futures width600 height405 srcsethttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures600x405png 600w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures150x101png 150w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures300x203png 300w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures73x50png 73w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures500x337png 500w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures280x189png 280w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures60x40png 60w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures118x79png 118w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfutures479x323png 479w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturespng 634w sizesmaxwidth 600px 100vw 600px gt naked short selling also used offset effect gold price bank japans surprise announcement october 31 massive new program qe apparently bank japan either pressured washington inflate japans currency order support dollars value applying policy based keynesian phillips curve 23 inflation stimulates economic growth japan economic doldrums long time reduced prereagan snake oil prescriptions desperate attempt revive economy japans announcement infinite money creation caused price gold rise prevent rise 300 us eastern time one least active trading periods gold futures electronic futures market globex hit sale 25 tonnes uncovered comex paper gold contracts dropped gold price 20 dollars legitimate seller would destroy capital selling position way gold price stabilized moved higher 8 us eastern time 20 minutes prior opening new york futures market comex another 38 tonnes uncovered paper gold futures sold possible purpose sale drive price gold legitimate investor would unload huge amount holdings way thereby wiping wealth ltimg classaligncenter sizelarge wpimage23731 srchttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract600x403png altcomex gold futures image 2 width600 height403 srcsethttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract600x403png 600w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract150x101png 150w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract300x202png 300w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract73x50png 73w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract500x336png 500w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract280x188png 280w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract60x40png 60w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract118x79png 118w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontract479x321png 479w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201411comexgoldfuturesdecembercontractpng 604w sizesmaxwidth 600px 100vw 600px gt allegedly united states home scientific economics predominance winners nobel prize economics despite high qualifications price gold silver equities bonds set us bear relationship economic reality american economists notice divergence markets economic reality disturbs neither public policymakers economists promote interests government allied interest groups result economy house cards additional reading see article originally published at160 paulcraigrobertsorg160and used permission | 782 |
<p>The wrangling went down to the wire as midnight approached on May 1.</p>
<p>Leaders of the Writers Guild of America and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers huddled around the long rectangular table in the conference room, purpose-built for collective bargaining, at <a href="http://variety.com/t/amptp/" type="external">AMPTP</a> headquarters in Sherman Oaks.</p>
<p>The industry let out a collective cheer — and sigh of relief — when word surfaced shortly after the witching hour that the sides had reached an agreement on a new master film and TV contract. For the first time in a decade, the <a href="http://variety.com/t/wga/" type="external">WGA</a> and the major studios and networks had come to the brink of a work stoppage. The high-flying peak TV era would have been quickly grounded if writers had set down their pencils — or keyboards — on May 2.</p>
<p>By many accounts, the <a href="http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/wga-amptp-deal-contract-strike-threat-1202406221/" type="external">WGA</a> and the majors were uncertain of the outcome of the negotiations as late as 90 minutes before the contract expiration deadline. So what turned the tide? Insiders credit relationships forged across the table during past negotiations for helping ease tensions at key moments. In the end, the accord came through the hard work of compromise and both sides educating the other on the issues that mattered most.</p>
<p>Writers considered the need to address outmoded compensation formulas for scribes increasingly working on short-order TV series, and the need to shore up the guild’s health insurance plan as strike-worthy items.</p>
<p>The concerns on both were strong enough to allow the guild to achieve a 96% margin of approval from members in a strike authorization vote. The memory of the 100-day writers strike in 2007 and early 2008 hung heavy over the discussions and the public pronouncements as the WGA went into war footing.</p>
<p>Both camps engaged in a little saber rattling in March and April as negotiations stopped and started.</p>
<p>Behind the scenes, however, there was a growing level of understanding between the sides. The <a href="http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/wga-amptp-negotiations-strike-contract-1202407152/" type="external">AMPTP</a> member companies acknowledged there was a need to adjust the compensation template for writers who were effectively taking per-episode pay cuts by working for longer periods on shows with episode orders of anywhere from eight to 13 per season compared to the 22- to 24-episode norm enshrined for decades on broadcast TV. This marked a big change from the 2007-08 negotiations when the philosophical differences over compensation issues became insurmountable. This time around, the heavy lifting went into coming up with a new formula that both sides could live with.</p>
<p>“The way in which the television industry has migrated to shorter orders had made part of our contract anachronistic,” said <a href="http://variety.com/t/david-young/" type="external">David Young</a>, executive director of the Writers Guild of America West. “Our members were taking a 25%-50% pay cut on their episodic fee. We had to deal with that in a way that worked for both parties.”</p>
<p>Insiders credit <a href="http://variety.com/t/christopher-keyser/" type="external">Christopher Keyser</a>, pictured above, a veteran shorunner and former <a href="http://variety.com/t/wga-west/" type="external">WGA West</a> president, and <a href="http://variety.com/2016/film/news/matthew-weiner-glen-mazzara-win-wga-west-1201865052/" type="external">WGA West</a> research chief <a href="http://variety.com/t/chuck-slocum/" type="external">Chuck Slocum</a> as key drivers of the effort to wrestle the short-order math problem to the ground. Keyser, who was co-chair of the WGA negotiating committee, was intimately familiar with the strain that short-orders have put on writer income levels. He came up through the world of broadcast TV dramas, notably Fox’s “Party of Five,” but more recently has worked on cable and streaming series (FX’s “Tyrant,” Amazon’s “The Last Tycoon”).</p>
<p>Another breakthrough moment came when CBS chief Leslie Moonves and Warner Bros. boss Kevin Tsujihara held a stealth meeting in April with four members of the WGA negotiating committee. One of the participants&#160;was Meredith Stiehm, a showrunner who was well known to Moonves as the creator of the CBS drama “Cold Case” and more recently an exec producer of Showtime’s “Homeland.” Stiehm explained to the honchos in plain terms that she was making half as much working on 12 episodes of “Homeland” than she did a decade ago delivering 22 episodes of “Cold Case” because of the outmoded fee structure. The fact that Moonves and Tsujihara traveled to Sherman Oaks on a Sunday afternoon to hear out the WGA team also went a long way to establishing goodwill during a rough patch in the negotiations.</p>
<p>“By and large [the companies] were pretty upfront early on in the negotiation,” Young says. “They could see there was a problem.” (The AMPTP declined to comment for this report.)</p>
<p>Eventually, the WGA came up with a new per-episode formula for short-order shows that was put on the bargaining table in a form that allowed for back-and-forth with AMPTP negotiators. Once they had something to work with, one observer says, it simply became a question of the “power dynamic.” The writers pushed hard and the studios gave up just enough to avoid seeing picket signs on May 2.</p>
<p>The urgent problem of the WGA’s deficit in its health insurance problem also was solved by both sides moving by degrees toward compromise. WGA leaders had to do some internal diplomacy to bring all of its negotiating team and board members around to the harsh reality that the guild would have to make some painful cuts in benefits — to the tune of $7 million over three years — in order to secure a $30 million influx from the AMPTP.</p>
<p>For the WGA, getting enough money to shore up the plan for the long haul was paramount. Otherwise, the health plan’s fiscal problems were sure to remain an urgent issue in contract negotiations every three years. And that would mean the WGA would give up leverage to push hard for gains in bottom-line issues of compensation, residuals and creative rights.</p>
<p>With the benefit of hindsight, it’s clear that both sides came to the 2017 negotiations ready to make a deal.</p>
<p>The strike threat was very real, and so was the pushback from the AMPTP companies early on. But the foundation of relationships — notably between AMPTP president <a href="http://variety.com/t/carol-lombardini/" type="external">Carol Lombardini</a> and WGA West executive director <a href="http://variety.com/2013/film/markets-festivals/telluride-film-review-starred-up-1200594716/" type="external">David Young</a> — was much stronger than in 2007. There was also a collective will to avoid the economic pain of a strike. Leadership and compromise saved the day, delivering a groundbreaking contract that kept writers’ keyboards humming and the cameras rolling.</p> | false | 1 | wrangling went wire midnight approached may 1 leaders writers guild america alliance motion picture television producers huddled around long rectangular table conference room purposebuilt collective bargaining amptp headquarters sherman oaks industry let collective cheer sigh relief word surfaced shortly witching hour sides reached agreement new master film tv contract first time decade wga major studios networks come brink work stoppage highflying peak tv era would quickly grounded writers set pencils keyboards may 2 many accounts wga majors uncertain outcome negotiations late 90 minutes contract expiration deadline turned tide insiders credit relationships forged across table past negotiations helping ease tensions key moments end accord came hard work compromise sides educating issues mattered writers considered need address outmoded compensation formulas scribes increasingly working shortorder tv series need shore guilds health insurance plan strikeworthy items concerns strong enough allow guild achieve 96 margin approval members strike authorization vote memory 100day writers strike 2007 early 2008 hung heavy discussions public pronouncements wga went war footing camps engaged little saber rattling march april negotiations stopped started behind scenes however growing level understanding sides amptp member companies acknowledged need adjust compensation template writers effectively taking perepisode pay cuts working longer periods shows episode orders anywhere eight 13 per season compared 22 24episode norm enshrined decades broadcast tv marked big change 200708 negotiations philosophical differences compensation issues became insurmountable time around heavy lifting went coming new formula sides could live way television industry migrated shorter orders made part contract anachronistic said david young executive director writers guild america west members taking 2550 pay cut episodic fee deal way worked parties insiders credit christopher keyser pictured veteran shorunner former wga west president wga west research chief chuck slocum key drivers effort wrestle shortorder math problem ground keyser cochair wga negotiating committee intimately familiar strain shortorders put writer income levels came world broadcast tv dramas notably foxs party five recently worked cable streaming series fxs tyrant amazons last tycoon another breakthrough moment came cbs chief leslie moonves warner bros boss kevin tsujihara held stealth meeting april four members wga negotiating committee one participants160was meredith stiehm showrunner well known moonves creator cbs drama cold case recently exec producer showtimes homeland stiehm explained honchos plain terms making half much working 12 episodes homeland decade ago delivering 22 episodes cold case outmoded fee structure fact moonves tsujihara traveled sherman oaks sunday afternoon hear wga team also went long way establishing goodwill rough patch negotiations large companies pretty upfront early negotiation young says could see problem amptp declined comment report eventually wga came new perepisode formula shortorder shows put bargaining table form allowed backandforth amptp negotiators something work one observer says simply became question power dynamic writers pushed hard studios gave enough avoid seeing picket signs may 2 urgent problem wgas deficit health insurance problem also solved sides moving degrees toward compromise wga leaders internal diplomacy bring negotiating team board members around harsh reality guild would make painful cuts benefits tune 7 million three years order secure 30 million influx amptp wga getting enough money shore plan long haul paramount otherwise health plans fiscal problems sure remain urgent issue contract negotiations every three years would mean wga would give leverage push hard gains bottomline issues compensation residuals creative rights benefit hindsight clear sides came 2017 negotiations ready make deal strike threat real pushback amptp companies early foundation relationships notably amptp president carol lombardini wga west executive director david young much stronger 2007 also collective avoid economic pain strike leadership compromise saved day delivering groundbreaking contract kept writers keyboards humming cameras rolling | 588 |
<p>The election of President Donald Trump and Republican control of Congress meant the National Rifle Association could probably rest easy that gun laws wouldn’t change for at least four years. But the NRA has begun a campaign not against pending legislation but what it sees as liberal forces bent on undoing the progress it’s made — and the political powerhouse is resorting to language that some believe could incite violence.</p>
<p>Using the hashtags #counterresistance and #clenchedfistoftruth, the NRA has put out a series of videos that announce a “shot across the bow,” and say the gun-rights group is “coming for you” and that “elites … threaten our very survival,” terms that suggest opponents are enemy combatants.</p>
<p>“The times are burning and the media elites have been caught holding the match,” NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch says in one video aired on NRATV, the gun lobby’s web video site, as it shows footage of people fighting police, breaking storefront glass and burning the American flag.</p>
<p>Later, she specifically calls out The New York Times: “We’ve had it with your narratives, your propaganda, your fake news. We’ve had it with your constant protection of your Democrat overlords, your refusal to acknowledge any truth that upsets the fragile construct that you believe is real life. And we’ve had it with your tone-deaf assertion that you are in any way truth or fact-based journalism,” Loesch says. “Consider this the shot across your proverbial bow. … In short? We’re coming for you.”</p>
<p>Kathleen Hall Jamieson, the director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, said the tone and language is “overwrought rhetoric” that, viewed by the wrong person, could lead to violence. The kicker on one of the videos — “We’re coming for you” — is straight out of the movies, she said, and “that phrase means that violence is imminent and we will perpetrate it.”</p>
<p>The NRA is taking a page from the Trump playbook.</p>
<p>The friction between the gun lobby and the media isn’t new. But critics of the NRA contend the organization is relying on the “fake news” mantra started by Trump to whip up its followers after a dip in gun sales that has taken place since Trump succeeded President Barack Obama, who favored stricter gun-control laws.</p>
<p>“They’re not inventing this hyperangry, nasty partisan tone but piggybacking on Trump’s approach. Of course, NRA voters by and large are Trump voters, so they would be sympathetic to that kind of message,” said Robert Spitzer, chairman of the political science department at State University of New York at Cortland, who has examined the firearms industry and Second Amendment issues extensively.</p>
<p>Spitzer, a member of the NRA as well as the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said it’s a pattern the NRA has exhibited as the group evolved from an almost exclusive focus on gun safety into a political beacon for conservatives who fear changes to the Second Amendment and the gun industry.</p>
<p>“It was Bill Clinton in the 1990s. In the early 2000s, it was John McCain. It was Hillary Clinton. It was the United Nations. They’ve held up the U.N. as ready to swoop in and take everybody’s guns,” Spitzer said. “The focus of their ire has changed, but the basic message has been the same.”</p>
<p>The NRA declined to comment on the videos to The Associated Press. But the NRA has produced videos saying the left and the media are out of control and feeding a false narrative that tea party conservatives are racists and Trump supporters are “toothless hillbillies.”</p>
<p>Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, said this month: “There is no longer any difference between our politicians and the elite media who report on them. … These elites threaten our very survival, and to them we say: We don’t trust you, we don’t fear you, and we don’t need you. Take your hands off our future.”</p>
<p>Erich Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, said it’s been a longtime frustration with journalists who, he contends, “ignore the violence and harsh rhetoric on the left while magnifying and twisting the words of those on the right.”</p>
<p>The NRA videos prompted Mike Nelson, a Democratic congressional candidate in Arkansas and self-described hunter and gun-rights supporter, to label them as “hate speech.” Nelson, whose website lists the NRA among more than two dozen organization he’s supported, said he can no longer back the NRA.</p>
<p>In a Facebook post, Nelson wrote: “If the NRA does not stop their hate campaign, I will call them out on sedition. Sedition is the willful undermining of the legal authority, the Incitement of Violence.”</p>
<p>Some gun owners have cheered the videos and said they give voice to conservatives weary of media attacks on Trump; others say the videos stray from the NRA’s original mission and that the NRA is inviting violence.</p>
<p>Joe Plenzler, a Marine veteran who served overseas and sometimes had reporters accompanying his unit, joined two other veterans in writing an opinion piece for The Daily Beast criticizing the videos.</p>
<p>“The NRA props up the Second Amendment by undermining and vilifying the protections afforded in the First, and paints everyone who may disagree with the current administration, our country’s justice system, or the NRA’s partisan political position with a very dark and unjust broad brush,” Plenzler wrote with Marine veterans Craig Tucker and Kyleanne Hunter.</p>
<p>Plenzler, who has since dropped his NRA membership, said he was disturbed by the videos.</p>
<p>“Lately, it seems like they’ve gone well out of the bounds of any sort of sane responsible behavior. If you want to advocate for the Second Amendment, which I unapologetically believe in, that’s fine,” he said. “But I think at the point where you are going to demonize half the American population in a recruitment effort to get more members, I’ve got a big problem with that.”</p> | false | 1 | election president donald trump republican control congress meant national rifle association could probably rest easy gun laws wouldnt change least four years nra begun campaign pending legislation sees liberal forces bent undoing progress made political powerhouse resorting language believe could incite violence using hashtags counterresistance clenchedfistoftruth nra put series videos announce shot across bow say gunrights group coming elites threaten survival terms suggest opponents enemy combatants times burning media elites caught holding match nra spokeswoman dana loesch says one video aired nratv gun lobbys web video site shows footage people fighting police breaking storefront glass burning american flag later specifically calls new york times weve narratives propaganda fake news weve constant protection democrat overlords refusal acknowledge truth upsets fragile construct believe real life weve tonedeaf assertion way truth factbased journalism loesch says consider shot across proverbial bow short coming kathleen hall jamieson director annenberg public policy center university pennsylvania said tone language overwrought rhetoric viewed wrong person could lead violence kicker one videos coming straight movies said phrase means violence imminent perpetrate nra taking page trump playbook friction gun lobby media isnt new critics nra contend organization relying fake news mantra started trump whip followers dip gun sales taken place since trump succeeded president barack obama favored stricter guncontrol laws theyre inventing hyperangry nasty partisan tone piggybacking trumps approach course nra voters large trump voters would sympathetic kind message said robert spitzer chairman political science department state university new york cortland examined firearms industry second amendment issues extensively spitzer member nra well brady center prevent gun violence said pattern nra exhibited group evolved almost exclusive focus gun safety political beacon conservatives fear changes second amendment gun industry bill clinton 1990s early 2000s john mccain hillary clinton united nations theyve held un ready swoop take everybodys guns spitzer said focus ire changed basic message nra declined comment videos associated press nra produced videos saying left media control feeding false narrative tea party conservatives racists trump supporters toothless hillbillies wayne lapierre executive vice president nra said month longer difference politicians elite media report elites threaten survival say dont trust dont fear dont need take hands future erich pratt executive director gun owners america said longtime frustration journalists contends ignore violence harsh rhetoric left magnifying twisting words right nra videos prompted mike nelson democratic congressional candidate arkansas selfdescribed hunter gunrights supporter label hate speech nelson whose website lists nra among two dozen organization hes supported said longer back nra facebook post nelson wrote nra stop hate campaign call sedition sedition willful undermining legal authority incitement violence gun owners cheered videos said give voice conservatives weary media attacks trump others say videos stray nras original mission nra inviting violence joe plenzler marine veteran served overseas sometimes reporters accompanying unit joined two veterans writing opinion piece daily beast criticizing videos nra props second amendment undermining vilifying protections afforded first paints everyone may disagree current administration countrys justice system nras partisan political position dark unjust broad brush plenzler wrote marine veterans craig tucker kyleanne hunter plenzler since dropped nra membership said disturbed videos lately seems like theyve gone well bounds sort sane responsible behavior want advocate second amendment unapologetically believe thats fine said think point going demonize half american population recruitment effort get members ive got big problem | 542 |
<p>EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. — The biggest surprise on cutdown day for the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Minnesota-Vikings/" type="external">Minnesota Vikings</a> was the release of left guard <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Alex-Boone/" type="external">Alex Boone</a>, who less than 18 months ago was a prized free-agent signing at $26.8 million over four years.</p>
<p>In hindsight, it shouldn’t have come as a surprise.</p>
<p>About two weeks ago, when head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Zimmer/" type="external">Mike Zimmer</a> was asked about the battle at center between Nick Easton and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pat-Elflein/" type="external">Pat Elflein</a>, Zimmer said, “Who knows? One of them could end up at guard.”</p>
<p>This came after Boone had missed the second preseason game at Seattle. Easton moved to left guard, allowing the rookie Elflein to start at center. And the line played the best it played all preseason.</p>
<p>But the assumption was the Vikings wouldn’t pull the trigger and dump Boone, leaving $3.4 million in dead cap space this season.</p>
<p>But this is how serious the team is about making sure they’ve got the right five guys for their switch to a new zone blocking scheme. Boone, who was brought in last year to be a power guy in front of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adrian_Peterson/" type="external">Adrian Peterson</a>, struggled being the nimble side-to-side guy that’s now required in <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pat-Shurmur/" type="external">Pat Shurmur</a>‘s version of the West Coast offense.</p>
<p>When the Vikings drafted running back <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dalvin-Cook/" type="external">Dalvin Cook</a> in the second round, they hailed his experience in a zone-blocking scheme.</p>
<p>“He came from a pretty advanced offensive system at Florida State,” Shurmur said. “You saw principles of zone running, gap running, and pass protection where he was involved. He was also involved in route running. He has a pretty good foundation of what we’re going to ask him to do, and I think that helps him.”</p>
<p>Well, it hurt Boone. And the Vikings pulled the trigger, knowing that if they don’t get their line right, the whole season will implode like it did during last year’s 3-8 slide to end the season.</p>
<p>The Vikings will have four new faces on the line in left tackle Riley Reiff, left guard Easton, center Elflein and right tackle Mike Remmers. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe-Berger/" type="external">Joe Berger</a>, who played far more games at center than right guard the last two years, will start at right guard.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Teddy-Bridgewater/" type="external">Teddy Bridgewater</a>, as expected, was moved to the regular-season PUP list. He missed all of last season after dislocating and tearing multiple ligaments in his left knee. He’s eligible to come off PUP after Week 6, but isn’t expected to play this season.</p>
<p>Zimmer has said Bridgewater will begin practicing when he’s “able to protect himself and make the moves on the field that’s required of his position.”</p>
<p>Obviously, if <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sam_Bradford/" type="external">Sam Bradford</a> plays well, the team will have no need to activate Bridgewater. If they keep him on PUP the whole season, they’re guaranteed to have his contract tolled to 2018, meaning they’d have his rights for another season at $1.345 million.</p>
<p>There is some debate as to what happens with the contract if Bridgewater is activated after six games. Wording in the CBA indicates that the final year of a contract tolls if a player is still on PUP as of the sixth game. The players’ union would likely challenge that considering there are past cases in which it was interpreted that a player had to be on PUP all year.</p>
<p>If Bridgewater is able to practice and the team doesn’t activate him, Bridgewater and the union likely will challenge the team’s motives for not activating him.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the Vikings decided to go with only two quarterbacks on cutdown day. They waived Taylor Heinicke, a third-year guy with no regular-season experience, and rookie Mitch Leidner, the former University of Minnesota quarterback who was signed recently when Heinicke dealt with an abdominal strain.</p>
<p>Heinicke, who was waived injured and placed on reserve/injured Sunday after clearing waivers, suffered a concussion in the preseason finale. He ran well in the preseason, struggled throwing the ball and with his decision-making.</p>
<p>Roster notes:</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Linebacker Eric Wilson was one of three undrafted rookies to make the final roster. The 6-foot-1, 230-pounder will become a standout special teamer. He has the compact build, the quickness and the tackling ability to be a leader covering kicks and punts. The other two undrafted rookies to make the team were DE Tashawn Bower, who flashed exceptional pass rushing skills for a guy who wasn’t drafted, and T Aviante Collins, a surprise winner of the backup right tackle job.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Linebacker Edmond Robinson, who went into training camp as a promising third-year pro, lost his spot on the roster when he was outplayed by other young linebackers, including rookie Ben Gedeon, a fourth-round pick from Michigan. Gedeon and veteran Emmanuel Lamur will handle the weak-side linebacker spot in the base defense. That’s the job Chad Greenway was handling at the end of his 11-year career. That spot plays about 30 percent of the defensive snaps.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Kicker Kai Forbath didn’t have the strongest leg in camp, but his accuracy was enough to beat out Marshall Koehn. Koehn was the better kickoff guy, and he nailed a 58-yard field goal with plenty of room to spare in the third preseason game. But he has never kicked in a regular-season game. His fate was officially sealed when he duck-hooked a PAT wide left in the final preseason game. The Vikings also went with experience over leg strength at punter, where Ryan Quigley’s directional skills beat out Taylor Symmank’s erratic power.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Defensive tackle Sharrif Floyd continues in his comeback attempt, but the Vikings aren’t hopeful. The former first-round draft pick played only one game last season before having knee surgery. The surgery was unsuccessful and Floyd suffered some nerve damage. He was placed on the reserve/non- <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Walker/" type="external">football</a> injury list.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Tackle T.J. Clemmings was quietly released on cutdown day. It was the final bottoming out for a third-year pro who started 30 of 32 games in his first two seasons. Often seen as the primary example of the Vikings’ ongoing weakness up front, the 2015 fourth-round draft pick was forced into the starting lineup by injuries in 2015 and last year. He started every game at right tackle as a rookie and bounced between right and left tackle when injuries destroyed the line early on last year. He was claimed on waivers by the Redskins. Also released was 2016 fourth-round pick Willie Beavers, another tackle who didn’t pan out.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Wide receiver <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Michael-Floyd/" type="external">Michael Floyd</a> began serving his four-game suspension for violating the league’s substance abuse policy. He was arrested for DWI in December.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Tight end Blake Bell was awarded to the Vikings as a waiver-wire claim on Sunday. The 26 year old was a fourth-round pick of the 49ers in 2015. He’s a big target that should be able to help as a blocker.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Quartrback Kyle Sloter, an undrafted rookie from Northern Colorado, was signed to the practice squad on Sunday. He was waived by denver Saturday. The Vikings kept only two quarterbacks on the active roster and also have Teddy Bridgewater on PUP for at least the first six weeks.</p> | false | 1 | eden prairie minn biggest surprise cutdown day minnesota vikings release left guard alex boone less 18 months ago prized freeagent signing 268 million four years hindsight shouldnt come surprise two weeks ago head coach mike zimmer asked battle center nick easton pat elflein zimmer said knows one could end guard came boone missed second preseason game seattle easton moved left guard allowing rookie elflein start center line played best played preseason assumption vikings wouldnt pull trigger dump boone leaving 34 million dead cap space season serious team making sure theyve got right five guys switch new zone blocking scheme boone brought last year power guy front adrian peterson struggled nimble sidetoside guy thats required pat shurmurs version west coast offense vikings drafted running back dalvin cook second round hailed experience zoneblocking scheme came pretty advanced offensive system florida state shurmur said saw principles zone running gap running pass protection involved also involved route running pretty good foundation going ask think helps well hurt boone vikings pulled trigger knowing dont get line right whole season implode like last years 38 slide end season vikings four new faces line left tackle riley reiff left guard easton center elflein right tackle mike remmers joe berger played far games center right guard last two years start right guard quarterback teddy bridgewater expected moved regularseason pup list missed last season dislocating tearing multiple ligaments left knee hes eligible come pup week 6 isnt expected play season zimmer said bridgewater begin practicing hes able protect make moves field thats required position obviously sam bradford plays well team need activate bridgewater keep pup whole season theyre guaranteed contract tolled 2018 meaning theyd rights another season 1345 million debate happens contract bridgewater activated six games wording cba indicates final year contract tolls player still pup sixth game players union would likely challenge considering past cases interpreted player pup year bridgewater able practice team doesnt activate bridgewater union likely challenge teams motives activating meanwhile vikings decided go two quarterbacks cutdown day waived taylor heinicke thirdyear guy regularseason experience rookie mitch leidner former university minnesota quarterback signed recently heinicke dealt abdominal strain heinicke waived injured placed reserveinjured sunday clearing waivers suffered concussion preseason finale ran well preseason struggled throwing ball decisionmaking roster notes linebacker eric wilson one three undrafted rookies make final roster 6foot1 230pounder become standout special teamer compact build quickness tackling ability leader covering kicks punts two undrafted rookies make team de tashawn bower flashed exceptional pass rushing skills guy wasnt drafted aviante collins surprise winner backup right tackle job linebacker edmond robinson went training camp promising thirdyear pro lost spot roster outplayed young linebackers including rookie ben gedeon fourthround pick michigan gedeon veteran emmanuel lamur handle weakside linebacker spot base defense thats job chad greenway handling end 11year career spot plays 30 percent defensive snaps kicker kai forbath didnt strongest leg camp accuracy enough beat marshall koehn koehn better kickoff guy nailed 58yard field goal plenty room spare third preseason game never kicked regularseason game fate officially sealed duckhooked pat wide left final preseason game vikings also went experience leg strength punter ryan quigleys directional skills beat taylor symmanks erratic power defensive tackle sharrif floyd continues comeback attempt vikings arent hopeful former firstround draft pick played one game last season knee surgery surgery unsuccessful floyd suffered nerve damage placed reservenon football injury list tackle tj clemmings quietly released cutdown day final bottoming thirdyear pro started 30 32 games first two seasons often seen primary example vikings ongoing weakness front 2015 fourthround draft pick forced starting lineup injuries 2015 last year started every game right tackle rookie bounced right left tackle injuries destroyed line early last year claimed waivers redskins also released 2016 fourthround pick willie beavers another tackle didnt pan wide receiver michael floyd began serving fourgame suspension violating leagues substance abuse policy arrested dwi december tight end blake bell awarded vikings waiverwire claim sunday 26 year old fourthround pick 49ers 2015 hes big target able help blocker quartrback kyle sloter undrafted rookie northern colorado signed practice squad sunday waived denver saturday vikings kept two quarterbacks active roster also teddy bridgewater pup least first six weeks | 689 |
<p>On Monday morning, the <a href="http://variety.com/t/golden-globes/" type="external">Golden Globes</a> reinforced the notion that Hollywood is still a boy’s club. The organization, made up of about 90 foreign journalists, seemed to go out on a limb not to nominate a single woman for best director. Not Greta Gerwig (“Lady Bird”). Not Patty Jenkins (“ <a href="http://variety.com/t/wonder-woman/" type="external">Wonder Woman</a>”). Not Dee Rees (“Mudbound”).</p>
<p>Although 2017 has been called the year of the woman, the Globes managed to overlook two of the biggest female-led hits of the year: “Beauty and the Beast,” the most successful movie of 2017 so far, was snubbed in the musical/comedy category, and “ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/news/warner-bros-2017-worldwide-box-office-wonder-woman-1202631457/" type="external">Wonder Woman</a>” was shut out for any awards. Other surprises: Jordan Peele didn’t get a nomination for writing or directing “Get Out,” although his movie did receive two nominations (for best picture and actor).</p>
<p>Guillermo del Toro’s “The Shape of Water,” a love story between a lonely woman and a monster, led all movies with seven nominations. “The Post” and “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri” each picked up six nods. On the TV side, HBO’s “Big Little Lies” landed six nominations and FX’s “Feud” scored four.</p>
<p>Here are the 21 biggest snubs and surprises from the Hollywood Foreign Press Association:</p>
<p>SNUB: Greta Gerwig for directing “Lady Bird”The biggest disappointment of the morning was that the Globes, following a troubling trend that’s been continuing at the Oscars, nominated five men in the best director category. It’s a shock that there was no love in the category for Greta Gerwig for “Lady Bird,” the best-reviewed independent film of 2017.</p>
<p>SNUB: Jordan Peele, for directing and writing “Get Out”The horror movie earned two nominations for best picture musical/comedy and lead actor Daniel Kaluuya. However, Peele was somehow not recognized in the directing or screenwriting categories, where the movie is expected to make a strong showing on the awards trail.</p>
<p>SNUB: “Wonder Woman” gets shut outSome pundits have wondered if the Warner Bros. tentpole could be the first comic book movie to score a best picture nomination at the Oscars. But the film’s momentum was hurt on Monday, when the Globes omitted it from all categories, including best picture, best director and best actress for Gal Gadot.</p>
<p>SNUB: “The Big Sick”The Amazon Studios release was a hit with audiences, earning $43 million at the domestic box office. It’s weird that the Globes didn’t find room for the movie in the best comedy category, or any recognition for stars Holly Hunter or Kumail Nanjiani, who delivered one of the year’s best breakout performances.</p>
<p>SNUB: <a href="http://variety.com/t/jennifer-lawrence/" type="external">Jennifer Lawrence</a>, “mother!”Yes, she starred in the most divisive movie of the year. But the Globes love <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/news/jennifer-lawrence-adam-sandler-avoiding-fan-encounters-actors-on-actors-1202623850/" type="external">Jennifer Lawrence</a> so much, they gave her an acting trophy for “Joy.” The fact that she didn’t earn a nomination for “mother!” means that Darren Aronofky’s drama about a woman who lives on an abandoned farm isn’t going to be an awards contender.</p>
<p>SNUB: Kate Winslet, “Wonder Wheel”Winslet is another favorite of the Hollywood Foreign Press, having picking up a total of 11 nominations over her career. Her role in Woody Allen’s drama set in Coney Island is the type of performance that the Globes usually go for.</p>
<p>SNUB: Emma Watson, “Beauty and the Beast”The “Harry Potter” star has never been nominated for a Golden Globe. Although the Hollywood Foreign Press loves musicals, they didn’t show any affection for Belle.</p>
<p>SNUB: Diane Kruger, “In the Fade”After winning the best actress prize at Cannes, for playing a woman dealing with grief after losing her family in a terrorist attack, Kruger hasn’t been able to break into the awards season race. That’s a shame, since she gives her best performance to date in the drama directed by Fatih Akin.</p>
<p>SNUB: Christian Bale, “Hostiles”The Western was hailed as as instant Oscar contender when it debuted at Telluride, with a tour-de-force lead performance from Bale. However, its distributor, Byron Allen’s Entertainment Studios Motion Pictures, is an unproven entity in the awards race game. The indie hasn’t had a high enough profile in a year where the best actor race is packed with heavyweights such as Tom Hanks (“The Post”), Gary Oldman (“The Darkest Hour”) and Daniel Day-Lewis (“Phantom Thread”).</p>
<p>SNUB: Jake Gyllenhaal, “Stronger”Gyllenhaal received rave reviews for playing Boston Marathon survivor Jeff Bauman, who lost both legs in the 2013 bombing on Boylston Street. Yet the film’s early fall release date and modest box office receipts might have hurts Gyllenhaal’s chances with the Hollywood Foreign Press.</p>
<p>SNUB: Adam Sandler, “The Meyerowitz Stories (New and Selected)”Sandler’s last (and only) Golden Globe nomination was for his starring role in 2002’s “Punch Drunk Love.” Many thought that he might return to category with his character actor turn in Noah Baumbach’s film.</p>
<p>SNUB: “Veep,” HBO“Veep” has been a Golden Globe reliable, with two nominations for comedy and three for its star, Julia Louis-Dreyfus. But the reigning Emmy champ didn’t win favor with HFPA members, who voted “Veep” out of office in favor of new series like “SMILF” and “Marvelous Mrs. Maisel.”</p>
<p>SNUB: “Transparent,” Amazon“Transparent” won Globes for the series and its star, Jeffrey Tambor, in its first season, and has been nominated every year since. That ground to a halt this year. Might the accusations against Tambor have factored in?</p>
<p>SNUB: Debra Messing, “Will &amp; Grace”Voters embraced the NBC revival, crowning it with noms for best series and best actor for Eric McCormack. But Debra Messing didn’t make the cut this time out, even though she’d earned six nods for the role.</p>
<p>SNUB: Larry David, “Curb Your Enthusiasm”David’s return to TV had been highly anticipated — he’d earned three nominations for his work on the show in its previous seasons. But voters shunned him for the ninth season — blame that Fatwah?</p>
<p>SNUB: Milo Ventimiglia, “This Is Us”The actor earned a nod last season for his turn as the ill-fated father in NBC’s hit drama, a role which has only gotten more complex and layered in its sophomore season.</p>
<p>SNUB: Carrie Coon, “The Leftovers” and “Fargo”She delivered two of the most talked about performances of the year in HBO’s drama and FX’s anthology series — but somehow HFPA voters missed them both.</p>
<p>SURPRISE: “All the Money in the World” reboundsSo far, Ridley Scott’s drama has been in the press for all the wrong reasons. Last month, Kevin Spacey had to be cut from the project, after a series of sexual harassment allegations surfaced. His role (as John Paul Getty) was recast with Christopher Plummer, who had to agree to last-minute reshoots. The Hollywood Foreign Press seems to believe that the film, which hasn’t screened for critics yet, is actually good. “All The Money in the World” received three Golden Globe nominations: best supporting actor Plummer, best actress Michelle Williams and best director.</p>
<p>SURPRISE: Ansel Elgort, “Baby Driver”The summer box office hit wasn’t really considered an award movies, yet Elgort made the cut over more expected names like Adam Sandler or Kumail Nanjiani. This is the 23-year-old star’s first Golden Globe nomination.</p>
<p>SURPRISE: Katherine Langford, “Thirteen Reasons Why”Netflix’s drama grabbed headlines for its subject matter — as did the performance of the Australian teen as the suicidal teenager.</p>
<p>SURPRISE: Kevin Bacon, “I Love Dick”It’s no surprise that Bacon would draw the attention of HFPA voters, having won for his 2010 movie “Taking Chance.” But his turn in Jill Soloway’s “I Love Dick” mostly flew under the radar.</p> | false | 1 | monday morning golden globes reinforced notion hollywood still boys club organization made 90 foreign journalists seemed go limb nominate single woman best director greta gerwig lady bird patty jenkins wonder woman dee rees mudbound although 2017 called year woman globes managed overlook two biggest femaleled hits year beauty beast successful movie 2017 far snubbed musicalcomedy category wonder woman shut awards surprises jordan peele didnt get nomination writing directing get although movie receive two nominations best picture actor guillermo del toros shape water love story lonely woman monster led movies seven nominations post three billboards outside ebbing missouri picked six nods tv side hbos big little lies landed six nominations fxs feud scored four 21 biggest snubs surprises hollywood foreign press association snub greta gerwig directing lady birdthe biggest disappointment morning globes following troubling trend thats continuing oscars nominated five men best director category shock love category greta gerwig lady bird bestreviewed independent film 2017 snub jordan peele directing writing get outthe horror movie earned two nominations best picture musicalcomedy lead actor daniel kaluuya however peele somehow recognized directing screenwriting categories movie expected make strong showing awards trail snub wonder woman gets shut outsome pundits wondered warner bros tentpole could first comic book movie score best picture nomination oscars films momentum hurt monday globes omitted categories including best picture best director best actress gal gadot snub big sickthe amazon studios release hit audiences earning 43 million domestic box office weird globes didnt find room movie best comedy category recognition stars holly hunter kumail nanjiani delivered one years best breakout performances snub jennifer lawrence motheryes starred divisive movie year globes love jennifer lawrence much gave acting trophy joy fact didnt earn nomination mother means darren aronofkys drama woman lives abandoned farm isnt going awards contender snub kate winslet wonder wheelwinslet another favorite hollywood foreign press picking total 11 nominations career role woody allens drama set coney island type performance globes usually go snub emma watson beauty beastthe harry potter star never nominated golden globe although hollywood foreign press loves musicals didnt show affection belle snub diane kruger fadeafter winning best actress prize cannes playing woman dealing grief losing family terrorist attack kruger hasnt able break awards season race thats shame since gives best performance date drama directed fatih akin snub christian bale hostilesthe western hailed instant oscar contender debuted telluride tourdeforce lead performance bale however distributor byron allens entertainment studios motion pictures unproven entity awards race game indie hasnt high enough profile year best actor race packed heavyweights tom hanks post gary oldman darkest hour daniel daylewis phantom thread snub jake gyllenhaal strongergyllenhaal received rave reviews playing boston marathon survivor jeff bauman lost legs 2013 bombing boylston street yet films early fall release date modest box office receipts might hurts gyllenhaals chances hollywood foreign press snub adam sandler meyerowitz stories new selectedsandlers last golden globe nomination starring role 2002s punch drunk love many thought might return category character actor turn noah baumbachs film snub veep hboveep golden globe reliable two nominations comedy three star julia louisdreyfus reigning emmy champ didnt win favor hfpa members voted veep office favor new series like smilf marvelous mrs maisel snub transparent amazontransparent globes series star jeffrey tambor first season nominated every year since ground halt year might accusations tambor factored snub debra messing amp gracevoters embraced nbc revival crowning noms best series best actor eric mccormack debra messing didnt make cut time even though shed earned six nods role snub larry david curb enthusiasmdavids return tv highly anticipated hed earned three nominations work show previous seasons voters shunned ninth season blame fatwah snub milo ventimiglia usthe actor earned nod last season turn illfated father nbcs hit drama role gotten complex layered sophomore season snub carrie coon leftovers fargoshe delivered two talked performances year hbos drama fxs anthology series somehow hfpa voters missed surprise money world reboundsso far ridley scotts drama press wrong reasons last month kevin spacey cut project series sexual harassment allegations surfaced role john paul getty recast christopher plummer agree lastminute reshoots hollywood foreign press seems believe film hasnt screened critics yet actually good money world received three golden globe nominations best supporting actor plummer best actress michelle williams best director surprise ansel elgort baby driverthe summer box office hit wasnt really considered award movies yet elgort made cut expected names like adam sandler kumail nanjiani 23yearold stars first golden globe nomination surprise katherine langford thirteen reasons whynetflixs drama grabbed headlines subject matter performance australian teen suicidal teenager surprise kevin bacon love dickits surprise bacon would draw attention hfpa voters 2010 movie taking chance turn jill soloways love dick mostly flew radar | 768 |
<p>Among the many challenges that new White House counsel Fred Fielding will face on judicial nominations is ensuring that the American Bar Association’s ideologically stacked judicial-evaluations committee behaves responsibly. Now that Mississippi attorney Michael B. Wallace has requested that President Bush not renominate him to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, it is instructive to complete an accounting of the ABA’s thoroughly scandalous “not qualified” rating of Wallace.</p>
<p>Although it determined that Wallace “has the highest professional competence” and “possesses the integrity to serve on the bench,” the ABA judicial-evaluations committee found him lacking on the highly malleable element of “judicial temperament.” As I have previously documented, <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/content/aba-testimony-wallace-nomination%E2%80%94part-2" type="external">bias</a>, a glaring <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/content/aba-testimony-wallace-nomination%E2%80%94part-7" type="external">conflict of interest</a>, incompetence (see <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/content/aba-testimony-wallace-nomination%E2%80%94part-3" type="external">here</a> and <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/content/aba-testimony-wallace-nomination%E2%80%94part-4" type="external">here</a>), a <a href="" type="internal">stacked committee</a>, <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/content/aba-testimony-wallace-nomination%E2%80%94part-5" type="external">violation of its own procedures</a>, and <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/content/aba-testimony-wallace-nomination%E2%80%94part-8" type="external">cheap gamesmanship</a> marked the ABA’s evaluation of Wallace. Those internal defects were compounded at Wallace’s September 2006 hearing by the incredible testimony given under oath — flat-out perjury, in my judgment — by the new chair of the ABA committee, Philadelphia lawyer Roberta Liebenberg. Liebenberg’s testimony merits careful scrutiny as an illustration of the depths to which the ABA will descend to defend its internal failings.</p>
<p>First, some background: One of the several scandals surrounding the ABA’s evaluation of Wallace relates to the fact that the chair of the ABA committee at the time of the evaluation, Stephen Tober, had had a major run-in with Wallace in 1987 when Wallace served on the board of the Legal Services Corporation (a federal agency that funds legal services for the poor and that was the focus of contentious reform efforts). In the course of strikingly intemperate and buffoonish <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=N2VlMDc2NzUwZWQxZWY4NTI0N2Y0OTNmNDdmYzUzZTc=" type="external">testimony</a> before an LSC committee headed by Wallace, Tober twice accused him of a “hidden agenda.” (The ABA president at the time of the ABA’s evaluation of Wallace, Michael Greco, and another ABA committee member, Marna Tucker, had likewise attacked Wallace over contentious LSC matters.) On the Wallace evaluation, Tober played the customary role that the ABA committee chair plays (and that is set forth in the ABA’s so-called <a href="http://www.abanet.org/scfedjud/federal_judiciary.pdf" type="external">Backgrounder</a>): He assigned Fifth Circuit member Kim Askew — whose own biases and conflict of interest concerning Wallace are an even greater scandal — to conduct the investigation. He reviewed her draft report with her. In light of her proposed “not qualified” rating, he assigned a second person, Thomas Hayward, to conduct a second evaluation of Wallace. He reviewed Hayward’s draft report with him. He determined that he was satisfied with the “quality and thoroughness” of Askew’s investigation, and made the same determination regarding Hayward’s investigation. He then directed his committee colleagues to read Askew’s report and Hayward’s report in tandem. Without any deliberation among the committee members (so Liebenberg has informed me), Tober then received and tallied the votes of the other committee members. Under the ABA committee’s procedures, the chair votes only in the event of a tie, so Tober did not cast a vote. Tober then reported the committee’s unanimous “not qualified” rating to the Senate Judiciary Committee.</p>
<p>Beyond the fact that Tober plainly should have recused himself from the Wallace evaluation, many of the facts that I recite about Tober’s role are in themselves of little interest. What ought to be of considerable interest, however, to anyone who cares about the integrity of the manner in which the ABA committee carries out the privileged role in the judicial-confirmation process that the Senate Judiciary Committee accords it, are Liebenberg’s sworn statements about Tober’s role in the Wallace evaluation.</p>
<p>Time after time, in emphatic, categorical declarations, Liebenberg testified that it was immaterial that Tober had not recused himself because, she claimed, he simply had no role at all in the ABA committee’s evaluation of Wallace:</p>
<p>I have the <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTljNjNhN2IzYmMxMjFjYWNiZGNlNWM0ZDU1MDA3MDU=" type="external">same reaction</a> to these sworn statements that I had when I first heard them in Liebenberg’s live testimony: These statements are patently false, and Liebenberg, as an ABA committee member during the Wallace evaluation and as chair at the time of her testimony, had ample reason to know that they were false. Indeed, in her prepared testimony, Liebenberg stated, “The evaluation of Mr. Wallace was conducted in accordance with the normal practices and procedures” of the ABA committee, and she referred senators to the ABA’s Backgrounder for a “more detailed description of these procedures.”</p>
<p>In recent weeks, I have, through an intermediary friendly to Liebenberg, afforded her the opportunity to dispute or clarify my understanding of the facts that render her testimony false. She has availed herself of the opportunity, and the exchange, in my judgment, has clearly confirmed my understanding. (See the appendix below.)</p>
<p>In sum, Liebenberg’s sworn testimony that “This is not a process where Mr. Tober had any role whatsoever in the evaluation or the vote,” and her other categorical statements to the same effect, are truthful only if “whatsoever” is not given anything close to its ordinary meaning but is instead a secret code that means, at a minimum, “except that he assigned the first investigator, reviewed her draft report with her, assigned the second investigator, reviewed his draft report with him, determined that he was satisfied with the quality and thoroughness of both investigations, directed his committee colleagues to read the investigators’ reports in tandem, received and tallied the votes, and reported the ABA’s rating to the Senate Judiciary Committee.”</p>
<p>In her exchange with me, Liebenberg now maintains that Tober “did not play a substantive role in the evaluation or rating of Mr. Wallace.” (Emphasis added.) That modifier “substantive” is conspicuously absent from her Senate testimony. Indeed, her categorical denial that Tober had “any role whatsoever in the evaluation” and her assertion that he “did not participate in any way” do not permit reading in that modifier. Moreover, I think it plain that Tober did play a “substantive” role — among various respects, in selecting the two investigators and in determining that he was satisfied with the “quality and thoroughness” of the investigations.</p>
<p>It is also worth noting that Liebenberg’s effort to obscure Tober’s actual role stands in striking contrast to the ABA’s effort to justify its re-rating of D.C. Circuit nominee (and now judge) Brett Kavanaugh. In that case, the <a href="" type="internal">shenanigans</a> of the circuit investigator, Marna Tucker, deserved scrutiny. But Tober, who played essentially the same role as chair there as he did on Wallace’s nomination, gave Tucker cover by presenting the entire testimony for the ABA committee. He never remotely suggested the absurd notion that he had played no role in the evaluation or rating and was therefore not competent to testify.</p>
<p>I have no reason to doubt that Liebenberg is a fine lawyer and, by the standards of the legal profession, generally an honorable person. The interesting question is how such a person could ever have made the statements that she did, let alone under oath. The answer, I would suggest, is that the ideological partisanship, intellectual mediocrity, and institutionalized mendacity of the ABA — the ABA’s culture, so to speak — tend to degrade those who rise within its ranks.</p>
<p>I don’t know Wallace, and I leave open the theoretical possibility that, notwithstanding what his many supporters say, he lacks the necessary judicial temperament. The thoroughly scandalous process by which the ABA reached that judgment, however, provides no basis for confidence in its assessment. Nor, given the “go along to get along” collective posterior-covering ethos of the ABA, is there any reason to credit the more recent supplemental evaluations of Wallace. This is especially so because assessments of judicial temperament are so subjective and manipulable. Indeed, it is striking to contrast the extrapolations made about Wallace’s judicial temperament from his experience as a litigator with the ABA’s unanimous conclusion a dozen years ago that federal district judge Lee Sarokin (whose record I discussed more fully <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjgzY2Q5ZTE5ZDczMDAxMmZjZDc2MWViMmNkNGFiMjY=" type="external">here</a>) was “well qualified” to be elevated to the Third Circuit. Despite the fact that the Third Circuit had lambasted Sarokin for “judicial usurpation of power,” for ignoring “fundamental concepts of due process,” for destroying the appearance of judicial impartiality, and for “superimpos[ing his] own view of what the law should be in the face of the Supreme Court’s contrary precedent,” the ABA had no concerns about his judicial temperament. But, of course, Sarokin was a nominee of President Clinton and was a self-described “flaming liberal” as a judge.</p>
<p>Can the ABA possibly sink any lower? Let’s see what these next two years bring.</p>
<p>— Edward Whelan is president of the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a> and is a regular contributor to NRO’s <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/" type="external">“Bench Memos” blog</a>.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Appendix</p>
<p>On November 27, 2006, I sent to an intermediary who is friendly to Roberta Liebenberg the twelve propositions set forth below and invited her to let me know whether she agreed or disagreed with the propositions and to provide any amplification (or any reference to other material) that she saw fit to provide.On December 1, 2006, that intermediary responded, stating that he had reviewed the propositions with Liebenberg and providing her responses (which “she has confirmed with Mr. Tober”).I set forth in full below those responses and my brief replies.</p>
<p>Liebenberg response:&#160;“Consistent with the standard practice of the Standing Committee, which generally provides for an evaluation to be conducted by the Committee member from the circuit to which the nomination has been made, Ms. Askew was assigned by Mr. Tober to conduct the Wallace evaluation because she served as the Fifth Circuit representative on the Committee.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;Liebenberg concedes Tober’s role.As Tober testified, the investigation is “ordinarily assigned” to the circuit member, “although it may be conducted by another member or former member.”Whether or not to apply the default rule, and what sort of preliminary inquiry ought to be undertaken, requires a decision—indeed, a substantive judgment (or a failure to exercise judgment)—on the part of the chair. Tober decided to have Askew perform the review despite her <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=N2VlMDc2NzUwZWQxZWY4NTI0N2Y0OTNmNDdmYzUzZTc=" type="external">ideological bias</a> against Wallace.Further, when Tober became aware (or should have become aware) of facts demonstrating that Askew had an <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWQzODZlYTNmYjZiZTMyN2Y1MjIxNTNjNjIxZjEzNzg=" type="external">actual conflict of interest</a>, he continued to let her perform the review.</p>
<p>Liebenberg response:&#160;“Mr. Tober did not review Ms. Askew’s draft report with her, nor did he perform a substantive review of that report. Instead, his review was solely procedural in nature. He utilized a procedural checklist to ensure that, among other things, all disciplinary agencies had been contacted, the requisite number of interviews had been conducted, and a sufficient number of writing samples had been submitted and reviewed. Mr. Tober did not edit, delete, modify, or add anything to the report. He did not tell Ms. Askew whom to interview or what to ask during her interviews. Nor did he ask Ms. Askew to take any further actions with respect to the report or her evaluation before she circulated her report to the rest of the Standing Committee.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;(a) The first clause of Liebenberg’s response contradicts her testimony that the Backgrounder’s procedures were followed. The Backgrounder states (on page 7):“The Chair reviews the informal report with the circuit member.”(b) Liebenberg’s response contradicts itself.The first sentence states that Tober did not review Askew’s draft report, but the second sentence concedes that he did review it.(c) Liebenberg’s response contrives an unsustainable distinction between “substantive” and “procedural” review. Tober himself had authority to determine the substantive content of his checklist.</p>
<p>Liebenberg response:&#160;“Mr. Tober assigned Mr. Hayward to perform a second evaluation of Mr. Wallace. Mr. Hayward, who is a former Chair of the Standing Committee, had participated in the ratings of over 500 nominees during his tenure on the Committee. Incidentally, Mr. Hayward is a Republican who has made contributions to a number of Republican political candidates.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;Liebenberg concedes Tober’s role.(Incidentally, Hayward did not re-interview any of the individuals interviewed by Askew but instead accepted, and relied on, her interview summaries.So much for an independent check.)</p>
<p>Liebenberg’s response:&#160;“Mr. Tober did not review Mr. Hayward’s draft report with him, nor did he perform a substantive review of that report. Instead, his review was solely procedural in nature, and entailed the same process set forth above in No. 2. As was true with Ms. Askew’s report, Mr. Tober did not edit, delete, modify, or add anything to Mr. Hayward’s report. He did not tell Mr. Hayward whom to interview or what to ask during his interviews. Nor did he ask Mr. Hayward to take any further actions with respect to the report or his evaluation before Mr. Hayward circulated his report to the rest of the Standing Committee.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;My reply on Proposition 2 applies fully here.</p>
<p>Liebenberg’s response:&#160;“Mr. Tober’s review of the draft reports by Ms. Askew and Mr. Hayward for ‘quality and thoroughness’ did not entail any substantive input on his part. Instead, his review was procedural in nature, as set forth above in Nos. 2 and 4.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;The Backgrounder (which Liebenberg testified was followed) makes clear that the chair must be “satisfied with the quality and thoroughness of the investigation.”This standard plainly requires a decision by the chair.Again, Liebenberg’s posited distinction between procedure and substance is incoherent.Further, she conflates the issue whether Tober provided “any substantive input” with the distinct question whether he performed a substantive review.(Incidentally, the fact that Tober evidently performed his substantive role in such a perfunctory fashion undermines the integrity of the ABA process.One reason to have a chair, rather than simply a checklist, is to harmonize the approaches taken by investigators so that ratings are consistent and don’t turn unduly on the assignment of the investigator.)</p>
<p>Liebenberg’s response:&#160;“Consistent with the practice of the Committee, Ms. Askew circulated her report directly to the Standing Committee members. In her transmittal letter accompanying the report she advised the members that they would separately receive Mr. Hayward’s report at or about the same time. She also advised the Committee members to review all of the evaluation materials, including the documents pertaining to the Standing Committee’s 1992 evaluations of Mr. Wallace, before voting on Mr. Wallace’s rating. It should be noted that Ms. Askew advised Committee members that she was the person who should be called if they had any questions about her report or the accompanying materials.</p>
<p>“Subsequently, Mr. Tober similarly advised Committee members to review the reports by Ms. Askew and Mr. Hayward in tandem. He did not direct Committee members to ascribe more significance to one report than another; did not suggest how Committee members should vote; and did not discuss with Ms. Askew, Mr. Hayward, or any members of the Committee his own views of the professional qualifications of Mr. Wallace.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;Liebenberg concedes Tober’s role.</p>
<p>Liebenberg’s response:“There were no ‘deliberations’ among Standing Committee members with respect to the rating of Mr. Wallace. Each Committee member independently reviewed the evaluation materials and voted on a rating to be given to Mr. Wallace. Mr. Tober and the rest of the Standing Committee did not have an in-person meeting, conference call, or e-mail discussion regarding Mr. Wallace’s qualifications or the rating to be given to him.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;For present purposes, I assume the correctness of Liebenberg’s account.(If there were no deliberations on a “not qualified” recommendation—and on Askew’s badly flawed report—that would seem yet another damning indictment of the ABA’s processes.)</p>
<p>Liebenberg’s response:&#160;“The 14 voting members of the Committee conveyed their votes to Mr. Tober, who in turn reported the Committee’s unanimous ‘Not Qualified’ rating of Mr. Wallace to the Senate Judiciary Committee.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;Liebenberg concedes Tober’s role.</p>
<p>Liebenberg’s response:&#160;“Neither the report by Ms. Askew nor the report by Mr. Hayward included a discussion of Mr. Tober’s experience with, and views of, Mr. Wallace. The evaluation materials did not include a discussion of any ‘run-in’ between Mr. Tober and Mr. Wallace in 1987, or any other interactions between them. Mr. Tober was not interviewed by Ms. Askew or Mr. Hayward about Mr. Wallace, they did not solicit his views regarding the nominee, and he did not volunteer to them his views.”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;For present purposes, I assume the correctness of Liebenberg’s account.</p>
<p>Liebenberg’s response (presented in the third person):&#160;“When Ms. Liebenberg testified that Mr. Tober did not ‘participate’ in the evaluation or rating of Mr. Wallace, her testimony was based on the fact that Mr. Tober did not conduct any of the evaluation interviews; was not interviewed by Ms. Askew or Mr. Hayward; did not prepare the evaluation reports or make any revisions to them; did not vote on Mr. Wallace’s rating; and did not express his own opinion of Mr. Wallace’s professional qualifications or what Mr. Wallace’s rating should be to Ms. Askew, Mr. Hayward, or anyone else on the Committee. Thus, Mr. Tober did not play a substantive role in the evaluation or rating of Mr. Wallace. Ms. Liebenberg explained to the Senate Judiciary Committee that the evaluations were the sole responsibility of Ms. Askew and Mr. Hayward, and that each of the 14 voting members of the Committee independently voted on the rating, with no influence being exercised over their votes by Mr. Tober. (transcript pp. 116, 121)”</p>
<p>My reply:&#160;Propositions 1-7, 9 and 10 establish that Liebenberg’s testimony was false.The transcript pages cited in her response do not put a different gloss on Liebenberg’s testimony.Indeed, they consist entirely of (unrelated) testimony by Askew, not Liebenberg.</p> | false | 1 | among many challenges new white house counsel fred fielding face judicial nominations ensuring american bar associations ideologically stacked judicialevaluations committee behaves responsibly mississippi attorney michael b wallace requested president bush renominate serve us court appeals fifth circuit instructive complete accounting abas thoroughly scandalous qualified rating wallace although determined wallace highest professional competence possesses integrity serve bench aba judicialevaluations committee found lacking highly malleable element judicial temperament previously documented bias glaring conflict interest incompetence see stacked committee violation procedures cheap gamesmanship marked abas evaluation wallace internal defects compounded wallaces september 2006 hearing incredible testimony given oath flatout perjury judgment new chair aba committee philadelphia lawyer roberta liebenberg liebenbergs testimony merits careful scrutiny illustration depths aba descend defend internal failings first background one several scandals surrounding abas evaluation wallace relates fact chair aba committee time evaluation stephen tober major runin wallace 1987 wallace served board legal services corporation federal agency funds legal services poor focus contentious reform efforts course strikingly intemperate buffoonish testimony lsc committee headed wallace tober twice accused hidden agenda aba president time abas evaluation wallace michael greco another aba committee member marna tucker likewise attacked wallace contentious lsc matters wallace evaluation tober played customary role aba committee chair plays set forth abas socalled backgrounder assigned fifth circuit member kim askew whose biases conflict interest concerning wallace even greater scandal conduct investigation reviewed draft report light proposed qualified rating assigned second person thomas hayward conduct second evaluation wallace reviewed haywards draft report determined satisfied quality thoroughness askews investigation made determination regarding haywards investigation directed committee colleagues read askews report haywards report tandem without deliberation among committee members liebenberg informed tober received tallied votes committee members aba committees procedures chair votes event tie tober cast vote tober reported committees unanimous qualified rating senate judiciary committee beyond fact tober plainly recused wallace evaluation many facts recite tobers role little interest ought considerable interest however anyone cares integrity manner aba committee carries privileged role judicialconfirmation process senate judiciary committee accords liebenbergs sworn statements tobers role wallace evaluation time time emphatic categorical declarations liebenberg testified immaterial tober recused claimed simply role aba committees evaluation wallace reaction sworn statements first heard liebenbergs live testimony statements patently false liebenberg aba committee member wallace evaluation chair time testimony ample reason know false indeed prepared testimony liebenberg stated evaluation mr wallace conducted accordance normal practices procedures aba committee referred senators abas backgrounder detailed description procedures recent weeks intermediary friendly liebenberg afforded opportunity dispute clarify understanding facts render testimony false availed opportunity exchange judgment clearly confirmed understanding see appendix sum liebenbergs sworn testimony process mr tober role whatsoever evaluation vote categorical statements effect truthful whatsoever given anything close ordinary meaning instead secret code means minimum except assigned first investigator reviewed draft report assigned second investigator reviewed draft report determined satisfied quality thoroughness investigations directed committee colleagues read investigators reports tandem received tallied votes reported abas rating senate judiciary committee exchange liebenberg maintains tober play substantive role evaluation rating mr wallace emphasis added modifier substantive conspicuously absent senate testimony indeed categorical denial tober role whatsoever evaluation assertion participate way permit reading modifier moreover think plain tober play substantive role among various respects selecting two investigators determining satisfied quality thoroughness investigations also worth noting liebenbergs effort obscure tobers actual role stands striking contrast abas effort justify rerating dc circuit nominee judge brett kavanaugh case shenanigans circuit investigator marna tucker deserved scrutiny tober played essentially role chair wallaces nomination gave tucker cover presenting entire testimony aba committee never remotely suggested absurd notion played role evaluation rating therefore competent testify reason doubt liebenberg fine lawyer standards legal profession generally honorable person interesting question person could ever made statements let alone oath answer would suggest ideological partisanship intellectual mediocrity institutionalized mendacity aba abas culture speak tend degrade rise within ranks dont know wallace leave open theoretical possibility notwithstanding many supporters say lacks necessary judicial temperament thoroughly scandalous process aba reached judgment however provides basis confidence assessment given go along get along collective posteriorcovering ethos aba reason credit recent supplemental evaluations wallace especially assessments judicial temperament subjective manipulable indeed striking contrast extrapolations made wallaces judicial temperament experience litigator abas unanimous conclusion dozen years ago federal district judge lee sarokin whose record discussed fully well qualified elevated third circuit despite fact third circuit lambasted sarokin judicial usurpation power ignoring fundamental concepts due process destroying appearance judicial impartiality superimposing view law face supreme courts contrary precedent aba concerns judicial temperament course sarokin nominee president clinton selfdescribed flaming liberal judge aba possibly sink lower lets see next two years bring edward whelan president ethics public policy center regular contributor nros bench memos blog 160 appendix november 27 2006 sent intermediary friendly roberta liebenberg twelve propositions set forth invited let know whether agreed disagreed propositions provide amplification reference material saw fit provideon december 1 2006 intermediary responded stating reviewed propositions liebenberg providing responses confirmed mr toberi set forth full responses brief replies liebenberg response160consistent standard practice standing committee generally provides evaluation conducted committee member circuit nomination made ms askew assigned mr tober conduct wallace evaluation served fifth circuit representative committee reply160liebenberg concedes tobers roleas tober testified investigation ordinarily assigned circuit member although may conducted another member former memberwhether apply default rule sort preliminary inquiry ought undertaken requires decisionindeed substantive judgment failure exercise judgmenton part chair tober decided askew perform review despite ideological bias wallacefurther tober became aware become aware facts demonstrating askew actual conflict interest continued let perform review liebenberg response160mr tober review ms askews draft report perform substantive review report instead review solely procedural nature utilized procedural checklist ensure among things disciplinary agencies contacted requisite number interviews conducted sufficient number writing samples submitted reviewed mr tober edit delete modify add anything report tell ms askew interview ask interviews ask ms askew take actions respect report evaluation circulated report rest standing committee reply160a first clause liebenbergs response contradicts testimony backgrounders procedures followed backgrounder states page 7the chair reviews informal report circuit memberb liebenbergs response contradicts itselfthe first sentence states tober review askews draft report second sentence concedes review itc liebenbergs response contrives unsustainable distinction substantive procedural review tober authority determine substantive content checklist liebenberg response160mr tober assigned mr hayward perform second evaluation mr wallace mr hayward former chair standing committee participated ratings 500 nominees tenure committee incidentally mr hayward republican made contributions number republican political candidates reply160liebenberg concedes tobers roleincidentally hayward reinterview individuals interviewed askew instead accepted relied interview summariesso much independent check liebenbergs response160mr tober review mr haywards draft report perform substantive review report instead review solely procedural nature entailed process set forth 2 true ms askews report mr tober edit delete modify add anything mr haywards report tell mr hayward interview ask interviews ask mr hayward take actions respect report evaluation mr hayward circulated report rest standing committee reply160my reply proposition 2 applies fully liebenbergs response160mr tobers review draft reports ms askew mr hayward quality thoroughness entail substantive input part instead review procedural nature set forth nos 2 4 reply160the backgrounder liebenberg testified followed makes clear chair must satisfied quality thoroughness investigationthis standard plainly requires decision chairagain liebenbergs posited distinction procedure substance incoherentfurther conflates issue whether tober provided substantive input distinct question whether performed substantive reviewincidentally fact tober evidently performed substantive role perfunctory fashion undermines integrity aba processone reason chair rather simply checklist harmonize approaches taken investigators ratings consistent dont turn unduly assignment investigator liebenbergs response160consistent practice committee ms askew circulated report directly standing committee members transmittal letter accompanying report advised members would separately receive mr haywards report time also advised committee members review evaluation materials including documents pertaining standing committees 1992 evaluations mr wallace voting mr wallaces rating noted ms askew advised committee members person called questions report accompanying materials subsequently mr tober similarly advised committee members review reports ms askew mr hayward tandem direct committee members ascribe significance one report another suggest committee members vote discuss ms askew mr hayward members committee views professional qualifications mr wallace reply160liebenberg concedes tobers role liebenbergs responsethere deliberations among standing committee members respect rating mr wallace committee member independently reviewed evaluation materials voted rating given mr wallace mr tober rest standing committee inperson meeting conference call email discussion regarding mr wallaces qualifications rating given reply160for present purposes assume correctness liebenbergs accountif deliberations qualified recommendationand askews badly flawed reportthat would seem yet another damning indictment abas processes liebenbergs response160the 14 voting members committee conveyed votes mr tober turn reported committees unanimous qualified rating mr wallace senate judiciary committee reply160liebenberg concedes tobers role liebenbergs response160neither report ms askew report mr hayward included discussion mr tobers experience views mr wallace evaluation materials include discussion runin mr tober mr wallace 1987 interactions mr tober interviewed ms askew mr hayward mr wallace solicit views regarding nominee volunteer views reply160for present purposes assume correctness liebenbergs account liebenbergs response presented third person160when ms liebenberg testified mr tober participate evaluation rating mr wallace testimony based fact mr tober conduct evaluation interviews interviewed ms askew mr hayward prepare evaluation reports make revisions vote mr wallaces rating express opinion mr wallaces professional qualifications mr wallaces rating ms askew mr hayward anyone else committee thus mr tober play substantive role evaluation rating mr wallace ms liebenberg explained senate judiciary committee evaluations sole responsibility ms askew mr hayward 14 voting members committee independently voted rating influence exercised votes mr tober transcript pp 116 121 reply160propositions 17 9 10 establish liebenbergs testimony falsethe transcript pages cited response put different gloss liebenbergs testimonyindeed consist entirely unrelated testimony askew liebenberg | 1,566 |
<p><a href="http://variety.com/t/charles-manson/" type="external">Charles Manson</a>, the notorious leader of the Manson Family cult that murdered actress <a href="http://variety.com/t/sharon-tate/" type="external">Sharon Tate</a> and six others in 1969, died Sunday in a Bakersfield, Calif., hospital. He was 83.</p>
<p>The California Department of Corrections released a statement reading, “Inmate <a href="http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/leslie-van-houten-jerry-brown-parole-1202549574/" type="external">Charles Manson</a>, 83, died of natural causes at 8:13 p.m. on Sunday, November 19, 2017, at a Kern County hospital.”</p>
<p>Manson returned to the hospital in mid-November after being hospitalized in January. He was transferred out of Corcoran State Prison, where he had been serving nine life sentences. He had been denied parole 12 times.&#160;</p>
<p>The shocking murders brought the carefree hippie era of the late 1960s to a dark end, with Manson and his followers becoming infamous cultural figures.&#160;Though he didn’t commit the Tate and LaBianca murders himself, the Corrections Department said “On December 13, 1971, Manson received a first-degree murder conviction from Los Angeles County for the July 25, 1969, death of Gary Hinman and another first-degree murder conviction for the August 1969 death of Donald Shea.”</p>
<p>Though the murders took place nearly 50 years ago, they continued to have a hold over the popular imagination. Quentin Tarantino is currently looking for a home for his 1969-based movie project that has the events surrounding Manson as a background. The current season of “American Horror Story” portrayed the Manson family in the “Charles (Manson) in Charge” episode.</p>
<p>A career criminal from an impoverished and abusive background, Manson was first incarcerated in 1951 and by age 32 had spent half of his life behind bars.</p>
<p>An aspiring musician who first learned to play guitar in prison, Manson began gathering followers in San Francisco during the Summer of Love in 1967. In the short time between his 1967 prison release and his imprisonment in 1969, Manson skirted the fringes of show business, even briefly finding himself working with the number rock and roll band in America, the Beach Boys.</p>
<p>He became intertwined with Hollywood in 1968, when he and more than a dozen of his followers lived at the Sunset Boulevard home of Dennis Wilson of the Beach Boys. Manson crossed paths with several entertainment business figures, including actors and film producers intrigued by his charismatic hold on his followers and his counterculture beliefs.</p>
<p>Manson recorded several songs and was introduced by Wilson to other show business acquaintances, including music producer Terry Melcher, the only son of Doris Day. One of Manson’s songs, “Cease to Exist,” was reworked by the Beach Boys as “Never Learn Not To Love,” and eventually released by the band with the writing credit attributed to Dennis Wilson.</p>
<p>The band’s changes to his song reportedly angered Manson, who allegedly threatened Dennis Wilson with murder.</p>
<p>In 1968, Manson and his followers were evicted from Dennis Wilson’s home and Manson relocated his group to Spahn Movie Ranch, near Chatsworth, Calif. The locale was rich with film and TV history, and films such as King Vidor’s “Duel in the Sun” and popular TV shows such as “Bonanza” and “Zorro” had filmed there.</p>
<p>From their Spahn Movie Ranch base, Manson launched a killing spree in 1969 with the goal of a sparking a race war he called “Helter Skelter,” based on his interpretation of a song from the Beatles’ “White Album.”</p>
<p>On Aug. 9, 1969, he directed his followers to kill the 26-year-old Tate — who was pregnant and married to director <a href="http://variety.com/t/roman-polanski/" type="external">Roman Polanski</a> — and four others at the home she was renting in the Benedict Canyon area of Los Angeles.</p>
<p>Polanski was out of the country at the time of the Cielo Drive killings. The other victims were celebrity hair stylist Jay Sebring, 35; Voytek Frykowski, 32; coffee heiress Abigail Folger, 25; and Steven Parent, 18, a friend of Tate’s caretaker. The word “Pig” was written on the front door in blood.</p>
<p>On the following night, Manson and his followers killed Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary, at their home in the Los Feliz district of Los Angeles. “Death to Pigs” and “Healter Skelter” were scrawled in blood at the crime scene.</p>
<p>Manson and more than 20 of his followers were arrested at ranches in the California desert in the following months. He and three followers — Susan Atkins, Patricia Krenwinkel and Leslie Van Houten — were found guilty in a trial and sentenced to death in 1971. The death sentences were commuted to life in prison in 1972 when the death penalty was abolished in California. Van Houten was granted parole in September but her release must still be approved by Governor Jerry Brown.</p>
<p>Manson has been the subject of dozens of books and articles, some, like musician-writer Ed Sanders’ 1971 tome “The Family,” investigative and rich in details of the cultural moment of the murders, but many simply cut and paste jobs published to satiate the public’s curiosity about the notorious killer.</p>
<p>The story of the trial was re-told in the 1976 TV film, “Helter Skelter,” based on the 1974 book by prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi and Curt Gentry. Steve Railsback portrayed Manson. The book was adapted for a second TV movie in 2004, directed by John Gray and starring Jeremy Davies as Manson.</p>
<p>The events surrounding the murders were explored in numerous other movies and TV shows including NBC series “Aquarius,” indie film “Manson Family Vacation” and on “South Park.”</p>
<p>In 2013, James Franco announced he would play hairdresser Sebring in “Beautiful People,” though the film was never put into production.</p>
<p>Over the decades, pop culture references to Manson and his murderous clan have abounded, from the name of goth rocker Marilyn Manson to the alt-rock band Kasabian, named after one of his followers, Linda Kasabian.</p>
<p>Manson’s impact was also seen with numerous Manson Family mentions in acclaimed novelist Thomas Pynchon’s 2009 bestseller set in ‘70s Los Angeles, “Inherent Vice,” while&#160;Joan Didion’s “White Album” includes an examination of the impact of Manson as well as an interview with Kasabian.</p>
<p>Manson again made headlines in 2015 when his fiancee at the time, Afton Elaine Burton, AKA “Star,” 53 years his junior, was reported to be planning their nuptials in order to secure a claim to his corpse, which she hoped to exploit as a commercial public display piece.</p>
<p>Since the murder convictions, Manson has been imprisoned at San Quentin; the California Medical Facility in Vacaville, Folsom, and at Corcoran.&#160;</p>
<p>Steve Gaydos contributed to this report.</p> | false | 1 | charles manson notorious leader manson family cult murdered actress sharon tate six others 1969 died sunday bakersfield calif hospital 83 california department corrections released statement reading inmate charles manson 83 died natural causes 813 pm sunday november 19 2017 kern county hospital manson returned hospital midnovember hospitalized january transferred corcoran state prison serving nine life sentences denied parole 12 times160 shocking murders brought carefree hippie era late 1960s dark end manson followers becoming infamous cultural figures160though didnt commit tate labianca murders corrections department said december 13 1971 manson received firstdegree murder conviction los angeles county july 25 1969 death gary hinman another firstdegree murder conviction august 1969 death donald shea though murders took place nearly 50 years ago continued hold popular imagination quentin tarantino currently looking home 1969based movie project events surrounding manson background current season american horror story portrayed manson family charles manson charge episode career criminal impoverished abusive background manson first incarcerated 1951 age 32 spent half life behind bars aspiring musician first learned play guitar prison manson began gathering followers san francisco summer love 1967 short time 1967 prison release imprisonment 1969 manson skirted fringes show business even briefly finding working number rock roll band america beach boys became intertwined hollywood 1968 dozen followers lived sunset boulevard home dennis wilson beach boys manson crossed paths several entertainment business figures including actors film producers intrigued charismatic hold followers counterculture beliefs manson recorded several songs introduced wilson show business acquaintances including music producer terry melcher son doris day one mansons songs cease exist reworked beach boys never learn love eventually released band writing credit attributed dennis wilson bands changes song reportedly angered manson allegedly threatened dennis wilson murder 1968 manson followers evicted dennis wilsons home manson relocated group spahn movie ranch near chatsworth calif locale rich film tv history films king vidors duel sun popular tv shows bonanza zorro filmed spahn movie ranch base manson launched killing spree 1969 goal sparking race war called helter skelter based interpretation song beatles white album aug 9 1969 directed followers kill 26yearold tate pregnant married director roman polanski four others home renting benedict canyon area los angeles polanski country time cielo drive killings victims celebrity hair stylist jay sebring 35 voytek frykowski 32 coffee heiress abigail folger 25 steven parent 18 friend tates caretaker word pig written front door blood following night manson followers killed leno labianca wife rosemary home los feliz district los angeles death pigs healter skelter scrawled blood crime scene manson 20 followers arrested ranches california desert following months three followers susan atkins patricia krenwinkel leslie van houten found guilty trial sentenced death 1971 death sentences commuted life prison 1972 death penalty abolished california van houten granted parole september release must still approved governor jerry brown manson subject dozens books articles like musicianwriter ed sanders 1971 tome family investigative rich details cultural moment murders many simply cut paste jobs published satiate publics curiosity notorious killer story trial retold 1976 tv film helter skelter based 1974 book prosecutor vincent bugliosi curt gentry steve railsback portrayed manson book adapted second tv movie 2004 directed john gray starring jeremy davies manson events surrounding murders explored numerous movies tv shows including nbc series aquarius indie film manson family vacation south park 2013 james franco announced would play hairdresser sebring beautiful people though film never put production decades pop culture references manson murderous clan abounded name goth rocker marilyn manson altrock band kasabian named one followers linda kasabian mansons impact also seen numerous manson family mentions acclaimed novelist thomas pynchons 2009 bestseller set 70s los angeles inherent vice while160joan didions white album includes examination impact manson well interview kasabian manson made headlines 2015 fiancee time afton elaine burton aka star 53 years junior reported planning nuptials order secure claim corpse hoped exploit commercial public display piece since murder convictions manson imprisoned san quentin california medical facility vacaville folsom corcoran160 steve gaydos contributed report | 649 |
<p>The following is a translation of an interview that originally&#160;appeared in the Polish Catholic weekly magazine Gość Niedzielny&#160;(Sunday Visitor).</p>
<p>Q (Gość Niedzielny). In recent months, Ireland and the United States have joined the list of countries who legally recognize same-sex marriage. The process of this legalization was different. In Ireland it was achieved by referendum, in the U.S. by decision of Supreme Court. Could you compare these events? If there were a same-sex marriage referendum organized in the U.S., what results might have been expected?</p>
<p>A (George Weigel). It’s not easy to say. There is polling data indicating that a majority of Americans now favor so-called “same-sex marriage.” But that is when the issue is posed, so to speak, abstractly. If there were a genuine national debate and national referendum, the results might be different when people have had a chance to reflect seriously on the issue and its implications for other aspects of public life. Still, we must face the fact that we lost the battle for a true understanding of marriage in the culture before we lost the legal battle in the Supreme Court. And the heterosexuals are responsible for that loss in the culture, through measures like no-fault divorce and practices like serial re-marriage, which is, de facto, polygamy, but one-at-a-time.</p>
<p>Q. Many people, even Catholics, don’t see any dangers here. They say: “Oh, this is the law for a small group of people, we should be tolerant, gay-marriage doesn’t harm traditional marriage, etc.”. Why is protest against the idea of same-sex marriage a moral obligation?</p>
<p>A. Because a state that claims the right to redefine reality is a danger on many fronts. If the state asserts the power to make us believe what we know is not true in this matter, it can assert the same authority in other matters. Moreover, if “sexual preference” (itself an oxymoron) becomes a protected category in American civil rights law, then the Church is going to be under intense legal pressure to bend its hiring practices to the “new normal,” which I described in your magazine recently as “there is no aberrant behavior.”</p>
<p>Q. The first law providing for marriage of people of the same sex was enacted in 2001 in the Netherlands. Now we have 21 countries with such laws. So the process is growing very fast. You said “The marriage battle was lost in the culture long before it was lost in the courts”. Why was the battle lost so easily in the culture? Why did a small group of people become so influent, so powerful? Why did they change the mind of so many?</p>
<p>A. Making faithful and fruitful marriage work is not easy, although it also provides immense satisfactions. Ours is a culture that has become accustomed to taking the easy way on many questions of “how should we live?” and this is another example of that.</p>
<p>Q. Gay rights ideologues will not leave the Catholic Church alone. But there were also signs at the 2014 Synod that the battle is also inside the Church. I heard cardinals saying that gay relationship is indeed not a marriage, but there are some values (mutual care, fidelity etc) which must be respected… What is going on?</p>
<p>A. What is going on is confusion. It is true that the Church must “take people as they are;” where else would we “take” them? But it is not true that the Church leaves people where they are: the Church always invites us to climb higher on what St. Augustine called the “ladder of love.” If it’s possible to identify a small element of good in any distorted relationship, then the skillful and compassionate pastor will take that element of good as a starting point for inviting someone to climb up higher on the ladder of love.</p>
<p>Q. The first election campaign of President Obama (in 2008) was under the banner of CHANGE. After almost 7 years of his presidency, could you shortly describe the change (or changes) in the United States?</p>
<p>A. The country is far deeper in debt, the security structure of the post-Cold War world has been dismantled, Putin has been emboldened in his aggressiveness, the Iranian mullahs are closer to a nuclear weapon, the Middle East has become even more chaotic because of a terrible abrogation of American responsibility in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a vast new heath care bureaucracy has been created. That’s the record written large. It’s very, very poor.</p>
<p>Q. Do you think these changes are reversible?</p>
<p>A. Yes. But it requires genuine leadership, which means leadership that explain the facts of the country’s life, and the world’s life, today, and doesn’t fantasize that “re-sets” accomplish anything with Russia, Iran, China, or the “new authoritarianism” in Latin America.</p>
<p>Q. What do you expect of Pope Francis’s visit in the United States?</p>
<p>A. I hope it’s a moment in which the Catholic community of the United States celebrates its vitality with the Successor of Peter, and a moment in which the Successor of Peter learns more about the vitality of Catholic life in the United States. Because, with all our problems, we are as close to being Pope Francis’s “Church permanently in mission” as he is going to find in the developed world.</p>
<p>Q. Do you think that Synod 2015 will be successful?</p>
<p>A. I think the Synod of 2015 will re-affirm and lift up the beauty of the biblical and Christian understanding of marriage as the answer to the crisis of marriage culture throughout the world.</p>
<p>Q. Pope Francis is cherished by mainstream media. But at the same time there is a growing anxiety or even critique of the pope within the Catholic Church. Why?</p>
<p>A. A lot of my media friends have projected onto the Pope their long-frustrated desire for a pope who turns Catholicism into a kind of liberal Protestantism. That is emphatically NOT Francis’s agenda, but too many Catholics, who don’t believe anything else they read in the mainstream press, believe what they read about the pope! Of course a more coherent Vatican communications operation would help address this problem.</p>
<p>Q. The Polish journalist Paweł Lisicki just published a book, “Jihad and Self-destruction of the West”. He accuses the Catholic Church (especially recent popes) of adopting a false paradigm of dialogue with Islam and argues that the greater need is for more brave words of truth about Islam, and a cry for our brothers murdered almost every day by jihadists. In your opinion, how should the Church deal with Islam? And what is your prognosis about the confrontation between Islam and the West?</p>
<p>A. The problem of jihadism has gotten worse under the Obama administration, which is largely staffed by ignorant people who know nothing about the dynamics of jihadist Islam — or even about the counter-jihadi currents within the complex Muslim world. (One former high Stat Department official recently wrote that the US should trumpet the Supreme Court decision on so-called “gay marriage” throughout the Muslim world as an antidote to jihadism!) What we do know, from all experience, is that the only protection persecuted Christians often have is the protection afforded by shining bright, harsh, and continuous light on the persecutors. That seems to me every Christian leader’s obligation today.</p>
<p>George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.</p> | false | 1 | following translation interview originally160appeared polish catholic weekly magazine gość niedzielny160sunday visitor q gość niedzielny recent months ireland united states joined list countries legally recognize samesex marriage process legalization different ireland achieved referendum us decision supreme court could compare events samesex marriage referendum organized us results might expected george weigel easy say polling data indicating majority americans favor socalled samesex marriage issue posed speak abstractly genuine national debate national referendum results might different people chance reflect seriously issue implications aspects public life still must face fact lost battle true understanding marriage culture lost legal battle supreme court heterosexuals responsible loss culture measures like nofault divorce practices like serial remarriage de facto polygamy oneatatime q many people even catholics dont see dangers say oh law small group people tolerant gaymarriage doesnt harm traditional marriage etc protest idea samesex marriage moral obligation state claims right redefine reality danger many fronts state asserts power make us believe know true matter assert authority matters moreover sexual preference oxymoron becomes protected category american civil rights law church going intense legal pressure bend hiring practices new normal described magazine recently aberrant behavior q first law providing marriage people sex enacted 2001 netherlands 21 countries laws process growing fast said marriage battle lost culture long lost courts battle lost easily culture small group people become influent powerful change mind many making faithful fruitful marriage work easy although also provides immense satisfactions culture become accustomed taking easy way many questions live another example q gay rights ideologues leave catholic church alone also signs 2014 synod battle also inside church heard cardinals saying gay relationship indeed marriage values mutual care fidelity etc must respected going going confusion true church must take people else would take true church leaves people church always invites us climb higher st augustine called ladder love possible identify small element good distorted relationship skillful compassionate pastor take element good starting point inviting someone climb higher ladder love q first election campaign president obama 2008 banner change almost 7 years presidency could shortly describe change changes united states country far deeper debt security structure postcold war world dismantled putin emboldened aggressiveness iranian mullahs closer nuclear weapon middle east become even chaotic terrible abrogation american responsibility iraq afghanistan vast new heath care bureaucracy created thats record written large poor q think changes reversible yes requires genuine leadership means leadership explain facts countrys life worlds life today doesnt fantasize resets accomplish anything russia iran china new authoritarianism latin america q expect pope franciss visit united states hope moment catholic community united states celebrates vitality successor peter moment successor peter learns vitality catholic life united states problems close pope franciss church permanently mission going find developed world q think synod 2015 successful think synod 2015 reaffirm lift beauty biblical christian understanding marriage answer crisis marriage culture throughout world q pope francis cherished mainstream media time growing anxiety even critique pope within catholic church lot media friends projected onto pope longfrustrated desire pope turns catholicism kind liberal protestantism emphatically franciss agenda many catholics dont believe anything else read mainstream press believe read pope course coherent vatican communications operation would help address problem q polish journalist paweł lisicki published book jihad selfdestruction west accuses catholic church especially recent popes adopting false paradigm dialogue islam argues greater need brave words truth islam cry brothers murdered almost every day jihadists opinion church deal islam prognosis confrontation islam west problem jihadism gotten worse obama administration largely staffed ignorant people know nothing dynamics jihadist islam even counterjihadi currents within complex muslim world one former high stat department official recently wrote us trumpet supreme court decision socalled gay marriage throughout muslim world antidote jihadism know experience protection persecuted christians often protection afforded shining bright harsh continuous light persecutors seems every christian leaders obligation today george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center washington dc | 638 |
<p />
<p>The third and final estimate (until the annual GDP revisions) of first quarter 2014 real GDP growth released June 25 by the US Bureau of Economic Analysis was a 2.9% contraction in GDP growth, a 5.5 percentage point difference from the January forecast of 2.6% growth. Apparently, the first quarter contraction was dismissed by those speculating in equities as weather related, as stock averages rose with the bad news.</p>
<p>Stock market participants might be in for a second quarter surprise. The result of many years of changes made to the official inflation measures is a substantially understated inflation rate. John Williams ( <a href="http://www.shadowstats.com" type="external">www.shadowstats.com</a>) provides inflation estimates based on previous official methodology when the Consumer Price Index still represented the cost of a constant standard of living. The 1.26% inflation measure used to deflate first quarter nominal GDP is unrealistic, as Americans who make purchases are aware.</p>
<p>A reasonable correction to the understated deflator gives a much higher first quarter contraction. The two main causes of inflation’s understatement are the substitution principle introduced during the Clinton regime and the hedonic adjustments ongoing since the 1980s that redefine price rises as quality improvements. Correcting for excessive hedonic adjustments gives a first quarter real GDP contraction of 5%. Correcting for hedonic and substitution adjustments gives a first quarter real GDP contraction of 8.5%.</p>
<p>Realistic economic analysis is a rarity. The financial press echoes Wall Street, and Wall Street economists are paid to help sell financial instruments. Gloomy analysis is frowned upon. Even negative quarters are given a positive spin.</p>
<p>Years of understatement of inflation has resulted in years of overstatement of GDP growth. Thinking about the many years of misstatement, we realized that the typical computation in nominal terms of the ratio of debt to GDP is seriously misleading.</p>
<p>Consider that debt is issued in nominal terms and repaid in nominal terms (except for a few Treasury bonds with inflation adjustments). However, nominal wealth or nominal GDP overstates real economic strength. The debt is growing, but both the nominal and real values of the output of goods and services are not keeping up with the rise in debt.</p>
<p>To understand how risky the rise of debt is, nominal debt must be compared to real GDP. Spin masters might dismiss this computation as comparing apples to oranges, but such a charge constitutes denial that the ratio of nominal debt to nominal GDP understates the wealth dilution caused by the government’s ability to issue and repay debt in nominal dollars. We know that inflation favors debtors, because debts can be repaid in inflated dollars.</p>
<p>The graph below shows three different debt to GDP ratios. The bottom line is nominal debt to nominal GDP, the financial press ratio. The middle line is the ratio of nominal debt to the official measure of real GDP. The top line is the ratio of nominal GDP to Shadowstats’ corrected measure of real GDP that puts back in some of the inflation that is no longer included in official measures. The basis for this corrected measure is also 2000, but as the GDP number for 2000 is lower due to correction, this graph begins with the ratio at a slightly higher point.</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">&lt;img class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-21772" src="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-600x370.jpg" alt="US Debt to GDP ratios" width="600" height="370" srcset="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-600x370.jpg 600w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-150x93.jpg 150w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-300x185.jpg 300w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-500x308.jpg 500w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-280x172.jpg 280w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-638x393.jpg 638w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-118x72.jpg 118w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp-479x295.jpg 479w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/debt-gdp.jpg 668w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" /&gt;</a></p>
<p>The nominal debt to GDP ratio shows that as of the end of the first quarter of 2014 total US Treasury debt outstanding is 103% of US GDP.</p>
<p>The ratio of Treasury debt to official real GDP shows debt at 136% of GDP.</p>
<p>The ratio of debt to real GDP deflated with more a more realistic measure of inflation, one more in keeping with the experience of consumers, puts US public debt at 185% of GDP. In other words, the burden of US debt on the real economy is almost twice the burden that is normally perceived.</p>
<p>The Shadowstats adjustment we made to real GDP does not fully correct for what we believe has been a growing understatement of inflation since the 1980s. The adjustment we made corrects the implicit price deflator for a two-percentage point understatement of annual inflation due to hedonic distortion. Real GDP with this correction since 2000 looks like this:</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">&lt;img class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-21774" src="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-600x433.jpg" alt="US Real GDP" width="600" height="433" srcset="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-600x433.jpg 600w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-150x108.jpg 150w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-300x216.jpg 300w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-500x361.jpg 500w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-280x202.jpg 280w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-638x461.jpg 638w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-118x85.jpg 118w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp-479x346.jpg 479w, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/real-gdp.jpg 668w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" /&gt;</a></p>
<p>We have calculated the ratios of US public debt to nominal GDP and to two measures of real GDP. The ratios of debt to GDP would be much higher if we used total credit outstanding, or total public and private debt, and if we used the government’s unfunded liabilities. The fact seems clear that debt is a major and unappreciated issue for the US economy. The enormous debt, especially with the middle class economy largely offshored, implies substantially lower living standards for the 99 percent.</p>
<p>The first quarter contraction, especially our corrected number, implies a second quarter negative real GDP. In other words, the years of Quantitative Easing (money printing) by the Federal Reserve has not resulted in economic recovery from the 2008 downturn and has not prevented further contraction.</p>
<p>Massive money creation and huge fiscal deficits have protected the balance sheets of “banks too big to fail” but have harmed the American people. Retirees and pension funds have been deprived for years of interest income as the Federal Reserve engineered zero or negative interest rates for the sake of a handful of oversized banks.</p>
<p>The extraordinary creation of new dollars diluted the dollars held by peoples, companies, institutions, and central banks throughout the world, raising fears that the dollar would lose exchange value and its role as world reserve currency.</p>
<p>Washington’s use of financial sanctions to force other countries to bend to Washington’s will is causing countries to leave the dollar payments system. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s advisor has said that the dollar must be crashed as the only way to prevent US aggression. The Chinese have called for “de-americanizing the world.”</p>
<p>The imperialistic US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), which comes into full force July 1, 2015, imposes such heavy reporting costs on foreign financial institutions that these institutions might opt out of dollar transactions. All together, the result could be a serious tumble in the value of the US dollar, more wealth contraction, higher inflation via import prices, and less US wealth available to support US debt.</p>
<p>In view of this reality, why is Washington pushing its puppet in Kiev toward war with Russia? Why is Washington pushing NATO to spend more money and build more bases on which to deploy more troops in the Baltics and Eastern Europe, especially when Washington’s contribution will be the largest part of the cost? Why is Washington re-entering the Middle East conflict that Washington began by inciting Sunni and Shia against one another? Why is Washington constructing new naval and air bases from the Philippines to Vietnam in order to encircle China?</p>
<p>If Washington is this unaware of its budget constraints and its financial predicament, it cannot be long before Americans experience economic catastrophe.</p> | false | 1 | third final estimate annual gdp revisions first quarter 2014 real gdp growth released june 25 us bureau economic analysis 29 contraction gdp growth 55 percentage point difference january forecast 26 growth apparently first quarter contraction dismissed speculating equities weather related stock averages rose bad news stock market participants might second quarter surprise result many years changes made official inflation measures substantially understated inflation rate john williams wwwshadowstatscom provides inflation estimates based previous official methodology consumer price index still represented cost constant standard living 126 inflation measure used deflate first quarter nominal gdp unrealistic americans make purchases aware reasonable correction understated deflator gives much higher first quarter contraction two main causes inflations understatement substitution principle introduced clinton regime hedonic adjustments ongoing since 1980s redefine price rises quality improvements correcting excessive hedonic adjustments gives first quarter real gdp contraction 5 correcting hedonic substitution adjustments gives first quarter real gdp contraction 85 realistic economic analysis rarity financial press echoes wall street wall street economists paid help sell financial instruments gloomy analysis frowned upon even negative quarters given positive spin years understatement inflation resulted years overstatement gdp growth thinking many years misstatement realized typical computation nominal terms ratio debt gdp seriously misleading consider debt issued nominal terms repaid nominal terms except treasury bonds inflation adjustments however nominal wealth nominal gdp overstates real economic strength debt growing nominal real values output goods services keeping rise debt understand risky rise debt nominal debt must compared real gdp spin masters might dismiss computation comparing apples oranges charge constitutes denial ratio nominal debt nominal gdp understates wealth dilution caused governments ability issue repay debt nominal dollars know inflation favors debtors debts repaid inflated dollars graph shows three different debt gdp ratios bottom line nominal debt nominal gdp financial press ratio middle line ratio nominal debt official measure real gdp top line ratio nominal gdp shadowstats corrected measure real gdp puts back inflation longer included official measures basis corrected measure also 2000 gdp number 2000 lower due correction graph begins ratio slightly higher point ltimg classaligncenter sizelarge wpimage21772 srchttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp600x370jpg altus debt gdp ratios width600 height370 srcsethttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp600x370jpg 600w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp150x93jpg 150w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp300x185jpg 300w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp500x308jpg 500w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp280x172jpg 280w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp638x393jpg 638w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp118x72jpg 118w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdp479x295jpg 479w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407debtgdpjpg 668w sizesmaxwidth 600px 100vw 600px gt nominal debt gdp ratio shows end first quarter 2014 total us treasury debt outstanding 103 us gdp ratio treasury debt official real gdp shows debt 136 gdp ratio debt real gdp deflated realistic measure inflation one keeping experience consumers puts us public debt 185 gdp words burden us debt real economy almost twice burden normally perceived shadowstats adjustment made real gdp fully correct believe growing understatement inflation since 1980s adjustment made corrects implicit price deflator twopercentage point understatement annual inflation due hedonic distortion real gdp correction since 2000 looks like ltimg classaligncenter sizelarge wpimage21774 srchttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp600x433jpg altus real gdp width600 height433 srcsethttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp600x433jpg 600w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp150x108jpg 150w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp300x216jpg 300w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp500x361jpg 500w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp280x202jpg 280w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp638x461jpg 638w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp118x85jpg 118w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdp479x346jpg 479w httpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201407realgdpjpg 668w sizesmaxwidth 600px 100vw 600px gt calculated ratios us public debt nominal gdp two measures real gdp ratios debt gdp would much higher used total credit outstanding total public private debt used governments unfunded liabilities fact seems clear debt major unappreciated issue us economy enormous debt especially middle class economy largely offshored implies substantially lower living standards 99 percent first quarter contraction especially corrected number implies second quarter negative real gdp words years quantitative easing money printing federal reserve resulted economic recovery 2008 downturn prevented contraction massive money creation huge fiscal deficits protected balance sheets banks big fail harmed american people retirees pension funds deprived years interest income federal reserve engineered zero negative interest rates sake handful oversized banks extraordinary creation new dollars diluted dollars held peoples companies institutions central banks throughout world raising fears dollar would lose exchange value role world reserve currency washingtons use financial sanctions force countries bend washingtons causing countries leave dollar payments system russian president vladimir putins advisor said dollar must crashed way prevent us aggression chinese called deamericanizing world imperialistic us foreign account tax compliance act fatca comes full force july 1 2015 imposes heavy reporting costs foreign financial institutions institutions might opt dollar transactions together result could serious tumble value us dollar wealth contraction higher inflation via import prices less us wealth available support us debt view reality washington pushing puppet kiev toward war russia washington pushing nato spend money build bases deploy troops baltics eastern europe especially washingtons contribution largest part cost washington reentering middle east conflict washington began inciting sunni shia one another washington constructing new naval air bases philippines vietnam order encircle china washington unaware budget constraints financial predicament long americans experience economic catastrophe | 770 |
<p>The victory of Donald Trump surprised virtually all political observers. Many since have focused on Trump’s record-high 39 percent margin among whites without a college degree. Few have focused on what this means: Trump — and the Republican party — owe the presidency to millions of whites who have largely voted Democratic for years. The implications of that for the future of the Republican party are immense.</p>
<p>Trump’s appeal to white non-college-educated Democrats and independents is clear with even a cursory glance at the election map. Take closely balanced Michigan, which Trump leads as of this writing by 12,000 votes. He carried the state by winning all but eight counties, including historically Democratic places such as Saginaw, Bay, and Gogebic counties. A Republican has not carried the first two since Ronald Reagan in 1984. Gogebic, a 92 percent white county on Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, hasn’t voted for the GOP since 1972.</p>
<p>The pattern is identical in other midwestern states that Trump won narrowly. He carried Wisconsin largely because he won ten white, historically Democratic counties in the southwestern part of the state that even Gore and Kerry won in their races against George W. Bush. Most of these counties had not been carried by the GOP nominee since George H. W. Bush in 1988 or Reagan in 1984; Republicans had not won Pepin and Kenosha since 1972. Trump swept Iowa by winning virtually every eastern county, places that had voted Democratic in every election since 1988. Pennsylvania’s Luzerne County last went Republican in 1988, while Ohio’s Trumbull County had been Democratic since 1972.</p>
<p>These voters do not fit neatly into any of the GOP’s pre-Trump factions. If they were motivated by social conservatism, they would have backed George W. Bush. If tax cuts were important to them, they could have backed any of the GOP’s last four nominees. But Chamber of Commerce Republicans can’t count on their support either. These voters are workers, not bosses, and they view corporate-centric policies with a very jaundiced eye.</p>
<p>It’s common to view their concerns through a purely economic lens and call them protectionist. That is largely true as far as it goes: These people have been buffeted by globalization more than most Americans and see restrictions on trade and immigration as ways to boost the number of good-paying jobs open to American workers. But that’s far from all that they want, nor does a purely economic lens capture the way they view their votes.</p>
<p>They are best viewed through the lens of active citizenship. They take national identity seriously and imbue Americanism with an implicit bargain that flies in the face of liberal or libertarian cosmopolitanism. They believe that being American means more than voting and paying taxes. To them it means that if you work hard and play by the rules, the people who run the country owe it to you that you will live with dignity and respect.</p>
<p>It became painfully obvious to these voters over the last eight years that national Democrats no longer treat them with respect or believe they are capable of living dignified lives. They have seen their way of life under assault, whether in the form of attacks on gun ownership, the focus on climate change over growth, or implicit claims that they are bigots. For people who voted twice for President Obama, these last insinuations might have been the most offensive and damaging of all.</p>
<p>Just because progressive Democrats seemed determined to drive these voters away did not mean, however, that they found conventional Republicans any better. These voters have shunned Republicans because they disagree with the party’s focus on low taxes, small government, and pro-business policies. They benefit enormously from middle-class entitlement programs; their children get what they consider to be good educations from public schools and state universities. They have no problem with redistribution so long as it is focused on either people who can’t work or people who do.</p>
<p>This attitude comes out clearly when we look at entitlement reform. Polls show that these voters do not want to cut Social Security or Medicare at all. Pew Research surveys also show that voters like these believe the government should spend more to help the poor even if it adds to the debt. These are not mainstream views among most Republicans, to say the least.</p>
<p>It will be easy for Republicans to treat these voters with respect in non-economic policies. Most Republicans share these voters’ reverence for traditional American values and reject the extreme coastal cosmopolitanism that increasingly defines the national Democratic party. It will be challenging, however, to extend that treatment to economic policies.</p>
<p>These voters view questions of public taxation and spending differently than do other factions in the party. Where movement conservatives see many social programs and the high taxes that fund them as threats to liberty, these voters see them as giving decent, hard-working people a hand up to live decent, dignified lives. Where business conservatives see free trade or immigration as helping people and increasing growth, these voters see those policies as favoring foreigners over themselves and as just another way that their bosses try to pay them less without justification.</p>
<p>Social conservatives often think that their policies are the way to reach out to these voters and bring them into the GOP coalition, but that’s a mistake. These voters are not motivated by social issues; they are, as the conservative Canadian political analyst Patrick Muttart says, “morally moderate.” They will go along with candidates of the Left or the Right who hold their party’s consensus views on abortion, gender identity, or marriage so long as they do not make those views their priority. Donald Trump’s lack of a firm grounding in traditional Republican social policy was, for these voters, a plus, as it signaled to them that advancing the Evangelical Christian social agenda would not be high on his agenda.</p>
<p>I’m sure many people reading this are thinking, “Adding these voters to the conservative coalition can’t be done.” But in fact it can be done, as Wisconsin governor Scott Walker showed. Walker cut taxes and reduced the rate of spending growth while taking on public-employee labor unions. He also expanded government-funded health-insurance coverage by taking advantage of his state’s very generous Medicaid program to cover more poor people publicly and push working-class people into Obamacare’s exchanges. All factions in his coalition got something they valued.</p>
<p>Walker rode this balanced approach to two important political victories, winning a recall battle and then reelection despite being targeted by national progressive groups. He won virtually all of the historically Democratic white counties that Trump won in his three elections, often running only a couple of percentage points behind Walker. Trump Democrats could also be called Walker Democrats.</p>
<p>Walker’s subsequent political missteps also show how one can lose these voters’ support by becoming too conventional a Republican. Walker veered to the right as he prepared his presidential campaign, catering to tea-party and Christian-conservative groups in nationally covered speeches in Iowa. He also tried to reduce funding for the University of Wisconsin system. His approval ratings dropped sharply and remain mired around 42 percent.</p>
<p>Accommodating these new voters’ concerns will be an ongoing challenge, but the political payoffs are immense. Bringing them into the Republican fold while veering like Walker toward more traditional GOP priorities will make the Midwest a new red firewall. Moreover, showing Americans more broadly that Republicans are willing to use government on occasion to break down barriers to people’s advancement will send a broader message to other voters, especially Latinos. Latinos have historically liked strong government that rewards work and provides opportunity as they move up the economic ladder. Seeing that the GOP shares these values will inevitably broaden the Republican coalition into something that more closely resembles the demography of the new America. And that will allow conservatives to finally redeem the legacy Ronald Reagan bequeathed to us, to make conservatism once more America’s true political religion.</p>
<p>– Henry Olsen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a visiting fellow at the Matthew Ryan Center at Villanova University. He is the author of the forthcoming book Ronald Reagan: New Deal Republican. This article appeared in the December 5, 2016, issue of National Review.</p> | false | 1 | victory donald trump surprised virtually political observers many since focused trumps recordhigh 39 percent margin among whites without college degree focused means trump republican party owe presidency millions whites largely voted democratic years implications future republican party immense trumps appeal white noncollegeeducated democrats independents clear even cursory glance election map take closely balanced michigan trump leads writing 12000 votes carried state winning eight counties including historically democratic places saginaw bay gogebic counties republican carried first two since ronald reagan 1984 gogebic 92 percent white county michigans upper peninsula hasnt voted gop since 1972 pattern identical midwestern states trump narrowly carried wisconsin largely ten white historically democratic counties southwestern part state even gore kerry races george w bush counties carried gop nominee since george h w bush 1988 reagan 1984 republicans pepin kenosha since 1972 trump swept iowa winning virtually every eastern county places voted democratic every election since 1988 pennsylvanias luzerne county last went republican 1988 ohios trumbull county democratic since 1972 voters fit neatly gops pretrump factions motivated social conservatism would backed george w bush tax cuts important could backed gops last four nominees chamber commerce republicans cant count support either voters workers bosses view corporatecentric policies jaundiced eye common view concerns purely economic lens call protectionist largely true far goes people buffeted globalization americans see restrictions trade immigration ways boost number goodpaying jobs open american workers thats far want purely economic lens capture way view votes best viewed lens active citizenship take national identity seriously imbue americanism implicit bargain flies face liberal libertarian cosmopolitanism believe american means voting paying taxes means work hard play rules people run country owe live dignity respect became painfully obvious voters last eight years national democrats longer treat respect believe capable living dignified lives seen way life assault whether form attacks gun ownership focus climate change growth implicit claims bigots people voted twice president obama last insinuations might offensive damaging progressive democrats seemed determined drive voters away mean however found conventional republicans better voters shunned republicans disagree partys focus low taxes small government probusiness policies benefit enormously middleclass entitlement programs children get consider good educations public schools state universities problem redistribution long focused either people cant work people attitude comes clearly look entitlement reform polls show voters want cut social security medicare pew research surveys also show voters like believe government spend help poor even adds debt mainstream views among republicans say least easy republicans treat voters respect noneconomic policies republicans share voters reverence traditional american values reject extreme coastal cosmopolitanism increasingly defines national democratic party challenging however extend treatment economic policies voters view questions public taxation spending differently factions party movement conservatives see many social programs high taxes fund threats liberty voters see giving decent hardworking people hand live decent dignified lives business conservatives see free trade immigration helping people increasing growth voters see policies favoring foreigners another way bosses try pay less without justification social conservatives often think policies way reach voters bring gop coalition thats mistake voters motivated social issues conservative canadian political analyst patrick muttart says morally moderate go along candidates left right hold partys consensus views abortion gender identity marriage long make views priority donald trumps lack firm grounding traditional republican social policy voters plus signaled advancing evangelical christian social agenda would high agenda im sure many people reading thinking adding voters conservative coalition cant done fact done wisconsin governor scott walker showed walker cut taxes reduced rate spending growth taking publicemployee labor unions also expanded governmentfunded healthinsurance coverage taking advantage states generous medicaid program cover poor people publicly push workingclass people obamacares exchanges factions coalition got something valued walker rode balanced approach two important political victories winning recall battle reelection despite targeted national progressive groups virtually historically democratic white counties trump three elections often running couple percentage points behind walker trump democrats could also called walker democrats walkers subsequent political missteps also show one lose voters support becoming conventional republican walker veered right prepared presidential campaign catering teaparty christianconservative groups nationally covered speeches iowa also tried reduce funding university wisconsin system approval ratings dropped sharply remain mired around 42 percent accommodating new voters concerns ongoing challenge political payoffs immense bringing republican fold veering like walker toward traditional gop priorities make midwest new red firewall moreover showing americans broadly republicans willing use government occasion break barriers peoples advancement send broader message voters especially latinos latinos historically liked strong government rewards work provides opportunity move economic ladder seeing gop shares values inevitably broaden republican coalition something closely resembles demography new america allow conservatives finally redeem legacy ronald reagan bequeathed us make conservatism americas true political religion henry olsen senior fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow matthew ryan center villanova university author forthcoming book ronald reagan new deal republican article appeared december 5 2016 issue national review | 798 |
<p>TORONTO — Right fielder <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jose_Bautista/" type="external">Jose Bautista</a> might have played his last home game with the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Toronto-Blue-Jays/" type="external">Toronto Blue Jays</a> on Sunday.</p>
<p>If Bautista did, he did it right and so did the Blue Jays and their fans.</p>
<p>Receiving ovations with each at-bat, Bautista had two singles, a walk and an RBI to help the Blue Jays defeat the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-York-Yankees/" type="external">New York Yankees</a> 9-5 in the rubber match of the three-game series.</p>
<p>“It was an exciting, the last home game and the focus on Jose,” Blue Jays manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Gibbons/" type="external">John Gibbons</a> said. “He helped rebuild the team, he was the face of the franchise for a number of years.”</p>
<p>Bautista was supported by <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Russell_Martin/" type="external">Russell Martin</a>‘s two doubles and three RBIs, and Teoscar Hernandez, who homered for the third straight game.</p>
<p>The Blue Jays (73-83) finish their season with six road games.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Aaron-Judge/" type="external">Aaron Judge</a> hit his league-leading 47th and 48th homers and had three RBIs for the Yankees (86-67).</p>
<p>Bautista took right field alone just before the game started as his teammates applauded from the dugout and the crowd gave a standing ovation. He was unaware that his teammates would not follow him on the field right away.</p>
<p>“We just decided that it was probably better if he just took the field alone to give him the credit that he deserved,” center fielder <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kevin-Pillar/" type="external">Kevin Pillar</a> said. “He’s been a huge part of this franchise for a long time. Obviously with his future being uncertain we wanted him to go out in Jose fashion.”</p>
<p>With one out in the ninth, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ezequiel-Carrera/" type="external">Ezequiel Carrera</a> replaced Bautista in right field. Bautista left the field to a standing ovation, hugged some teammates along the way and then returned from the dugout for a curtain call.</p>
<p>“I don’t think he was aware of (the plan to substitute him in the ninth),” Gibbons said. “I know he appreciated it, I’m sure. He got a great ovation. The fans took care of him all day long as they should have.”</p>
<p>“A lot of good emotions,” Bautista said. “It’s good to be recognized and it’s good to feel the love and I appreciate everything that happened today. It is a possibility that I may not be back. Those decisions will be made and we’ll see what happens.”</p>
<p>“He’s meant a lot to this city, he’s meant a lot to this organization,” Yankees manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Girardi/" type="external">Joe Girardi</a> said. “You could see that he was emotional coming off the field. I thought it was nice what they did.”</p>
<p>Blue Jays starter <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marcus-Stroman/" type="external">Marcus Stroman</a> (13-8) allowed five hits, four walks and three runs while striking out two in 5 2/3 innings to earn his second straight win.</p>
<p>Yankees starter <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jaime_Garcia/" type="external">Jaime Garcia</a> (5-10) allowed four hits, three walks and five runs in 2 1/3 innings. The left-hander struck out four.</p>
<p>The Yankees have clinched a wild-card spot, but their chances of winning the American League East are fading. “It’s getting fairly large with seven games to go,” Girardi said. “Obviously we’re going to keep playing but I think you have to start to think ahead a little bit, too. It’s frustrating because we’ve played really well the last six weeks.’</p>
<p>The Yankees are on a 16-7 roll.</p>
<p>“If it happens it happens, if it doesn’t then we’ll figure out the wild-card thing,” Yankees designated hitter <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chase_Headley/" type="external">Chase Headley</a> said. “You couldn’t really ask for us to play any better than we have at this month. Unfortunately, Boston got hot at the same time.”</p>
<p>Hernandez led off the bottom of the first with his fifth homer of the season and the first of his career leading off a game.</p>
<p>The Blue Jays scored again in the second on <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Darwin_Barney/" type="external">Darwin Barney</a>‘s sacrifice fly that scored Pillar, who doubled and stole third.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin_Smoak/" type="external">Justin Smoak</a> doubled with one out in the third, and Bautista and Kendrys Morales walked to load the bases. Jonathan Holder, who replaced Garcia, got a foul out to third before yielding Martin’s bases-clearing hit to right center.</p>
<p>The Yankees scored in the fourth. Headley and Judge walked before <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Didi-Gregorius/" type="external">Didi Gregorius</a> hit an RBI single.</p>
<p>The Blue Jays scored four runs in the fourth against Bryan Mitchell. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Josh-Donaldson/" type="external">Josh Donaldson</a> and Bautista had RBI singles and Morales had aa two-run single with Bautista being thrown out at home in a close play as he tried to score from first on the hit.</p>
<p>Judge led off the sixth with a homer. Stroman retired the next two batters on grounders before giving up a double to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jacoby_Ellsbury/" type="external">Jacoby Ellsbury</a> and walking <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Todd-Frazier/" type="external">Todd Frazier</a>.</p>
<p>Matt Dermody replaced Stroman and gave up an RBI double to Greg Bird before Ryan Tepera ended the inning on Austin Romine’s grounder to third.</p>
<p>Tepera allowed a one-out single to Headley and Judge’s second homer of the game and was replaced by Aaron Loup, who pitched around a single with two strikeouts to end the inning.</p>
<p>Toronto’s Tom Koehler pitched a perfect eighth. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Roberto-Osuna/" type="external">Roberto Osuna</a> struck out the side in the ninth.</p>
<p>NOTES: Toronto RF Jose Bautista singled to right on the first pitch to him in the first inning to end a 0-for-18 drought. … Blue Jays LHP <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brett_Anderson/" type="external">Brett Anderson</a> (3-4, 7.15 ERA) will oppose Red Sox LHP Drew Pomeranz (16-5, 3.15) Monday in the opener of a three-game series at Boston. … Yankees LHP CC Sabathia (12-5, 3.81) will face <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kansas-City-Royals/" type="external">Kansas City Royals</a> RHP Jake Junis (8-2, 4.05) Monday at Yankee Stadium. It is a makeup game for a postponement on May 25. … The crowd of 47,394 at the Rogers Centre brought the total season attendance to 3,203,886.</p> | false | 1 | toronto right fielder jose bautista might played last home game toronto blue jays sunday bautista right blue jays fans receiving ovations atbat bautista two singles walk rbi help blue jays defeat new york yankees 95 rubber match threegame series exciting last home game focus jose blue jays manager john gibbons said helped rebuild team face franchise number years bautista supported russell martins two doubles three rbis teoscar hernandez homered third straight game blue jays 7383 finish season six road games aaron judge hit leagueleading 47th 48th homers three rbis yankees 8667 bautista took right field alone game started teammates applauded dugout crowd gave standing ovation unaware teammates would follow field right away decided probably better took field alone give credit deserved center fielder kevin pillar said hes huge part franchise long time obviously future uncertain wanted go jose fashion one ninth ezequiel carrera replaced bautista right field bautista left field standing ovation hugged teammates along way returned dugout curtain call dont think aware plan substitute ninth gibbons said know appreciated im sure got great ovation fans took care day long lot good emotions bautista said good recognized good feel love appreciate everything happened today possibility may back decisions made well see happens hes meant lot city hes meant lot organization yankees manager joe girardi said could see emotional coming field thought nice blue jays starter marcus stroman 138 allowed five hits four walks three runs striking two 5 23 innings earn second straight win yankees starter jaime garcia 510 allowed four hits three walks five runs 2 13 innings lefthander struck four yankees clinched wildcard spot chances winning american league east fading getting fairly large seven games go girardi said obviously going keep playing think start think ahead little bit frustrating weve played really well last six weeks yankees 167 roll happens happens doesnt well figure wildcard thing yankees designated hitter chase headley said couldnt really ask us play better month unfortunately boston got hot time hernandez led bottom first fifth homer season first career leading game blue jays scored second darwin barneys sacrifice fly scored pillar doubled stole third justin smoak doubled one third bautista kendrys morales walked load bases jonathan holder replaced garcia got foul third yielding martins basesclearing hit right center yankees scored fourth headley judge walked didi gregorius hit rbi single blue jays scored four runs fourth bryan mitchell josh donaldson bautista rbi singles morales aa tworun single bautista thrown home close play tried score first hit judge led sixth homer stroman retired next two batters grounders giving double jacoby ellsbury walking todd frazier matt dermody replaced stroman gave rbi double greg bird ryan tepera ended inning austin romines grounder third tepera allowed oneout single headley judges second homer game replaced aaron loup pitched around single two strikeouts end inning torontos tom koehler pitched perfect eighth roberto osuna struck side ninth notes toronto rf jose bautista singled right first pitch first inning end 0for18 drought blue jays lhp brett anderson 34 715 era oppose red sox lhp drew pomeranz 165 315 monday opener threegame series boston yankees lhp cc sabathia 125 381 face kansas city royals rhp jake junis 82 405 monday yankee stadium makeup game postponement may 25 crowd 47394 rogers centre brought total season attendance 3203886 | 542 |
<p>The pending acquisition of the bulk of <a href="http://variety.com/t/21st-century-fox/" type="external">21st Century Fox</a>’s assets by the Walt Disney Co. turns the latter into a content giant the likes of which has never been seen. But it also turns the former into a leaner, more focused entity whose future is radically changed from what most observers envisioned for it just months ago.</p>
<p>The new <a href="http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/disney-fox-deal-media-stocks-rise-deal-news-1202640771/" type="external">21st Century Fox</a> consists of three key assets — Fox Broadcasting, Fox News, and cable channels Fox Sports 1 and 2. It is a company that is effectively out of the business of producing entertainment content, and far less invested in the distributing said content. Fox is focused instead on news and sports programming, which remain less vulnerable to downward trends in linear television ratings than scripted and reality entertainment. The new Fox would also be safely removed from the uncertain world of theatrical film.</p>
<p>In a Dec. 11 report, analyst Michael Nathanson valued a post-Disney deal Fox at $22.7 billion — with 76% of that value coming from Fox Sports and Fox News. In an earlier report last month on the possible deal, Nathanson wrote, “As we have long believed, the future of traditional linear networks and linear viewing consumption will predominately be live and concentrated in sports and news verticals.”</p>
<p>The biggest and most immediate changes are likely to be felt at Fox Broadcasting, which will be divorced from studio 20th Century Fox Television. Fox will thus become the only broadcast network not affiliated with a television studio.</p>
<p>Fox Broadcasting and 20th Century Fox Television are both currently headed by Fox Networks Group chairmen and CEOs Gary Newman and Dana Walden. The businesses split at a time when integration between broadcast networks and sibling studios is highly prized. With linear ratings in decline, broadcast networks are increasingly touted as valuable to their parent companies as first-window platforms for content that can be monetized abroad and on other platforms in subsequent windows.</p>
<p>“The cash cow for many of the networks is putting on shows that they produce, then having the global distribution and syndication rights, which is where a lot of the money really is,” said media consultant Brad Adgate. Losing a relationship with a studio means that Fox Broadcasting loses a great deal of its ability to build value for a new 21st Century Fox. But it still may be able to leverage its position as a buyer to negotiate financial stakes in new programming. “Fox may open up negotiations with studios and say, ‘Look, if you want us to put this on the network, we want some sort of equity stake,’” Adgate said.</p>
<p>And without having to worry about supporting a studio, Fox Broadcasting may be able to program more strategically than it has in recent years.</p>
<p>“Not having a relationship with a production company could actually be freeing,” Katz Media Group’s Stacey Schulman said. “We’ve looked at this model for the last 20 years and thought it would be beneficial for networks to own the back end of content that came out of their own libraries. But sometimes it leads to shows being given chances for longer than they should be given chances in time periods they shouldn’t be given”</p>
<p>Without that constraint, Schulman added, Fox “may actually program better for themselves. And if they go into more reality content that will probably make the network younger in median age than it is now. So that will benefit it in terms of attracting younger skewing brands.”</p>
<p>The deal is unlikely to cause much change to Fox News’ cable channels, whose carriage contracts were negotiated separately from those of entertainment brands such as FX and National Geographic. But the news operation could see increased synergy with broadcast.</p>
<p>“They obviously have a strong news product which they haven’t really cross pollinated with their broadcast network that much,” said Schulman. “In light of that and the fact that they’re losing a big content library and production arm, you might see more news production coming from the Fox News side showing up on the network.”</p>
<p>Sports already plays a large role for Fox Broadcasting, where Sunday afternoon NFL telecasts are typically the highest rated programs anywhere on television, and baseball’s World Series has enjoyed two consecutive years of strong viewership. But Fox Sports 1 and 2 have yet to develop into legitimate challengers to Disney-owned ESPN’s dominance in cable sports programming. “In terms of the sport-media world, Fox Sports 1 is a niche broadcaster still,” said Windy Dees, a sports-administration professor at the University of Miami.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Fox is losing a key asset in its regional sports network group, which moves to Disney — and which Nathanson values at $23.5 billion, more than any other asset in the acquisition. Observers, including Nathanson, had originally anticipated that the RSNs would stay with Fox as a valuable component of a news-and-sports strategy.</p>
<p>And looking back to broadcast, even NFL football is less of a boon to broadcast than it has been in the past, as ratings, which for years defied gravity, continue to slide.</p>
<p>“That’s by far their biggest, strongest piece,” Dees said of Fox’s NFL package. “But I think the issue with that is what’s the future of the NFL and are we at a tipping point? The ratings decline is a concern.”</p> | false | 1 | pending acquisition bulk 21st century foxs assets walt disney co turns latter content giant likes never seen also turns former leaner focused entity whose future radically changed observers envisioned months ago new 21st century fox consists three key assets fox broadcasting fox news cable channels fox sports 1 2 company effectively business producing entertainment content far less invested distributing said content fox focused instead news sports programming remain less vulnerable downward trends linear television ratings scripted reality entertainment new fox would also safely removed uncertain world theatrical film dec 11 report analyst michael nathanson valued postdisney deal fox 227 billion 76 value coming fox sports fox news earlier report last month possible deal nathanson wrote long believed future traditional linear networks linear viewing consumption predominately live concentrated sports news verticals biggest immediate changes likely felt fox broadcasting divorced studio 20th century fox television fox thus become broadcast network affiliated television studio fox broadcasting 20th century fox television currently headed fox networks group chairmen ceos gary newman dana walden businesses split time integration broadcast networks sibling studios highly prized linear ratings decline broadcast networks increasingly touted valuable parent companies firstwindow platforms content monetized abroad platforms subsequent windows cash cow many networks putting shows produce global distribution syndication rights lot money really said media consultant brad adgate losing relationship studio means fox broadcasting loses great deal ability build value new 21st century fox still may able leverage position buyer negotiate financial stakes new programming fox may open negotiations studios say look want us put network want sort equity stake adgate said without worry supporting studio fox broadcasting may able program strategically recent years relationship production company could actually freeing katz media groups stacey schulman said weve looked model last 20 years thought would beneficial networks back end content came libraries sometimes leads shows given chances longer given chances time periods shouldnt given without constraint schulman added fox may actually program better go reality content probably make network younger median age benefit terms attracting younger skewing brands deal unlikely cause much change fox news cable channels whose carriage contracts negotiated separately entertainment brands fx national geographic news operation could see increased synergy broadcast obviously strong news product havent really cross pollinated broadcast network much said schulman light fact theyre losing big content library production arm might see news production coming fox news side showing network sports already plays large role fox broadcasting sunday afternoon nfl telecasts typically highest rated programs anywhere television baseballs world series enjoyed two consecutive years strong viewership fox sports 1 2 yet develop legitimate challengers disneyowned espns dominance cable sports programming terms sportmedia world fox sports 1 niche broadcaster still said windy dees sportsadministration professor university miami meanwhile fox losing key asset regional sports network group moves disney nathanson values 235 billion asset acquisition observers including nathanson originally anticipated rsns would stay fox valuable component newsandsports strategy looking back broadcast even nfl football less boon broadcast past ratings years defied gravity continue slide thats far biggest strongest piece dees said foxs nfl package think issue whats future nfl tipping point ratings decline concern | 514 |
<p>CHAPEL HILL, N.C. — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Lamar-Jackson/" type="external">Lamar Jackson</a> threw for three touchdowns and rushed for three more as No. 17 Louisville defeated North Carolina 47-35 on Saturday.</p>
<p>Jackson gained 132 yards on the ground and threw for 393 more for Louisville (2-0). His 526 yards of total offense marked the most ever allowed by North Carolina to one player.</p>
<p>The defending <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Heisman_Trophy/" type="external">Heisman Trophy</a> winner recorded his 15th game with at least 100 yards rushing, tying a school record. His 35 career rushing touchdowns are third on the Cardinals’ all-time list.</p>
<p>Running back Malik Williams rushed for 149 yards on 13 carries as Louisville piled up 705 yards of total offense.</p>
<p>Brandon Harris completed 17 of 23 passes for 216 yards while Austin Proehl caught eight passes for 120 yards as North Carolina dropped to 0-2 for the first time since 2010.</p>
<p>No. 1 Alabama 41, Fresno State 10</p>
<p>TUSCALOOSA, Ala. — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jalen-Hurts/" type="external">Jalen Hurts</a> rushed for a pair of touchdowns and 154 yards as top-ranked Alabama routed Fresno State.</p>
<p>Hurts recorded touchdown runs of 55 yards and three yards in the opening minutes of the first and second quarters as Alabama (2-0) totaled 305 yards on the ground. He also completed 14 of 18 passes for 128 yards.</p>
<p>Chason Virgil completed 21 of 34 passes for 180 yards for Fresno State (1-1).</p>
<p>No. 4 Penn State 33, Pittsburgh 14</p>
<p>STATE COLLEGE, Pa. — Saquon Barkley racked up 183 all-purpose yards and scored two touchdowns on 20 touches for No. 4 Penn State.</p>
<p>Trace McSorley completed 15 of 28 passes for 164 yards, three touchdowns and an interception. Tight end Mike Gesicki caught two touchdown passes for the Nittany Lions (2-0), who avenged last season’s loss to Pittsburgh (1-1).</p>
<p>Panthers quarterback Max Browne completed 19 of 32 passes for 138 yards. Under pressure for most of the afternoon, he was sacked five times and threw two interceptions.</p>
<p>No. 8 Michigan 36, Cincinnati 14</p>
<p>ANN ARBOR, Mich. — Ty Issac rushed for 133 yards on 20 carries to help lead the Wolverines to a 36-14 win over the Bearcats in their home opener.</p>
<p>The Wolverines (2-0) also returned two interceptions for touchdowns. Tyree Kinnel had a 28-yard return in the first quarter and Lavert Hill had a 24-yard return late in the fourth quarter.</p>
<p>Quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Wilton-Speight/" type="external">Wilton Speight</a> completed 17 of 29 passes for 221 yards while Hayden Moore finished 15 of 40 for 132 yards for Cincinnati (1-1).</p>
<p>No. 9 Wisconsin 31, Florida Atlantic 14</p>
<p>MADISON, Wis. — Jonathan Taylor rushed for three touchdowns and 223 yards in his first career start as the Badgers cruised to a win.</p>
<p>Taylor had 26 carries in place of injured sophomore Bradrick Shaw. Quarterback Alex Hornibrook completed 16 of 28 passes for 201 yards for Wisconsin (2-0).</p>
<p>Florida Atlantic (0-2) quarterback Daniel Parr was finished 9 of 19 for 142 yards.</p>
<p>No. 18 Virginia Tech 27, Delaware 0</p>
<p>BLACKSBURG, Va. — No. 18 Virginia Tech forced two turnovers and recorded four sacks in its rout of Delaware.</p>
<p>Virginia Tech (2-0) allowed 223 yards while also getting a punt return touchdown from Greg Stroman and two field goals from Joey Slye.</p>
<p>Hokies quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Josh-Jackson/" type="external">Josh Jackson</a> passed for 222 yards and two touchdowns. Quarterback Joe Walker passed for 116 yards for Delaware (1-1).</p>
<p>No. 19 Kansas State 55, Charlotte 7</p>
<p>MANHATTAN, Kan. — Safety Kendall Adams returned a pair of interceptions for touchdowns as the Wildcats breezed to a win.</p>
<p>Adams recorded interception returns of 30 and 46 yards as Kansas State (2-0) bolted to a 31-7 lead in the second quarter. The Wildcats have 109 non-offensive touchdowns since 1999, the most in the nation by any FBS team.</p>
<p>Kansas State quarterback Jesse Ertz was an efficient 16 of 21 for 178 yards. Charlotte (0-2) quarterback Hassan Klugh was 8 of 19 for 33 yards and scored the lone touchdown.</p>
<p>No. 23 TCU 28, Arkansas 7</p>
<p>FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. — Darius Anderson and Sewo Olonilua ran for late touchdowns as No. 23 TCU improved to 2-0.</p>
<p>Anderson scored on a 14-yard TD with 2:18 remaining. Fourteen seconds later, after Arkansas (1-1) fumbled the kickoff, Olonilua ran in from 13 yards for his second touchdown.</p>
<p>TCU quarterback Kenny Hill completed 21 of 31 passes for 166 yards. Arkansas quarterback Austin Allen was 9 of 23 for 138 yards.</p>
<p>No. 25 Tennessee 42, Indiana State 7</p>
<p>KNOXVILLE, Tenn. — Running back Ty Chandler returned the opening kickoff 91 yards for a touchdown and sophomore running back Carlin Fils-aime scored two touchdowns to lead No. 25 Tennessee.</p>
<p>Quarterback Quinten Dormady completed 13 of 18 passes with two touchdowns and an interception to help Tennessee improve to 2-0 and set up a showdown next week with No. 22 Florida.</p>
<p>Indiana State (0-2) quarterback Cade Sparks completed 8 of 17 for 70 yards, and running back Lemonte Booker rushed for 76 yards on 15 carries.</p> | false | 1 | chapel hill nc lamar jackson threw three touchdowns rushed three 17 louisville defeated north carolina 4735 saturday jackson gained 132 yards ground threw 393 louisville 20 526 yards total offense marked ever allowed north carolina one player defending heisman trophy winner recorded 15th game least 100 yards rushing tying school record 35 career rushing touchdowns third cardinals alltime list running back malik williams rushed 149 yards 13 carries louisville piled 705 yards total offense brandon harris completed 17 23 passes 216 yards austin proehl caught eight passes 120 yards north carolina dropped 02 first time since 2010 1 alabama 41 fresno state 10 tuscaloosa ala jalen hurts rushed pair touchdowns 154 yards topranked alabama routed fresno state hurts recorded touchdown runs 55 yards three yards opening minutes first second quarters alabama 20 totaled 305 yards ground also completed 14 18 passes 128 yards chason virgil completed 21 34 passes 180 yards fresno state 11 4 penn state 33 pittsburgh 14 state college pa saquon barkley racked 183 allpurpose yards scored two touchdowns 20 touches 4 penn state trace mcsorley completed 15 28 passes 164 yards three touchdowns interception tight end mike gesicki caught two touchdown passes nittany lions 20 avenged last seasons loss pittsburgh 11 panthers quarterback max browne completed 19 32 passes 138 yards pressure afternoon sacked five times threw two interceptions 8 michigan 36 cincinnati 14 ann arbor mich ty issac rushed 133 yards 20 carries help lead wolverines 3614 win bearcats home opener wolverines 20 also returned two interceptions touchdowns tyree kinnel 28yard return first quarter lavert hill 24yard return late fourth quarter quarterback wilton speight completed 17 29 passes 221 yards hayden moore finished 15 40 132 yards cincinnati 11 9 wisconsin 31 florida atlantic 14 madison wis jonathan taylor rushed three touchdowns 223 yards first career start badgers cruised win taylor 26 carries place injured sophomore bradrick shaw quarterback alex hornibrook completed 16 28 passes 201 yards wisconsin 20 florida atlantic 02 quarterback daniel parr finished 9 19 142 yards 18 virginia tech 27 delaware 0 blacksburg va 18 virginia tech forced two turnovers recorded four sacks rout delaware virginia tech 20 allowed 223 yards also getting punt return touchdown greg stroman two field goals joey slye hokies quarterback josh jackson passed 222 yards two touchdowns quarterback joe walker passed 116 yards delaware 11 19 kansas state 55 charlotte 7 manhattan kan safety kendall adams returned pair interceptions touchdowns wildcats breezed win adams recorded interception returns 30 46 yards kansas state 20 bolted 317 lead second quarter wildcats 109 nonoffensive touchdowns since 1999 nation fbs team kansas state quarterback jesse ertz efficient 16 21 178 yards charlotte 02 quarterback hassan klugh 8 19 33 yards scored lone touchdown 23 tcu 28 arkansas 7 fayetteville ark darius anderson sewo olonilua ran late touchdowns 23 tcu improved 20 anderson scored 14yard td 218 remaining fourteen seconds later arkansas 11 fumbled kickoff olonilua ran 13 yards second touchdown tcu quarterback kenny hill completed 21 31 passes 166 yards arkansas quarterback austin allen 9 23 138 yards 25 tennessee 42 indiana state 7 knoxville tenn running back ty chandler returned opening kickoff 91 yards touchdown sophomore running back carlin filsaime scored two touchdowns lead 25 tennessee quarterback quinten dormady completed 13 18 passes two touchdowns interception help tennessee improve 20 set showdown next week 22 florida indiana state 02 quarterback cade sparks completed 8 17 70 yards running back lemonte booker rushed 76 yards 15 carries | 577 |
<p>illustration: michael Hoeweler; reference: Marion Curtis/Starpix/REX/Shutterstock</p>
<p>Hollywood has long recognized Ron Perlman for being unrecognizable. Some of his most iconic roles — including “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/hellboy/" type="external">Hellboy</a>,” “Quest of Fire” and the late-1980s CBS series “Beauty and the Beast” — required extensive, transformative makeup and prosthetics. The actor is returning to television, a medium he describes as “the one area where the storytelling is really rich, really deep and really human,” to join the Crackle drama “Startup” in the series’ second season, which premieres Sept. 28. Perlman’s initial break in the industry came not from television or film, but in the <a href="http://variety.com/t/tommy-tune/" type="external">Tommy Tune</a>-directed stage musical “Sunset,” which led to his first mention in Variety on Oct. 5, 1977.</p>
<p>SEE MORE: <a href="https://variety.com/access-digital/" type="external">From the September 20, 2017, issue of Variety</a></p>
<p>What was it like auditioning for Tommy Tune?</p>
<p>I was wired early in my career for failure. So anytime anyone liked what I did, much less actually hired me, it was a shock. Tommy Tune was a singular validation that I had never experienced before.</p>
<p>What do you remember about working with Alexis Smith in “Sunset”?</p>
<p>My dad taught me how to be a devotee to the golden age of Hollywood, which was the ’30s and ’40s, and Alexis Smith was this symbol of everything that was magical about that period. For me to have been a part of it, those are the things I deeply felt. Lisa Mordente was one of the girls in the show, and her parents were Tony Mordente and Chita Rivera, so Chita was up there all the time hanging out, and I’ve become drinking buddies with Chita Rivera and Alexis Smith. These girls could party. Alexis Smith said to me, “Do you drink vodka?” And I said, “No I don’t.” And she said, “Well if you hang out with me you’re going to have to learn how because that’s my drink.” And from that moment to this moment, vodka has been my jam. She allowed me to escort her around Buffalo because she knew I really adored her and couldn’t get enough of the stories of the great old days of Hollywood. She was one of those women who never ever looked back at the past, but she also knew that I was the most captive audience she’d ever met. Just the fact that she liked having me as a dinner companion meant the world to me. It was so incredibly validating.</p>
<p>Was acting something you always wanted to pursue?</p>
<p>I knew that I loved it from the moment I started doing it in high school. I was told by my parents and their family, who are all Depression kids, you want to have as much security as you can, and show business is totally not the right way to. My dad came to see [me in] “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/guys-and-dolls/" type="external">Guys and Dolls</a>.” The next day he says to me, “You know you have to do this, right? This is what you were born to do.” And he was dead, like two years later. So it was almost like a death-bed encouragement slash permission. He had been a musician, and he understood the uncertainty of being an artist. If this man who has given me everything, my taste, my point of view, my aesthetic, my value system, this is his final act of guidance, who am I to say no?</p>
<p>Who were some of your role models when you started out?</p>
<p>The [third] movie that I ever made was “The Name of the Rose” and Sean Connery was the star. I followed him around like a fanboy. When he found out that I couldn’t get enough stories about Hitchcock and John Huston and all the people he’d worked with, he would basically sit there for eight hours between shots and download all these stories onto me and see the delight coming out of me. On my days off, I would come to set and watch Sean work. I never had more of a mentor than him because he was one of these movie stars that made it look effortless. But when I watched him craft these performances, it wasn’t effortless at all. It was incredibly well thought out, it was incredibly respectful to the material, and there was a real aesthetic to the actor bringing an inanimate role to life that I had never looked upon that way before I watched him do it. His respect for the written word was gorgeous and illuminating, and I probably never had an acting mentor that meant more to me than him.</p>
<p>What’s the best advice you’ve gotten?</p>
<p>My first agent was a guy named Richard Astor in New York when I was in my 20s, and he said, “You mustn’t expect to get any real, important work until you’re in your 40s, and you’re probably not going to get real work that’s going to mean anything to you until you’re in your 50s.” And I said, “I’m 27. Why did you bring me in here?” He said, “Well, you never know. I’m going to try to get you work, but you have this old soul, and nothing juvenile comes off you. Your destiny is not right now, it’s down the road when you grow into it.” He turned out to be perfectly right. The best parts of my career didn’t happen until I was 50. It was not easy to hear, because when you’re 27, you just want instant gratification. But now that I have the luxury of perspective, the guy was dead on.</p>
<p>Did you have any particularly memorable auditions?</p>
<p>I’m a horrible auditioner, and I don’t think I ever really got a great job from an audition, except maybe from “Sunset.” I always felt this overwhelming amount of pressure that completely screwed up my freeness, and if you’re not free while you’re being an actor, then people are definitely not going to get a sense of whether you can handle the role or not. The days where I was free and relaxed and easy, they were very few and far between. “Sunset” was one; “Quest of Fire” was the other. I thought I was making this crap caveman movie. I found out that this guy (Jean-Jacques Annaud) had won an Academy Award for “Black and White in Color” and he was a distinguished filmmaker. By the time I got nervous, I had already had the role, so I didn’t trip myself up.</p>
<p>You’re known for roles that require extensive makeup. Do you remember the longest it’s ever taken you to get into character?</p>
<p>The first day of “Name of the Rose,” not only did they have to create the makeup on my face, but they also had to apply this hunchback, which needed to be revealed shirtless, so it needed to be perfect. I was in the makeup chair for 12½ hours. So by the time I get to the set, we only had about an hour and a half to shoot.</p>
<p>Did the long hours ever deter you from wanting to take on a role?</p>
<p>I’m told there are not a lot of actors who can handle the four to five to six hours in the makeup chair. I’ve never had a problem with it, but if you look back at the roles in which I did that, first one being “Quest of Fire” then “Name of the Rose” then “Beauty and the Beast,” then “Island of Dr. Moreau,” then “Hellboy,” I was always so thrilled to be playing those roles that whatever I had to go through to get onto the set and be that guy, playing those roles, kind of paled in comparison to the joy and the honor of playing the part. I always kept saying to myself, “There’s a million guys that wish they were you right now and there’s absolutely no reason you should ever complain about the fact that it’s taking four hours to get on set. Because by the time you do get on set, you’re Hellboy.” It’s never been a burden to me because the roles I was playing as a result of all that work in the chair were phenomenal.</p> | false | 1 | illustration michael hoeweler reference marion curtisstarpixrexshutterstock hollywood long recognized ron perlman unrecognizable iconic roles including hellboy quest fire late1980s cbs series beauty beast required extensive transformative makeup prosthetics actor returning television medium describes one area storytelling really rich really deep really human join crackle drama startup series second season premieres sept 28 perlmans initial break industry came television film tommy tunedirected stage musical sunset led first mention variety oct 5 1977 see september 20 2017 issue variety like auditioning tommy tune wired early career failure anytime anyone liked much less actually hired shock tommy tune singular validation never experienced remember working alexis smith sunset dad taught devotee golden age hollywood 30s 40s alexis smith symbol everything magical period part things deeply felt lisa mordente one girls show parents tony mordente chita rivera chita time hanging ive become drinking buddies chita rivera alexis smith girls could party alexis smith said drink vodka said dont said well hang youre going learn thats drink moment moment vodka jam allowed escort around buffalo knew really adored couldnt get enough stories great old days hollywood one women never ever looked back past also knew captive audience shed ever met fact liked dinner companion meant world incredibly validating acting something always wanted pursue knew loved moment started high school told parents family depression kids want much security show business totally right way dad came see guys dolls next day says know right born dead like two years later almost like deathbed encouragement slash permission musician understood uncertainty artist man given everything taste point view aesthetic value system final act guidance say role models started third movie ever made name rose sean connery star followed around like fanboy found couldnt get enough stories hitchcock john huston people hed worked would basically sit eight hours shots download stories onto see delight coming days would come set watch sean work never mentor one movie stars made look effortless watched craft performances wasnt effortless incredibly well thought incredibly respectful material real aesthetic actor bringing inanimate role life never looked upon way watched respect written word gorgeous illuminating probably never acting mentor meant whats best advice youve gotten first agent guy named richard astor new york 20s said mustnt expect get real important work youre 40s youre probably going get real work thats going mean anything youre 50s said im 27 bring said well never know im going try get work old soul nothing juvenile comes destiny right road grow turned perfectly right best parts career didnt happen 50 easy hear youre 27 want instant gratification luxury perspective guy dead particularly memorable auditions im horrible auditioner dont think ever really got great job audition except maybe sunset always felt overwhelming amount pressure completely screwed freeness youre free youre actor people definitely going get sense whether handle role days free relaxed easy far sunset one quest fire thought making crap caveman movie found guy jeanjacques annaud academy award black white color distinguished filmmaker time got nervous already role didnt trip youre known roles require extensive makeup remember longest ever taken get character first day name rose create makeup face also apply hunchback needed revealed shirtless needed perfect makeup chair 12½ hours time get set hour half shoot long hours ever deter wanting take role im told lot actors handle four five six hours makeup chair ive never problem look back roles first one quest fire name rose beauty beast island dr moreau hellboy always thrilled playing roles whatever go get onto set guy playing roles kind paled comparison joy honor playing part always kept saying theres million guys wish right theres absolutely reason ever complain fact taking four hours get set time get set youre hellboy never burden roles playing result work chair phenomenal | 622 |
<p>WASHINGTON — If it’s tough being a kid, try being a “first kid” — the child of an American president.</p>
<p>Just ask President Bill Clinton’s daughter, Chelsea. Or President George W. Bush’s twins, Jenna and Barbara. And now, President Donald Trump’s youngest child, Barron, is finding out.</p>
<p>Ten-year-old Barron was the target of a poorly received joke tweeted by a “Saturday Night Live” writer on Jan. 20 as the new first family reveled in Inauguration Day events. Separately in Chicago, comedian Shannon Noll played the title character in “Barron Trump: Up Past Bedtime,” which had a recent run at a theater in Hyde Park.</p>
<p>Both instances have revived age-old questions about the sometimes less-than-kid-glove treatment of presidential kids.</p>
<p>“I think the children are off-limits,” said Lisa Caputo, who was White House press secretary when “Saturday Night Live” made fun of then-13-year-old Chelsea Clinton. “They didn’t run for public office, they don’t hold an official role.”</p>
<p>“SNL” cast member Mike Meyers sent the Clintons a letter of apology after the incident.</p>
<p>The teenage Chelsea Clinton also was mocked by talk radio host Rush Limbaugh, who called her a dog.</p>
<p>Katie Rich, the “SNL” writer who tweeted about Barron, was suspended indefinitely. After deleting the tweet and deactivating her Twitter account, she reactivated the account, saying she wanted to “sincerely apologize” for the “insensitive” tweet and that she deeply regretted her actions.</p>
<p>“It was inexcusable &amp; I’m so sorry,” Rich said. Fellow comedians have risen to her defense, but Noll told the Chicago Reader that she has been the subject of a social media backlash, including death threats, as well as homophobic, transphobic, anti-Semitic and racist comments directed at her. The theater has also been harassed.</p>
<p>All presidents and first ladies seek a life outside the spotlight for minor children who live in the 132-room mansion, except when they themselves put their kids in the spotlight.</p>
<p>Days after the incident involving Rich, the White House appealed for respect for Barron’s privacy.</p>
<p>“It is a longstanding tradition that the children of presidents are afforded the opportunity to grow up outside of the political spotlight,” the White House press office said in a brief statement. “The White House fully expects this tradition to continue.”</p>
<p>That same week, Trump told Sean Hannity of Fox News that it was “a disgrace” for NBC “to attack my 10-year-old son.” Trump also suggested the dustup may have bothered Barron, who has only been seen publicly during big moments of the past year, such as the night Trump addressed the Republican National Convention and election night. He continues to live full-time in New York City with his mother, first lady Melania Trump.</p>
<p>“It’s not an easy thing for him. Believe me,” Trump said of his son.</p>
<p>In contrast, Trump’s adult children, Don Jr., Eric, Ivanka and Tiffany, are sharing the limelight with their famous father. Don Jr. and Eric are running the family business, and Ivanka could end up joining the administration. All three Trump children sat in on meetings their father conducted before and after he took office.</p>
<p>Doug Wead, who wrote a book about the children of presidents, said it’s the “ultimate hurt” when the offspring become the vehicle for the ire that some grownups wish they could direct toward the president. He said kids become targets because they’re seen as weak.</p>
<p>“Barron can’t fight back,” Wead said.</p>
<p>Anita McBride, who worked for three Republican presidents and was first lady Laura Bush’s chief of staff, said President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, did a good job shielding their daughters from most public scrutiny. Bush’s daughters were college-bound when he was elected in 2000, so they didn’t live in the White House. But their underage drinking made headlines.</p>
<p>“Why in a matter of 24 hours should it be different for this child?” McBride said of Barron.</p>
<p>And Chelsea Clinton said on Twitter that “Barron Trump deserves the chance every child does — to be a kid.” But she also added that standing up for kids means opposing Trump policies that hurt them.</p>
<p>The supportive tweet from the former first daughter — who is good friends with Barron’s sister Ivanka — shed light on the exclusive club of “first children,” who seem to be looking out for one another.</p>
<p>Jenna and Barbara Bush recently applauded Malia and Sasha Obama for surviving the “unbelievable pressure of the White House” and enduring “harsh criticism of your parents by people” who don’t know them.</p>
<p>“Take all that you have seen, the people you have met, the lessons you have learned, and let that help guide you in making positive change. We have no doubt you will,” they encouraged the Obama girls in a letter. The Bush sisters also wrote a letter to the Obama girls when they moved into the White House in 2009 at ages 10 and 7.</p>
<p>Wead said few tears should be shed over the fact that these children sometimes get rough treatment from the public.</p>
<p>As children of privilege, they are steps ahead of so many of their peers.</p>
<p>“Two of them became presidents themselves,” Wead said, referring to George W. Bush, son of President George H.W. Bush, and John Quincy Adams, son of President John Adams.</p> | false | 1 | washington tough kid try first kid child american president ask president bill clintons daughter chelsea president george w bushs twins jenna barbara president donald trumps youngest child barron finding tenyearold barron target poorly received joke tweeted saturday night live writer jan 20 new first family reveled inauguration day events separately chicago comedian shannon noll played title character barron trump past bedtime recent run theater hyde park instances revived ageold questions sometimes lessthankidglove treatment presidential kids think children offlimits said lisa caputo white house press secretary saturday night live made fun then13yearold chelsea clinton didnt run public office dont hold official role snl cast member mike meyers sent clintons letter apology incident teenage chelsea clinton also mocked talk radio host rush limbaugh called dog katie rich snl writer tweeted barron suspended indefinitely deleting tweet deactivating twitter account reactivated account saying wanted sincerely apologize insensitive tweet deeply regretted actions inexcusable amp im sorry rich said fellow comedians risen defense noll told chicago reader subject social media backlash including death threats well homophobic transphobic antisemitic racist comments directed theater also harassed presidents first ladies seek life outside spotlight minor children live 132room mansion except put kids spotlight days incident involving rich white house appealed respect barrons privacy longstanding tradition children presidents afforded opportunity grow outside political spotlight white house press office said brief statement white house fully expects tradition continue week trump told sean hannity fox news disgrace nbc attack 10yearold son trump also suggested dustup may bothered barron seen publicly big moments past year night trump addressed republican national convention election night continues live fulltime new york city mother first lady melania trump easy thing believe trump said son contrast trumps adult children jr eric ivanka tiffany sharing limelight famous father jr eric running family business ivanka could end joining administration three trump children sat meetings father conducted took office doug wead wrote book children presidents said ultimate hurt offspring become vehicle ire grownups wish could direct toward president said kids become targets theyre seen weak barron cant fight back wead said anita mcbride worked three republican presidents first lady laura bushs chief staff said president barack obama wife michelle good job shielding daughters public scrutiny bushs daughters collegebound elected 2000 didnt live white house underage drinking made headlines matter 24 hours different child mcbride said barron chelsea clinton said twitter barron trump deserves chance every child kid also added standing kids means opposing trump policies hurt supportive tweet former first daughter good friends barrons sister ivanka shed light exclusive club first children seem looking one another jenna barbara bush recently applauded malia sasha obama surviving unbelievable pressure white house enduring harsh criticism parents people dont know take seen people met lessons learned let help guide making positive change doubt encouraged obama girls letter bush sisters also wrote letter obama girls moved white house 2009 ages 10 7 wead said tears shed fact children sometimes get rough treatment public children privilege steps ahead many peers two became presidents wead said referring george w bush son president george hw bush john quincy adams son president john adams | 514 |
<p>What do America’s college students want? They want to be oppressed. More precisely, a surprising number of students at America’s finest colleges and universities wish to appear as victims — to themselves, as well as to others — without the discomfort of actually experiencing victimization. Here is where global warming comes in. The secret appeal of campus climate activism lies in its ability to turn otherwise happy, healthy, and prosperous young people into an oppressed class, at least in their own imaginings. Climate activists say to the world, “I’ll save you.” Yet deep down they’re thinking, “Oppress me.”</p>
<p>In his important new book,&#160; <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=074566976X" type="external">The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse: Save the Earth, Punish Human Beings</a>, French intellectual gadfly Pascal Bruckner does the most thorough job yet of explaining the climate movement as a secular religion, an odd combination of deformed Christianity and reconstructed Marxism. (You can find&#160;Bruckner’s excellent article based on the book&#160; <a href="http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_2_apocalyptic-daze.html" type="external">here</a>.) Bruckner describes a historical process wherein “the long list of emblematic victims — Jews, blacks, slaves, proletarians, colonized peoples — was replaced, little by little, with the Planet.” The planet, says Bruckner, “has become the new proletariat that must be saved from exploitation.”</p>
<p>But why? Bruckner finds it odd that a “mood of catastrophe” should prevail in the West, the most well-off part of the world. The reason, I think, is that the only way to turn the prosperous into victims is to threaten the very existence of a world they otherwise command.</p>
<p>And why should the privileged&#160;wish to become victims? To alleviate guilt and to appropriate the victim’s superior prestige. In the neo-Marxist dispensation now regnant on our college campuses, after all, the advantaged are ignorant and guilty while the oppressed are innocent and wise. The initial solution to this problem was for the privileged to identify with “struggling groups” by wearing, say, a Palestinian&#160;keffiyeh. Yet better than merely empathizing with the oppressed is to&#160;be&#160;oppressed. This is the climate movement’s signal innovation.</p>
<p>We can make sense of Bruckner’s progression of victimhood from successive minorities to the globe itself by considering the lives of modern-day climate activists. Let’s begin with Bill McKibben, the most influential environmental activist in the country, and&#160; <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/341991/fossil-fuel-divestment-stanley-kurtz" type="external">leader</a>&#160;of the campus fossil-fuel divestment movement.</p>
<p>In a 1996 piece titled “ <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=0805076271" type="external">Job and Matthew</a>,” McKibben describes his arrival at college in 1978 as a liberal-leaning student with a suburban Protestant background. “My leftism grew more righteous in college,” he says, “but still there was something pro forma about it.” The problem? “Being white, male, straight, and of impeccably middle-class background, I could not realistically claim to be a victim of anything.” At one point, in what he calls a “loony” attempt to claim the mantle of victimhood, McKibben nearly convinced himself that he was part Irish so he could don a black armband&#160;as Bobby Sands and fellow&#160;members of the Provisional&#160;Irish Republican Army died in a hunger strike. Yet even as he failed to persuade himself he was Irish, McKibben continued to enthusiastically support every leftist-approved victim group he could find. Nonetheless, something was missing. None of these causes seemed truly his own. When McKibben almost singlehandedly turned global warming into a public issue in 1989, his problem was solved. Now everyone could be a victim.</p>
<p>Wen Stephenson, a contributing writer at&#160;The Nation&#160;and an enthusiastic supporter of McKibben’s anti-fossil-fuel crusade, is one of the sharpest observers of the climate movement. In March, Stephenson published a <a href="http://grist.org/climate-energy/the-children-why-a-generation-is-putting-itself-on-the-line-for-the-climate/" type="external">profile</a>&#160;of some of the student climate protesters he’d gotten to know best. Their stories&#160;look very much like McKibben’s description of his own past.</p>
<p>Stephenson’s thesis is that, despite vast differences between the upper-middle-class college students who make up much of today’s climate movement and southern blacks living under segregation in the 1950s, climate activists think of themselves on the model of the early civil-rights protesters. When climate activists court arrest through civil disobedience, they imagine themselves to be reliving the struggles of persecuted African Americans staging lunch-counter sit-ins at risk of their lives. Today’s climate protesters,&#160;Stephenson writes,“feel themselves oppressed by powerful, corrupt forces beyond their control.” And they fight “not only for people in faraway places but, increasingly, for themselves.”</p>
<p>One young activist, a sophomore at Harvard, told Stephenson that she grew up “privileged in a poor rural town.” Inspired by the civil-rights movement, her early climate activism was undertaken “in solidarity” with Third World peoples: “I saw climate change as this huge human rights abuse against people who are already disadvantaged in our global society. . . . I knew theoretically there could be impacts on the U.S. But I thought, I’m from a rich, developed country, my parents are well-off, I know I’m going to college, and it’s not going to make a difference to my life. But especially over this past year, I’ve learned that climate change is a threat to me.” When one of her fellow protesters said: “You know, I think I could die of climate change. That could be the way I go,” the thought stuck with her. “You always learn about marginalized groups in society, and think about how their voices don’t have as much power, and then suddenly you’re like, ‘Wait, that’s exactly what I am, with climate change.’”</p>
<p>The remaining biographical accounts in Stephenson’s piece repeat these themes. Climate activists see themselves as privileged, are deeply influenced by courses on climate change and on “marginalized” groups they’ve been exposed to in high school and college, and treat the climate apocalypse as their personal admissions pass to the sacred circle of the oppressed.</p>
<p>It may be that these activists, eyes opened by fortuitous education, are merely recognizing the reality of our impending doom. Or might this particular apocalypse offer unacknowledged psychic rewards? These students could easily be laid low by an economic crisis brought on by demographic decline and the strains of baby-boomer retirement on our entitlement system. Yet marriage and children aren’t a priority, although they could help solve the problem. Why? Many dooms beckon. How has climate change won out?</p>
<p>Last academic year, the National Association of Scholars released a&#160; <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/03/the_sad_state_of_liberal_education_at_bowdoin_117774.html" type="external">widely discussed</a>&#160; <a href="http://www.nas.org/articles/what_does_bowdoin_teach_how_a_contemporary_liberal_arts_college_shapes_stud" type="external">report</a>&#160;called “What Does Bowdoin Teach? How a Contemporary Liberal Arts College Shapes Students.” The report chronicles what I’ve called a “ <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/345411/two-islands-bowdoin-stanley-kurtz" type="external">reverse island</a>” effect. Back in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the classic liberal-arts curriculum first came under challenge, courses in ethnic and gender studies were like tiny islands in a sea of traditionalism. Politicized in ways that were incompatible with liberal education, these ideologically based “studies” programs were generally dismissed as necessary concessions to the nascent multicultural zeitgeist.</p>
<p>Today the situation is reversed. Not only have the ideologically driven “studies” programs taken over a large share of the college curriculum, but many courses in conventional departments reflect the underlying assumptions of the various minority-studies concentrations. Today, classic liberal-arts courses have themselves been turned into tiny besieged islands, while the study of alleged oppression represents the leading approach at America’s colleges and universities.</p>
<p>In this atmosphere, students cannot help wishing to see themselves as members of a persecuted group. Climate activism answers their&#160;existential challenges&#160;and gives them a sense of crusading purpose in a lonely secular world. The planet, as Bruckner would have it, is the new proletariat. Yet substitute “upper-middle-class” for “planet,” and the progression of victimhood is explained. Global warming allows the upper-middle-class to join the proletariat, cloaking erstwhile oppressors in the mantle of righteous victimhood.</p>
<p>Insight into the quasi-religious motivations that stand behind climate activism cannot finally resolve the empirical controversies at stake in our debate over global warming. Yet understanding climate activism as a cultural phenomenon does yield insight into that debate. The religious character of the climate-change crusade chokes off serious discussion. It&#160; <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/344684/whats-matter-vassar-stanley-kurtz" type="external">stigmatizes</a>&#160;reasonable&#160; <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/342198/fossil-fuel-divestment-part-3-stanley-kurtz" type="external">skepticism</a>&#160;about climate catastrophism (which is different from questioning the fundamental physics of carbon dioxide’s effect on the atmosphere). Climate apocalypticism drags what ought to be careful consideration of the costs and benefits of various policy options into the fraught world of identity politics. The wish to be oppressed turns into the wish to be morally superior, which turns into the pleasure of&#160; <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/348110/swarthmore-spinning-out-control-videos" type="external">silencing</a>&#160;alleged oppressors, which turns into its own sort of hatred and oppression.</p>
<p>What do American college students want? I would like to think they are looking for an education in the spirit of classic liberalism, an education that offers them, not a ready-made ideology, but the tools to make an informed choice among the fundamental alternatives in life. The people who run our universities, unfortunately, have taught their students to want something different, and this is what truly&#160; <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/342287/harvard-cheats-itself-stanley-kurtz" type="external">oppresses</a>&#160;them.</p>
<p>Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | americas college students want want oppressed precisely surprising number students americas finest colleges universities wish appear victims well others without discomfort actually experiencing victimization global warming comes secret appeal campus climate activism lies ability turn otherwise happy healthy prosperous young people oppressed class least imaginings climate activists say world ill save yet deep theyre thinking oppress important new book160 fanaticism apocalypse save earth punish human beings french intellectual gadfly pascal bruckner thorough job yet explaining climate movement secular religion odd combination deformed christianity reconstructed marxism find160bruckners excellent article based book160 bruckner describes historical process wherein long list emblematic victims jews blacks slaves proletarians colonized peoples replaced little little planet planet says bruckner become new proletariat must saved exploitation bruckner finds odd mood catastrophe prevail west welloff part world reason think way turn prosperous victims threaten existence world otherwise command privileged160wish become victims alleviate guilt appropriate victims superior prestige neomarxist dispensation regnant college campuses advantaged ignorant guilty oppressed innocent wise initial solution problem privileged identify struggling groups wearing say palestinian160keffiyeh yet better merely empathizing oppressed to160be160oppressed climate movements signal innovation make sense bruckners progression victimhood successive minorities globe considering lives modernday climate activists lets begin bill mckibben influential environmental activist country and160 leader160of campus fossilfuel divestment movement 1996 piece titled job matthew mckibben describes arrival college 1978 liberalleaning student suburban protestant background leftism grew righteous college says still something pro forma problem white male straight impeccably middleclass background could realistically claim victim anything one point calls loony attempt claim mantle victimhood mckibben nearly convinced part irish could black armband160as bobby sands fellow160members provisional160irish republican army died hunger strike yet even failed persuade irish mckibben continued enthusiastically support every leftistapproved victim group could find nonetheless something missing none causes seemed truly mckibben almost singlehandedly turned global warming public issue 1989 problem solved everyone could victim wen stephenson contributing writer at160the nation160and enthusiastic supporter mckibbens antifossilfuel crusade one sharpest observers climate movement march stephenson published profile160of student climate protesters hed gotten know best stories160look much like mckibbens description past stephensons thesis despite vast differences uppermiddleclass college students make much todays climate movement southern blacks living segregation 1950s climate activists think model early civilrights protesters climate activists court arrest civil disobedience imagine reliving struggles persecuted african americans staging lunchcounter sitins risk lives todays climate protesters160stephenson writesfeel oppressed powerful corrupt forces beyond control fight people faraway places increasingly one young activist sophomore harvard told stephenson grew privileged poor rural town inspired civilrights movement early climate activism undertaken solidarity third world peoples saw climate change huge human rights abuse people already disadvantaged global society knew theoretically could impacts us thought im rich developed country parents welloff know im going college going make difference life especially past year ive learned climate change threat one fellow protesters said know think could die climate change could way go thought stuck always learn marginalized groups society think voices dont much power suddenly youre like wait thats exactly climate change remaining biographical accounts stephensons piece repeat themes climate activists see privileged deeply influenced courses climate change marginalized groups theyve exposed high school college treat climate apocalypse personal admissions pass sacred circle oppressed may activists eyes opened fortuitous education merely recognizing reality impending doom might particular apocalypse offer unacknowledged psychic rewards students could easily laid low economic crisis brought demographic decline strains babyboomer retirement entitlement system yet marriage children arent priority although could help solve problem many dooms beckon climate change last academic year national association scholars released a160 widely discussed160 report160called bowdoin teach contemporary liberal arts college shapes students report chronicles ive called reverse island effect back late 1960s early 1970s classic liberalarts curriculum first came challenge courses ethnic gender studies like tiny islands sea traditionalism politicized ways incompatible liberal education ideologically based studies programs generally dismissed necessary concessions nascent multicultural zeitgeist today situation reversed ideologically driven studies programs taken large share college curriculum many courses conventional departments reflect underlying assumptions various minoritystudies concentrations today classic liberalarts courses turned tiny besieged islands study alleged oppression represents leading approach americas colleges universities atmosphere students help wishing see members persecuted group climate activism answers their160existential challenges160and gives sense crusading purpose lonely secular world planet bruckner would new proletariat yet substitute uppermiddleclass planet progression victimhood explained global warming allows uppermiddleclass join proletariat cloaking erstwhile oppressors mantle righteous victimhood insight quasireligious motivations stand behind climate activism finally resolve empirical controversies stake debate global warming yet understanding climate activism cultural phenomenon yield insight debate religious character climatechange crusade chokes serious discussion it160 stigmatizes160reasonable160 skepticism160about climate catastrophism different questioning fundamental physics carbon dioxides effect atmosphere climate apocalypticism drags ought careful consideration costs benefits various policy options fraught world identity politics wish oppressed turns wish morally superior turns pleasure of160 silencing160alleged oppressors turns sort hatred oppression american college students want would like think looking education spirit classic liberalism education offers readymade ideology tools make informed choice among fundamental alternatives life people run universities unfortunately taught students want something different truly160 oppresses160them stanley kurtz senior fellow ethics public policy center | 831 |
<p>The set’s a bit grander and the music sounds richer, but success hasn’t spoiled this embraceable musical fable about the surprising friendships that bloom in the middle of a political desert. In this <a href="http://variety.com/2017/legit/podcasts/stagecraft-podcast-bands-visit-tony-shalhoub-1202584719/" type="external">Broadway transfer of an Off Broadway hit</a>, human error sends an Egyptian military band to a depressed Israeli outpost in a desert wasteland — and human connections bring Arabs and Israelis together on common ground.</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/t/tony-shalhoub/" type="external">Tony Shalhoub</a> remains steadfast as lovable Colonel Tewfiq Zakaria, the modest commander of the Alexandria Ceremonial Police Orchestra. The band was headed for the Arab Cultural Center in sophisticated Petah Tikvah, but was misdirected to Bet Hatikvah, a bleak little village in the middle of nowhere. <a href="http://variety.com/t/katrina-lenk/" type="external">Katrina Lenk</a> is even more earth-shaking as Dina, the beautiful and incredibly vital café owner who is wasting away in Bet Hatikvah but comes alive when the band unexpectedly arrives in her little ghost town.</p>
<p>Broadway theatergoers looking for something off-the-beaten-musical-track should be charmed by this unassuming show, written by Itamar Moses (book) and David Yazbek (music &amp; lyrics) and tenderly directed by <a href="http://variety.com/t/david-cromer/" type="external">David Cromer</a>. But this disarming musical has the emotional depth that holds up to repeated viewings and the offbeat charm that could make it a cult hit.</p>
<p>“Once, not long ago, a group of musicians came to Israel from Egypt. You probably didn’t hear about it. It wasn’t very important.” &#160;That unassuming statement, projected on the back wall of Scott Pask’s plain and simple (and amusing) set, is enough to grab the most jaded audience.</p>
<p>Actually, the visit turned out to be very important, on a universally human level. But not at first glance, when Tewfiq turns up at a bus station in Israel with his little band of musicians. The show’s musicians are onstage, trying to look like villagers, but members of that extraordinary band are occasionally called upon to pick up instruments of their own — and in some cases, play them very well.</p>
<p>Although the band is smartly outfitted in costumer Sarah Laux’s baby-blue ersatz-military uniforms, their government funding is in peril, and they absolutely must not screw up their assignment to perform at the initiation ceremony of the Arab Culture Center in Peta Tikva. The political and cultural significance of this mission weighs heavily on the fanatically steadfast Tewfiq, who stands ramrod straight (but is dying inside) in Shalhoub’s painfully honest performance.</p>
<p>Like other obsessive characters he has played, most notably Adrian Monk, the beloved OCD-wracked detective he inhabited for seven years on TV, Tewfiq transcends conventional character comedy. In Shalhoub’s hands, he is simultaneously funny and sad and a little bit crazy, and you absolutely have to love him.&#160; When disaster strikes, Tewfiq stiffens his spine and stands straighter. And strike it does when the musicians are misdirected at the bus station. Instead of sophisticated Petah Tikvah, they find themselves in Bet Hatikvah, a dreary town in the middle of the desert.</p>
<p>Thanks to the revolving set and some quicksilver lighting changes by Tyler Micoleau, we can take in the whole town at a glance.&#160; In “Waiting,” the first of the many nuanced (vaguely Arabic, vaguely Israeli, altogether enchanting) musical numbers in Yazbek’s wonderful score, the depressed residents are quick to tell the band what their uneventful life is like. &#160;And in “Welcome to Nowhere,” Dina is joined by other disheartened residents to express their sense of isolation and their hopeless yearning for some kind of human connection.</p>
<p>With nowhere to go and nothing to do until the first bus arrives in the morning, the Egyptians are warily taken in by the Israelis, who reluctantly feed them, house them, and in one scene that is simply out of this world, entertain them at the circa 1970s roller rink.</p>
<p>No one exchanges a word about incendiary Arab-Israeli political matters, visitors and hosts slowly begin to acknowledge their common humanity. In “Hadid’s Song About Love” (sung with romantic intensity by Ari’el Stachel) the tall, handsome ladies’ man in the band takes pity on a young married man (endearing John Cariani) and shows him how to woo his wife.</p>
<p>There’s nothing big or grand here. Connections are made on little things, everyday things, common things we all share. The transcendent moment of the show comes when the so-called Telephone Guy (the fantastic Adam Kantor) makes one final, desperate effort to reach someone on that infuriatingly silent telephone.&#160; “Can you answer me?” he begs. And the entire ensemble does exactly that.</p>
<p>Broadway Review: ‘The Band’s Visit’Ethel Barrymore Theater; 1,046 seats; $169 top. Opened&#160;Nov. 9, 2017. Reviewed Nov. 4. Running time: ONE HOUR, 35 MIN.</p>
<p>ProductionA presentation by Orin Wolf, StylesFour Productions, Evamere Entertainment, Atlantic Theater Company, David F. Schwartz, Barbara Broccoli, Frederick Zollo, Grove*Reg, Lassen Blume Baldwin, Thomas Steven Perakos, Marc Platt, The Shubert Organization, The Baruch / Routh / Frankel / Viertel Group, Robert Cole, Deroy-Carr-Klausner, Federman-Moellenberg, Roy Furman, FVSL Theatricals, Hendel-Karmazin, Horipro, IPN, Jam Theatricals, The John Gore Organization, Koenigsberg-Krauss, David Mirvish, James L. Nederlander, Al Nocciolino, Once Upon a Time Productions, Susan Rose, Paul Shiverick, and Executive Producer Allan Williams of a musical, originally presented by the Atlantic Theater Company, in one act with book by Itamar Moses, based on the screenplay by Eran Kolirin, and with music &amp; lyrics by David Yazbek.</p>
<p>CreativeDirected by <a href="http://variety.com/2016/legit/reviews/the-bands-visit-review-musical-tony-shalhoub-1201938052/" type="external">David Cromer</a>. Choreography by Patrick McCollum. Music director &amp; additional arrangements by Andrea Grody. Orchestrations, Jamshied Sharifi. Sets, Scott Pask; costumes, Sarah Laux, lighting, Tyler Micoleau; sound, Kai Harada; projections, Maya Ciarrocchi, hair &amp; wigs, Charles G. LaPointe; production stage manager, Richard Hodge</p>
<p>Cast <a href="http://variety.com/2017/legit/news/the-price-opening-broadway-mark-ruffalo-1202010854/" type="external">Tony Shalhoub</a>, Katrina Lenk, John Cariani, Ari’el Sachel, Andrew Polk, Etai Benson, George Abud, Adam Kantor, Bill Army, Rachel PRather, Jonathan Raviv, Sharone Sayegh, Kristen Sieh, Alok Tewari, Ossama Farouk, Sam Sadigursky, Harvey Valdes, Garo Yellin.</p> | false | 1 | sets bit grander music sounds richer success hasnt spoiled embraceable musical fable surprising friendships bloom middle political desert broadway transfer broadway hit human error sends egyptian military band depressed israeli outpost desert wasteland human connections bring arabs israelis together common ground tony shalhoub remains steadfast lovable colonel tewfiq zakaria modest commander alexandria ceremonial police orchestra band headed arab cultural center sophisticated petah tikvah misdirected bet hatikvah bleak little village middle nowhere katrina lenk even earthshaking dina beautiful incredibly vital café owner wasting away bet hatikvah comes alive band unexpectedly arrives little ghost town broadway theatergoers looking something offthebeatenmusicaltrack charmed unassuming show written itamar moses book david yazbek music amp lyrics tenderly directed david cromer disarming musical emotional depth holds repeated viewings offbeat charm could make cult hit long ago group musicians came israel egypt probably didnt hear wasnt important 160that unassuming statement projected back wall scott pasks plain simple amusing set enough grab jaded audience actually visit turned important universally human level first glance tewfiq turns bus station israel little band musicians shows musicians onstage trying look like villagers members extraordinary band occasionally called upon pick instruments cases play well although band smartly outfitted costumer sarah lauxs babyblue ersatzmilitary uniforms government funding peril absolutely must screw assignment perform initiation ceremony arab culture center peta tikva political cultural significance mission weighs heavily fanatically steadfast tewfiq stands ramrod straight dying inside shalhoubs painfully honest performance like obsessive characters played notably adrian monk beloved ocdwracked detective inhabited seven years tv tewfiq transcends conventional character comedy shalhoubs hands simultaneously funny sad little bit crazy absolutely love him160 disaster strikes tewfiq stiffens spine stands straighter strike musicians misdirected bus station instead sophisticated petah tikvah find bet hatikvah dreary town middle desert thanks revolving set quicksilver lighting changes tyler micoleau take whole town glance160 waiting first many nuanced vaguely arabic vaguely israeli altogether enchanting musical numbers yazbeks wonderful score depressed residents quick tell band uneventful life like 160and welcome nowhere dina joined disheartened residents express sense isolation hopeless yearning kind human connection nowhere go nothing first bus arrives morning egyptians warily taken israelis reluctantly feed house one scene simply world entertain circa 1970s roller rink one exchanges word incendiary arabisraeli political matters visitors hosts slowly begin acknowledge common humanity hadids song love sung romantic intensity ariel stachel tall handsome ladies man band takes pity young married man endearing john cariani shows woo wife theres nothing big grand connections made little things everyday things common things share transcendent moment show comes socalled telephone guy fantastic adam kantor makes one final desperate effort reach someone infuriatingly silent telephone160 answer begs entire ensemble exactly broadway review bands visitethel barrymore theater 1046 seats 169 top opened160nov 9 2017 reviewed nov 4 running time one hour 35 min productiona presentation orin wolf stylesfour productions evamere entertainment atlantic theater company david f schwartz barbara broccoli frederick zollo grovereg lassen blume baldwin thomas steven perakos marc platt shubert organization baruch routh frankel viertel group robert cole deroycarrklausner federmanmoellenberg roy furman fvsl theatricals hendelkarmazin horipro ipn jam theatricals john gore organization koenigsbergkrauss david mirvish james l nederlander al nocciolino upon time productions susan rose paul shiverick executive producer allan williams musical originally presented atlantic theater company one act book itamar moses based screenplay eran kolirin music amp lyrics david yazbek creativedirected david cromer choreography patrick mccollum music director amp additional arrangements andrea grody orchestrations jamshied sharifi sets scott pask costumes sarah laux lighting tyler micoleau sound kai harada projections maya ciarrocchi hair amp wigs charles g lapointe production stage manager richard hodge cast tony shalhoub katrina lenk john cariani ariel sachel andrew polk etai benson george abud adam kantor bill army rachel prather jonathan raviv sharone sayegh kristen sieh alok tewari ossama farouk sam sadigursky harvey valdes garo yellin | 625 |
<p>Today, HUD Secretary Julian Castro announced the finalization of the Obama administration’s <a href="http://www.huduser.org/portal/affht_pt2.html" type="external">Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule</a>. A front-page <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/08/obama-administration-to-unveil-major-new-rules-targeting-segregation-across-u-s/" type="external">article</a> pre-emptively defending the move appears in today’s Washington Post. The final rule is 377 pages, vastly longer than the preliminary version of the rule promulgated in 2013.</p>
<p>AFFH is easily one of President Obama’s most radical initiatives, on a par with Obamacare in its transformative potential. In effect, AFFH gives the federal government a lever to re-engineer nearly every American neighborhood—imposing a preferred racial and ethnic composition, densifying housing, transportation, and business development in suburb and city alike, and weakening or casting aside the authority of local governments over core responsibilities, from zoning, to transportation, to education. Not only the policy but the political implications are immense—at the presidential, congressional, state, and local levels.</p>
<p>It is a scandal that the mainstream press has largely refused to report on AFFH until the day of its final release. The rule has been out in preliminary form for two years, and well before that the Obama administration’s transformative aims in urban/suburban policy were evident. Three years ago, when I wrote about Obama’s policy blueprint in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Spreading-Wealth-Robbing-Suburbs-Cities/dp/1595230920/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1358868447&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=Kurtz+spreading+the+wealth" type="external">Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities</a>, the administration’s efforts to keep this issue under the radar were evident. Only last month, an admission of the stealth relied on by advocates to advance this initiative was <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/419766/affh-admission-stealth-caught-video-stanley-kurtz" type="external">caught on video</a>.</p>
<p>Obama has downplayed his policy goals in this area and delayed the finalization of AFFH for years, because he understands how politically explosive this rule is. Once the true implications of AFFH are understood, Americans will rebel. The only prospect for successful imposition is a frog-boiling strategy of gradual intensification. The last day the frog will be able to jump is Tuesday, November 8, 2016.</p>
<p>Fundamentally, AFFH is an attempt to achieve economic integration. Race and ethnicity are being used as proxies for class, since these are the only hooks for social engineering provided by the Fair Housing Act of 1968. Like AFFH itself, today’s Washington Post piece blurs the distinction between race and class, conflating the persistence of “concentrated poverty” with housing discrimination by race. Not being able to afford a free-standing house in a bedroom suburb is no proof of racial discrimination. Erstwhile urbanites have been moving to rustic and spacious suburbs since Cicero built his villa outside Rome. Even in a mono-racial and mono-ethnic world, suburbanites would zone to set limits on dense development.</p>
<p>Emily Badger’s piece in today’s Washington Post focuses on race, but the real story of AFFH is the attempt to force integration by class, to densify development in American suburbs and cities, and to undo America’s system of local government and replace it with a “regional” alternative that turns suburbs into helpless satellites of large cities. Once HUD gets its hooks into a municipality, no policy area is safe. Zoning, transportation, education, all of it risks slipping into the control of the federal government and the new, unelected regional bodies the feds will empower. Over time, AFFH could spell the end the local democracy that Alexis de Tocqueville rightly saw as the foundation of America’s liberty and distinctiveness.</p>
<p>At this point, municipalities across the country need to seriously consider refraining from applying for Community Development Block Grants and other grant programs sponsored by HUD. Take one dollar of HUD money and you will be forced to submit to its demands, which can reach far beyond housing. Unfortunately, this is a highly imperfect solution, and not only because municipalities would be surrendering money taxed from their citizens’ pockets. The recent Supreme Court decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project has provided the federal government with a second club to use against municipalities seeking to escape HUD control. (See my <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/articles/420623/washington-takes-zoning-board" type="external">piece</a> on Inclusive Communities in the latest issue of NR.) Ultimately, only a Republican president acting in concert with a Republican congress can stymie AFFH and undo the damage of the Supreme Court’s recent housing decision.</p>
<p>This brings us to politics. As noted, AFFH is a largely unacknowledged attempt to force economic integration on every neighborhood in America. Yet in a recent <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2015/06/27/shockingly-americans-not-big-on-government-enforced-neighborhood-diversity/" type="external">Rasmussen poll</a>, 83 percent of respondents said it was not the government’s job to diversify neighborhoods by income level, while only 8 percent say that this is an appropriate task for government. Now you know why the Obama administration and a compliant press corps have kept this initiative quiet.</p>
<p>It will take time to collect the data on which HUD’s new demands for local governments all over America will be based.&#160; While important enforcement will begin under the Obama administration, the major impact of AFFH will come under a President Hillary Clinton, should she be elected. And Obama’s AFFH enforcer, Julian Castro, is widely touted as a likely vice-presidential running mate for Hillary. That means AFFH is going to be an issue in the next presidential campaign.</p>
<p>And the political implications go deeper still, to every level of government. Westchester Country New York, where AFFH has had a dry run of sorts, is now administered by Republican County Executive Robert Astorino. Many forget that before the Obama administration tried to force Westchester Country to cast aside its own zoning laws and build high-density, low-income housing at its own expense, Westchester was a liberal Democratic county run by liberal Democrats. After all, this is where Bill and Hillary Clinton live. At the local level, the Obama administration drove Westchester into the arms of the Republicans. The same thing could happen nationally, at every political level. But only if the frog wakes up and jumps by November of 2016. Even with AFFH now public, the Obama administration and the press corps will do everything in their power to obscure the real issues at stake in the massive AFFH power-grab. Don’t let that happen.</p>
<p>Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>.</p> | false | 1 | today hud secretary julian castro announced finalization obama administrations affirmatively furthering fair housing rule frontpage article preemptively defending move appears todays washington post final rule 377 pages vastly longer preliminary version rule promulgated 2013 affh easily one president obamas radical initiatives par obamacare transformative potential effect affh gives federal government lever reengineer nearly every american neighborhoodimposing preferred racial ethnic composition densifying housing transportation business development suburb city alike weakening casting aside authority local governments core responsibilities zoning transportation education policy political implications immenseat presidential congressional state local levels scandal mainstream press largely refused report affh day final release rule preliminary form two years well obama administrations transformative aims urbansuburban policy evident three years ago wrote obamas policy blueprint spreading wealth obama robbing suburbs pay cities administrations efforts keep issue radar evident last month admission stealth relied advocates advance initiative caught video obama downplayed policy goals area delayed finalization affh years understands politically explosive rule true implications affh understood americans rebel prospect successful imposition frogboiling strategy gradual intensification last day frog able jump tuesday november 8 2016 fundamentally affh attempt achieve economic integration race ethnicity used proxies class since hooks social engineering provided fair housing act 1968 like affh todays washington post piece blurs distinction race class conflating persistence concentrated poverty housing discrimination race able afford freestanding house bedroom suburb proof racial discrimination erstwhile urbanites moving rustic spacious suburbs since cicero built villa outside rome even monoracial monoethnic world suburbanites would zone set limits dense development emily badgers piece todays washington post focuses race real story affh attempt force integration class densify development american suburbs cities undo americas system local government replace regional alternative turns suburbs helpless satellites large cities hud gets hooks municipality policy area safe zoning transportation education risks slipping control federal government new unelected regional bodies feds empower time affh could spell end local democracy alexis de tocqueville rightly saw foundation americas liberty distinctiveness point municipalities across country need seriously consider refraining applying community development block grants grant programs sponsored hud take one dollar hud money forced submit demands reach far beyond housing unfortunately highly imperfect solution municipalities would surrendering money taxed citizens pockets recent supreme court decision texas department housing community affairs v inclusive communities project provided federal government second club use municipalities seeking escape hud control see piece inclusive communities latest issue nr ultimately republican president acting concert republican congress stymie affh undo damage supreme courts recent housing decision brings us politics noted affh largely unacknowledged attempt force economic integration every neighborhood america yet recent rasmussen poll 83 percent respondents said governments job diversify neighborhoods income level 8 percent say appropriate task government know obama administration compliant press corps kept initiative quiet take time collect data huds new demands local governments america based160 important enforcement begin obama administration major impact affh come president hillary clinton elected obamas affh enforcer julian castro widely touted likely vicepresidential running mate hillary means affh going issue next presidential campaign political implications go deeper still every level government westchester country new york affh dry run sorts administered republican county executive robert astorino many forget obama administration tried force westchester country cast aside zoning laws build highdensity lowincome housing expense westchester liberal democratic county run liberal democrats bill hillary clinton live local level obama administration drove westchester arms republicans thing could happen nationally every political level frog wakes jumps november 2016 even affh public obama administration press corps everything power obscure real issues stake massive affh powergrab dont let happen stanley kurtz senior fellow ethics public policy center | 586 |
<p>Who runs the film studio? Who gets the keys to the TV kingdom? And will a Murdoch be in line for Bob Iger’s throne?</p>
<p>There are more questions than answers as the possibility of <a href="http://variety.com/t/disney/" type="external">Disney</a> acquiring the 20th Century Fox studio and other significant assets from <a href="http://variety.com/t/21st-century-fox/" type="external">21st Century Fox</a> appears to be gaining steam. <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/05/disney-and-fox-are-closing-in-on-deal-could-be-announced-next-week--sources.html" type="external">CNBC</a> reported Tuesday morning that a deal valued at $60 billion or more could be struck as early as next week.</p>
<p>It’s understood that high-level <a href="http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/disney-sues-redbox-digital-movie-downloads-1202627882/" type="external">Disney</a> and Fox executives had substantive conversations during the Thanksgiving holiday break. But sources at both Disney and Fox say there has been no formal communication with the rank-and-file about the prospect of a deal. The silence has led to much nervous speculation about how a Disney-Fox marriage would be structured, and what it would mean for senior leaders on both sides. Sources cautioned that the talks remain in the delicate stage with no certainty of a deal coming to fruition. But that hasn’t stopped industry insiders from speculating about what the combination of two historic Hollywood brands might look like after the dust settles.</p>
<p>CORPORATE</p>
<p>One of the most intriguing questions posed by what would be a historic union of two Hollywood studios is whether the Fox deal could also provide an answer to the drawn-out process of finding a successor for Disney chairman-CEO Bob Iger. Peter Rice, the Fox Networks Group chief who was recently promoted to president of <a href="http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/disney-21st-century-fox-rise-1202630939/" type="external">21st Century Fox</a>, has been seen as a candidate even before the merger discussions took root. Twenty-First Century Fox CEO James Murdoch and executive chairman Lachlan Murdoch would emerge from the proposed stock transaction with big stakes in Disney, thanks to the Murdoch clan’s holdings. It might be hard to imagine a Murdoch working for another media giant, but already there’s been speculation that James might seek a role overseeing international TV operations. Sky and Star TV are businesses he helped grow before climbing into the corporate executive suite a few years ago. Lachlan Murdoch, meanwhile, might be more inclined to stay involved with the assets that don’t go to Disney: Fox News, Fox Sports, Fox Broadcasting, and the TV station group.</p>
<p>FILM STUDIO</p>
<p>Twenty-First Century Fox CEO James Murdoch praised the one-year-old regime of Stacey Snider at 20th Century Fox for putting the film studio in “a good place” creatively. But would Snider maintain her perch if the studio is sold to Disney? Perhaps 20th Century Fox and Fox Searchlight would endure as a specialty labels within Disney’s film universe, which also includes such content engines as Marvel, Pixar, Lucasfilm, and, of course, Walt Disney Pictures. Walt Disney Studios chairman Alan Horn has had the hottest hand of any studio chief in recent history— thanks in part to the wealth of material at his disposal.</p>
<p>Would there be enough breathing room in the kingdom for Snider to stick around under Horn? Or might she be asked to serve as the sorcerer’s apprentice for a period?&#160;Horn, who has been in the role since 2012, turns 75 in February. Disney has faced criticism for its lack of female division heads, and Snider does have a deep resume, having run Universal, DreamWorks and Fox. Some in Hollywood said they could imagine Fox as a stand-alone production unit inside Disney, making more original movies in the vein of Fox’s upcoming awards contender “The Post,” a period drama about the Washington Post during the Watergate era, while Disney continues to focus on the big tentpoles.</p>
<p>TV STUDIO</p>
<p>The formidable 20th Century Fox Television production operation is a crown jewel in the Fox empire. The mothership studio has a deep library and dozens of shows in production at any given time — with notable recent success stories including NBC’s “This Is Us” and Fox’s “Empire.” The Fox 21 Television Studios arm focuses on cable and streaming outlets. Together they deliver a wealth of mostly scripted TV series content that travels the globe. There is no question that Fox’s TV operation is larger and more profitable than Disney’s ABC Studios unit, which has been beefing up its talent roster and diversifying under the direction of president Patrick Moran. Would size win out? It’s hard to imagine Disney maintaining parallel TV production operations.</p>
<p>A tricky consideration here is that the 20th TV studio bosses — Dana Walden and Gary Newman — also oversee the Fox broadcast network, which is not among the assets Disney is angling to buy (for starters, FCC rules prohibit one company from owning more than one of the Big Four networks). The deal as it stands will put Walden and Newman, who have been professional partners since 1999, at a crossroads with some of their turf left behind no matter which way they go. Unless, of course, Disney has bigger plans for the pair, or Walden and Newman have their own plans. Walden’s name has surfaced as being on Jeff Bezos’ wish-list for the vacancy at Amazon Studios.</p>
<p>TV NETWORKS</p>
<p>The valuation of Fox’s FX Networks cable group has to come with a special premium for the Landgraf factor. FX Networks CEO John Landgraf is one of the most respected programmers and mangers of creative talent in the industry. He has been on the short list for major network and studio job openings for a decade. At FX, he’s built a loyal team of executives who have punched above their weight with a mix of high-brow prestige programs (“The People V. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story,” “The Americans”) and edgy crowd-pleasers (“American Horror Story,” “Sons of Anarchy”).</p>
<p>Given this track record, it would not be surprising to see Landgraf and Co. courted for a bigger profile within an enlarged Disney TV group. Of course, such a move would have implications for existing Disney/ABC TV Group brass starting with president Ben Sherwood.</p>
<p>The National Geographic Channels group, headed by Courteney Monroe, would likely remain an autonomous entity even after a sale as Fox owns most, but not all, of that joint venture with the National Geographic Society.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the 22 regional Fox Sports cable channels would easily fold into the ESPN operation, which has long operated autonomously from Disney/ABC TV Group. Fox’s national Fox Sports 1 and Fox Sports 2 cable networks are not part of the sale equation as those would surely raise red flags on an anti-trust basis if combined with ESPN. ESPN has not been in the regional sports network business — but the expansion with the Fox RSNs might still prove a hurdle on the regulatory front.</p>
<p>INTERNATIONAL</p>
<p>Fox’s collection of 300-plus international cable channels, its stake in Euro satcaster Sky and the growing Star India TV business are a big part of the deal’s appeal for Disney. The international TV assets aren’t as high-profile as the Hollywood brand names but they represent huge growth potential in an area where Disney is lagging its traditional media rivals. With little overlap, Disney would probably seek to keep existing management in place, at least for the near term.</p>
<p>(Pictured: Stacey Snider, Peter Rice, John Landgraf, Dana Walden, and Gary Newman)</p> | false | 1 | runs film studio gets keys tv kingdom murdoch line bob igers throne questions answers possibility disney acquiring 20th century fox studio significant assets 21st century fox appears gaining steam cnbc reported tuesday morning deal valued 60 billion could struck early next week understood highlevel disney fox executives substantive conversations thanksgiving holiday break sources disney fox say formal communication rankandfile prospect deal silence led much nervous speculation disneyfox marriage would structured would mean senior leaders sides sources cautioned talks remain delicate stage certainty deal coming fruition hasnt stopped industry insiders speculating combination two historic hollywood brands might look like dust settles corporate one intriguing questions posed would historic union two hollywood studios whether fox deal could also provide answer drawnout process finding successor disney chairmanceo bob iger peter rice fox networks group chief recently promoted president 21st century fox seen candidate even merger discussions took root twentyfirst century fox ceo james murdoch executive chairman lachlan murdoch would emerge proposed stock transaction big stakes disney thanks murdoch clans holdings might hard imagine murdoch working another media giant already theres speculation james might seek role overseeing international tv operations sky star tv businesses helped grow climbing corporate executive suite years ago lachlan murdoch meanwhile might inclined stay involved assets dont go disney fox news fox sports fox broadcasting tv station group film studio twentyfirst century fox ceo james murdoch praised oneyearold regime stacey snider 20th century fox putting film studio good place creatively would snider maintain perch studio sold disney perhaps 20th century fox fox searchlight would endure specialty labels within disneys film universe also includes content engines marvel pixar lucasfilm course walt disney pictures walt disney studios chairman alan horn hottest hand studio chief recent history thanks part wealth material disposal would enough breathing room kingdom snider stick around horn might asked serve sorcerers apprentice period160horn role since 2012 turns 75 february disney faced criticism lack female division heads snider deep resume run universal dreamworks fox hollywood said could imagine fox standalone production unit inside disney making original movies vein foxs upcoming awards contender post period drama washington post watergate era disney continues focus big tentpoles tv studio formidable 20th century fox television production operation crown jewel fox empire mothership studio deep library dozens shows production given time notable recent success stories including nbcs us foxs empire fox 21 television studios arm focuses cable streaming outlets together deliver wealth mostly scripted tv series content travels globe question foxs tv operation larger profitable disneys abc studios unit beefing talent roster diversifying direction president patrick moran would size win hard imagine disney maintaining parallel tv production operations tricky consideration 20th tv studio bosses dana walden gary newman also oversee fox broadcast network among assets disney angling buy starters fcc rules prohibit one company owning one big four networks deal stands put walden newman professional partners since 1999 crossroads turf left behind matter way go unless course disney bigger plans pair walden newman plans waldens name surfaced jeff bezos wishlist vacancy amazon studios tv networks valuation foxs fx networks cable group come special premium landgraf factor fx networks ceo john landgraf one respected programmers mangers creative talent industry short list major network studio job openings decade fx hes built loyal team executives punched weight mix highbrow prestige programs people v oj simpson american crime story americans edgy crowdpleasers american horror story sons anarchy given track record would surprising see landgraf co courted bigger profile within enlarged disney tv group course move would implications existing disneyabc tv group brass starting president ben sherwood national geographic channels group headed courteney monroe would likely remain autonomous entity even sale fox owns joint venture national geographic society meanwhile 22 regional fox sports cable channels would easily fold espn operation long operated autonomously disneyabc tv group foxs national fox sports 1 fox sports 2 cable networks part sale equation would surely raise red flags antitrust basis combined espn espn regional sports network business expansion fox rsns might still prove hurdle regulatory front international foxs collection 300plus international cable channels stake euro satcaster sky growing star india tv business big part deals appeal disney international tv assets arent highprofile hollywood brand names represent huge growth potential area disney lagging traditional media rivals little overlap disney would probably seek keep existing management place least near term pictured stacey snider peter rice john landgraf dana walden gary newman | 725 |
<p>America’s struggle with symbols of its slavery past was highlighted amid clashes over a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Dealing with controversial pieces of historical art has a long, sometimes bloody, and occasionally amusing history.</p>
<p>Toppling monuments is a tradition honored by centuries, even millennia. It has often been connected to cultural or religious strife, like the infamous 2001 destruction of Buddha statues in the Bamyan valley of Afghanistan by the Taliban, or acts of vandalism by Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) in Palmyra, Syria and other places.</p>
<p>But more often, monuments of the past were targeted for being images of a disfavored ruler or a fallen government. Pharaoh Thutmose III tried to undermine the legacy of his predecessor, Hatshepsut, sometimes simply by erasing her name from her figures.</p>
<p>Sometimes, statues of rulers were not only destroyed but actually remade to suit the new regime. In 1792, in the days of the French Revolution, an almost two-century-old monument to Henry IV on the Pont Neuf was destroyed, and its metal used to cast cannons. In 1818, after the restoration of the monarchy, it was <a href="https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_%C3%A9questre_d%27Henri_IV" type="external">recreated</a>, partially with bronze taken from a statue of Napoleon, which had been on the top of the Vendôme Column. It remains a landmark of Paris to this day.</p>
<p>The United States has had its own share of monument-toppling from the beginning of its existence. Just five days after the Declaration of Independence was ratified in 1776, a gilded lead <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Johannes_Adam_Simon_Oertel_Pulling_Down_the_Statue_of_King_George_III,_N.Y.C._ca._1859.jpg" type="external">statue of Britain’s King George III</a> was taken down in Manhattan and used to make musket balls.</p>
<p>With the advent of the mass media, the removal of a statue can often be transformed into a powerful symbol of change, or attempted change, as was the case with the toppling of a statue of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin in the 1956 uprising in Hungary. The rioters, however, failed to tear down the entire 8-meter-high bronze statue, and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stalin%27s_Boots.jpg" type="external">Stalin’s jackboots</a> remained on the pedestal until after the uprising was quashed. A copy of the piece is now part of Budapest’s Memento Park, dedicated to Hungary’s socialist past.</p>
<p>Possibly the first time that the way the toppling of a monument was covered on the news became more important than the act itself – in 2003 during the US invasion of Iraq. The destruction of Saddam Hussein’s statue at Firdos Square was broadcast live and trumpeted by Washington as proof that the Iraqis were overwhelmingly welcoming the intervention. Then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld compared it to the fall of the Berlin Wall.</p>
<p>The reality on the ground was slightly different, according to Peter Maass, who was one of dozens of Western journalists who witnessed the <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/the-toppling-saddam-statue-firdos-square-baghdad" type="external">statue’s demise</a>. He says the event was subtly instigated by US troops, while Iraqis in the square were few in number and probably less enthusiastic than news reports at the time led people to believe. Perhaps given the media spin over the toppling of the statue, it serves as a fitting symbol of the war.</p>
<p>America’s debate over Confederate monuments and their role as rally points for white supremacists, while nothing new in itself, sprang into the spotlight after the violence in Charlottesville last weekend. The tragic incident has become a key event in America this year, symbolic of a larger division in America.</p>
<p>Amplified by social media, the message for some has become: are you with us, or with Trump and all the bigots, racists, and killers he stands with? Or, alternatively: are you with us, or with the snowflakes, fake news peddlers and all the others trying to smear our past, our values, and our president?</p>
<p>The story of Lucifer-who rebelled against God-is part of many Christians’ traditions. I’ve never been in a church with a Lucifer statue.</p>
<p>— Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChelseaClinton/status/898335002697412608" type="external">August 18, 2017</a></p>
<p>The fact that the violence started over the planned removal of a statue of General Robert E. Lee was secondary, but it managed to trigger some monumental (pun intended) aftershocks – like the tearing down of other <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/399617-durham-confederate-statue-protesters/" type="external">Confederate monuments</a> by <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/399584-atlanta-confederate-monument-damage/" type="external">angry crowds</a> and <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/400018-chicago-lincoln-vandalized-alderman/" type="external">the torching of a Lincoln bust</a> in Chicago.</p>
<p>One unexpected (potential) victim of the emotional tsunami is Bolshevik leader Lenin. <a href="http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Fremont-s-Lenin-in-focus-after-removal-of-11824249.php" type="external">A statue of Lenin</a> in Seattle was targeted by both right-wing protesters, and <a href="http://q13fox.com/2017/08/17/seattles-mayor-lenin-statue-needs-to-come-down/" type="external">city Mayor Ed Murray</a>. For both sides, the monument to the communist leader is just a prop for arguing respectively for and against the preservation of the Confederate memorial at Lake View Cemetery, and neither is apparently willing to buy the Lenin figure from the owner to bring it down.</p>
<p>Ironically, Lenin’s statue in Seattle is a curiosity, not an icon of communism or the Soviet Union. Originally from Czechoslovakia, it was bought from a scrapyard and brought to America by a collector. The bohemian community of Fremont regularly uses it as part of installations, dressing it in drag or putting a red star on its head for Christmas. <a href="http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/lenin-statue-is-loved-hated-and-very-fremont/" type="external">The statue’s original symbolism</a> does not appear to bother people who see it every day.</p>
<p>The artistic hijacking in Seattle is strangely mirrored on the opposite site of the world, in Ukraine. Its current government and nationalist groups have made it their goal to eradicate all symbols of its joint past with Russia, and hundreds of Lenin monuments left over from the Soviet days were the primary target. Just this week, the authorities reported removing 2,389 Soviet monuments in Ukraine, including all those of Lenin.</p>
<p>Some were not happy with this “Leninfall,” either due to sentimental feelings, or because the municipalities were expected to foot the bill for it. So, in some villages and towns, Lenin monuments were <a href="http://www.mv.org.ua/news/153561-v_zaporozhskoi_oblasti_pamjatnik_leninu_peredelali_v_getmana_pilipa_orlika.html" type="external">rededicated</a> to acceptable historic figures like Pylyp Orlyk, an aide to controversial Ukrainian Hetman Ivan Mazepa.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/news/319436-ukraine-lenin-vader-monument/" type="external">READ MORE:&#160;Lenin pulled to the Dark Side: Revolutionary’s statue turns into Darth Vader</a></p>
<p>Or even Darth Vader! A Lenin statue in Odessa was remade in the image of the Star Wars villain by a local politician who dresses as Darth Vader and even goes by that name.</p>
<p>[embedded content]</p>
<p>A different fate was reserved for statues of another leader, who used to be as prominently displayed in his home country as Lenin was in the USSR. Saparmurat Niyazov – or as he preferred to be called, Turkmenbashi, the father of all Turkmens – was quite fond of praise. The president-for-life of Turkmenistan had an estimated 14,000 statues and busts of himself erected over the two decades of his rule.</p>
<p>The grandest one was placed atop the Arch of Neutrality, an almost 100-meter-high symbol of Turkmenistan’s policy of non-alignment. With its arms stretched up to the sky, the glittering Turkmenbashi rotated to always face the sun (a popular joke was that it was the sun that went across the sky to see the statue’s face).</p>
<p>A few years after Niyazov’s death, his successor ordered the arch and the monument to be removed from the central square of Ashgabat, and many observers expected that the gigantic monument of Turkmenbashi would never be seen again – for reasons Pharaoh Thutmose could relate to. They were wrong. The entire construction was simply moved to the outskirts of the city. The statue, however, no longer rotates – presumably to not turn its back to the people.</p> | false | 1 | americas struggle symbols slavery past highlighted amid clashes statue confederate general robert e lee dealing controversial pieces historical art long sometimes bloody occasionally amusing history toppling monuments tradition honored centuries even millennia often connected cultural religious strife like infamous 2001 destruction buddha statues bamyan valley afghanistan taliban acts vandalism islamic state formerly isisisil palmyra syria places often monuments past targeted images disfavored ruler fallen government pharaoh thutmose iii tried undermine legacy predecessor hatshepsut sometimes simply erasing name figures sometimes statues rulers destroyed actually remade suit new regime 1792 days french revolution almost twocenturyold monument henry iv pont neuf destroyed metal used cast cannons 1818 restoration monarchy recreated partially bronze taken statue napoleon top vendôme column remains landmark paris day united states share monumenttoppling beginning existence five days declaration independence ratified 1776 gilded lead statue britains king george iii taken manhattan used make musket balls advent mass media removal statue often transformed powerful symbol change attempted change case toppling statue soviet dictator josef stalin 1956 uprising hungary rioters however failed tear entire 8meterhigh bronze statue stalins jackboots remained pedestal uprising quashed copy piece part budapests memento park dedicated hungarys socialist past possibly first time way toppling monument covered news became important act 2003 us invasion iraq destruction saddam husseins statue firdos square broadcast live trumpeted washington proof iraqis overwhelmingly welcoming intervention thendefense secretary donald rumsfeld compared fall berlin wall reality ground slightly different according peter maass one dozens western journalists witnessed statues demise says event subtly instigated us troops iraqis square number probably less enthusiastic news reports time led people believe perhaps given media spin toppling statue serves fitting symbol war americas debate confederate monuments role rally points white supremacists nothing new sprang spotlight violence charlottesville last weekend tragic incident become key event america year symbolic larger division america amplified social media message become us trump bigots racists killers stands alternatively us snowflakes fake news peddlers others trying smear past values president story luciferwho rebelled godis part many christians traditions ive never church lucifer statue chelsea clinton chelseaclinton august 18 2017 fact violence started planned removal statue general robert e lee secondary managed trigger monumental pun intended aftershocks like tearing confederate monuments angry crowds torching lincoln bust chicago one unexpected potential victim emotional tsunami bolshevik leader lenin statue lenin seattle targeted rightwing protesters city mayor ed murray sides monument communist leader prop arguing respectively preservation confederate memorial lake view cemetery neither apparently willing buy lenin figure owner bring ironically lenins statue seattle curiosity icon communism soviet union originally czechoslovakia bought scrapyard brought america collector bohemian community fremont regularly uses part installations dressing drag putting red star head christmas statues original symbolism appear bother people see every day artistic hijacking seattle strangely mirrored opposite site world ukraine current government nationalist groups made goal eradicate symbols joint past russia hundreds lenin monuments left soviet days primary target week authorities reported removing 2389 soviet monuments ukraine including lenin happy leninfall either due sentimental feelings municipalities expected foot bill villages towns lenin monuments rededicated acceptable historic figures like pylyp orlyk aide controversial ukrainian hetman ivan mazepa read more160lenin pulled dark side revolutionarys statue turns darth vader even darth vader lenin statue odessa remade image star wars villain local politician dresses darth vader even goes name embedded content different fate reserved statues another leader used prominently displayed home country lenin ussr saparmurat niyazov preferred called turkmenbashi father turkmens quite fond praise presidentforlife turkmenistan estimated 14000 statues busts erected two decades rule grandest one placed atop arch neutrality almost 100meterhigh symbol turkmenistans policy nonalignment arms stretched sky glittering turkmenbashi rotated always face sun popular joke sun went across sky see statues face years niyazovs death successor ordered arch monument removed central square ashgabat many observers expected gigantic monument turkmenbashi would never seen reasons pharaoh thutmose could relate wrong entire construction simply moved outskirts city statue however longer rotates presumably turn back people | 645 |
<p>By Reid Spencer, NASCAR Wire Service</p>
<p>Distributed by The Sports Xchange</p>
<p>LOUDON, N.H. — Kyle Busch’s celebratory burnout produced a cloud of smoke over the front stretch at New Hampshire Motor Speedway, but Ryan Preece’s first run in top-of-the-line equipment made an even bigger impression in Saturday’s Overton’s 200 NASCAR Xfinity Series race.</p>
<p>After a major snafu on pit road took a potential win away from Brad Keselowski, who had arguably the fastest car at the Magic Mile, Busch cruised to a 10.425-second victory. It was his third win in six starts this season, his sixth at NHMS and the 89th of his career, extending his series record.</p>
<p>Driving the No. 20 Joe Gibbs Racing Toyota for the first time, Preece finished second to his far more experienced teammate and left the track hoping his performance will open the eyes of someone looking for talent behind the wheel.</p>
<p>“This is something I dreamed about, to be honest with you,” said Preece, who won Friday’s All-Star modified race and finished second in Saturday’s 100-lap preliminary to the Xfinity event. “I work hard week-in and week-out at the modifieds, so to be able to have this opportunity means a lot to me.”</p>
<p>Preece, who will race at Iowa on July 29 in his only other scheduled event in the No. 20 car, ran the full NASCAR Xfinity Series schedule last year in Johnny Davis’ No. 01 Chevrolet.</p>
<p>“I don’t take back doing what I did last year,” Preece said. “It was great. People don’t even know that I ran full-time, but I got laps. That’s what you need sometimes. I’ve been doing this all my life, so all I needed was the right opportunity.</p>
<p>“Joe Gibbs gave it to me. Congratulations to Kyle, my teammate. That’s pretty cool to say. Right?”</p>
<p>The race, which ran without a caution from a restart on Lap 97 to the finish at Lap 200, turned on the final cycle of green-flag pit stops. Busch ducked onto pit road on Lap 169 for fuel and fresh tires.</p>
<p>Keselowski, who led a race-high 102 laps, brought his car to the pits on Lap 170 but had to angle his No. 22 Ford around Kyle Larson’s No. 42 Chevrolet, which had started to leave its pit stall as Keselowski pulled in.</p>
<p>When the jack dropped and Keselowski accelerated, the gas can was still locked into its coupler, and the forward motion of the car pulled both the can and the fueler out of the No. 22’s pit stall.</p>
<p>Keselowski had to serve a stop-and-go penalty for dragging equipment outside the pit box. His winning chances gone, Keselowski finished fifth, more than 18 seconds in arrears, as one of six cars on the lead lap.</p>
<p>“I think we kind of coaxed those guys into having to rush themselves and hurry a little bit (by pitting first with a flawless stop), and maybe we put the pressure and that was the difference today,” Busch said. “So great day for us and excited to have the opportunity to be in Victory Lane again here in New Hampshire.”</p>
<p>Keselowski had a succinct summation of the afternoon.</p>
<p>“It’s always fun being fast and leading the most laps and all that, but we just didn’t put the whole race together today,” he said.</p>
<p>Sunoco rookie of the year frontrunner William Byron ran third, with Larson, Keselowski and Ben Kennedy behind him. Byron is second in the series standings, 45 points behind leader Elliott Sadler, who ran seventh, the first driver one lap down.</p>
<p>NASCAR XFINITY Series Race — Overton’s 200</p>
<p>New Hampshire Motor Speedway</p>
<p>Loudon, N.H.</p>
<p>Saturday, July 15, 2017</p>
<p>1. (1) Kyle Busch(i), Toyota, 200.</p>
<p>2. (6) Ryan Preece, Toyota, 200.</p>
<p>3. (7) William Byron #, Chevrolet, 200.</p>
<p>4. (3) Kyle Larson(i), Chevrolet, 200.</p>
<p>5. (2) Brad Keselowski(i), Ford, 200.</p>
<p>6. (13) Ben Kennedy #, Chevrolet, 200.</p>
<p>7. (8) Elliott Sadler, Chevrolet, 199.</p>
<p>8. (12) Ty Dillon(i), Chevrolet, 199.</p>
<p>9. (10) Cole Custer #, Ford, 199.</p>
<p>10. (9) Brennan Poole, Chevrolet, 199.</p>
<p>11. (4) Matt Tifft #, Toyota, 199.</p>
<p>12. (5) Daniel Hemric #, Chevrolet, 199.</p>
<p>13. (14) Blake Koch, Chevrolet, 199.</p>
<p>14. (19) Ryan Reed, Ford, 198.</p>
<p>15. (21) JJ Yeley, Toyota, 198.</p>
<p>16. (23) Michael Annett, Chevrolet, 198.</p>
<p>17. (16) Brendan Gaughan, Chevrolet, 197.</p>
<p>18. (24) Harrison Rhodes, Chevrolet, 197.</p>
<p>19. (18) Ross Chastain, Chevrolet, 197.</p>
<p>20. (20) Ryan Sieg, Chevrolet, 197.</p>
<p>21. (26) Jeremy Clements, Chevrolet, 197.</p>
<p>22. (39) Dylan Lupton, Toyota, 196.</p>
<p>23. (25) Garrett Smithley, Chevrolet, 195.</p>
<p>24. (15) Dakoda Armstrong, Toyota, 195.</p>
<p>25. (34) Joey Gase, Chevrolet, 195.</p>
<p>26. (27) BJ McLeod, Chevrolet, 194.</p>
<p>27. (32) Spencer Boyd, Chevrolet, 193.</p>
<p>28. (33) Timmy Hill, Dodge, 186.</p>
<p>29. (31) Tommy Joe Martins, Chevrolet, 185.</p>
<p>30. (28) David Starr, Chevrolet, 184.</p>
<p>31. (38) Mike Harmon, Dodge, 178.</p>
<p>32. (11) Justin Allgaier, Chevrolet, 173.</p>
<p>33. (37) Martin Roy, Chevrolet, Engine, 163.</p>
<p>34. (22) Brandon Jones, Chevrolet, 157.</p>
<p>35. (17) Spencer Gallagher #, Chevrolet, Suspension, 156.</p>
<p>36. (36) Carl Long, Chevrolet, Electrical, 67.</p>
<p>37. (35) Morgan Shepherd, Chevrolet, Suspension, 59.</p>
<p>38. (30) Jeff Green, Chevrolet, Electrical, 15.</p>
<p>39. (29) Reed Sorenson(i), Chevrolet, Brakes, 7.</p>
<p>40. (40) John Jackson, Dodge, Vibration, 4.</p>
<p>Average Speed of Race Winner: 109.276 mph.</p>
<p>Time of Race: 01 Hrs, 56 Mins, 11 Secs. Margin of Victory: 10.425 Seconds.</p>
<p>Caution Flags: 3 for 15 laps.</p>
<p>Lead Changes: 13 among 7 drivers.</p>
<p>Lap Leaders: K. Busch(i) 1-2; B. Keselowski(i) 3-7; K. Busch(i) 8-27; B. Keselowski(i) 28-33; J. Allgaier 34-35; E. Sadler 36-40; K. Larson(i) 41-51; R. Preece 52-53; K. Busch(i) 54-71; B. Keselowski(i) 72-93; K. Busch(i) 94-101; B. Keselowski(i) 102-170; M. Tifft # 171; K. Busch(i) 172-200.</p>
<p>Leaders Summary (Driver, Times Lead, Laps Led): B. Keselowski(i) 4 times for 102 laps; K. Busch(i) 5 times for 77 laps; K. Larson(i) 1 time for 11 laps; E. Sadler 1 time for 5 laps; R. Preece 1 time for 2 laps; J. Allgaier 1 time for 2 laps; M. Tifft # 1 time for 1 lap.</p>
<p>Stage #1 Top Ten: 42,20,18,1,22,7,48,3,9,19</p>
<p>Stage #2 Top Ten: 22,18,42,20,9,1,3,19,48,2</p> | false | 1 | reid spencer nascar wire service distributed sports xchange loudon nh kyle buschs celebratory burnout produced cloud smoke front stretch new hampshire motor speedway ryan preeces first run topoftheline equipment made even bigger impression saturdays overtons 200 nascar xfinity series race major snafu pit road took potential win away brad keselowski arguably fastest car magic mile busch cruised 10425second victory third win six starts season sixth nhms 89th career extending series record driving 20 joe gibbs racing toyota first time preece finished second far experienced teammate left track hoping performance open eyes someone looking talent behind wheel something dreamed honest said preece fridays allstar modified race finished second saturdays 100lap preliminary xfinity event work hard weekin weekout modifieds able opportunity means lot preece race iowa july 29 scheduled event 20 car ran full nascar xfinity series schedule last year johnny davis 01 chevrolet dont take back last year preece said great people dont even know ran fulltime got laps thats need sometimes ive life needed right opportunity joe gibbs gave congratulations kyle teammate thats pretty cool say right race ran without caution restart lap 97 finish lap 200 turned final cycle greenflag pit stops busch ducked onto pit road lap 169 fuel fresh tires keselowski led racehigh 102 laps brought car pits lap 170 angle 22 ford around kyle larsons 42 chevrolet started leave pit stall keselowski pulled jack dropped keselowski accelerated gas still locked coupler forward motion car pulled fueler 22s pit stall keselowski serve stopandgo penalty dragging equipment outside pit box winning chances gone keselowski finished fifth 18 seconds arrears one six cars lead lap think kind coaxed guys rush hurry little bit pitting first flawless stop maybe put pressure difference today busch said great day us excited opportunity victory lane new hampshire keselowski succinct summation afternoon always fun fast leading laps didnt put whole race together today said sunoco rookie year frontrunner william byron ran third larson keselowski ben kennedy behind byron second series standings 45 points behind leader elliott sadler ran seventh first driver one lap nascar xfinity series race overtons 200 new hampshire motor speedway loudon nh saturday july 15 2017 1 1 kyle buschi toyota 200 2 6 ryan preece toyota 200 3 7 william byron chevrolet 200 4 3 kyle larsoni chevrolet 200 5 2 brad keselowskii ford 200 6 13 ben kennedy chevrolet 200 7 8 elliott sadler chevrolet 199 8 12 ty dilloni chevrolet 199 9 10 cole custer ford 199 10 9 brennan poole chevrolet 199 11 4 matt tifft toyota 199 12 5 daniel hemric chevrolet 199 13 14 blake koch chevrolet 199 14 19 ryan reed ford 198 15 21 jj yeley toyota 198 16 23 michael annett chevrolet 198 17 16 brendan gaughan chevrolet 197 18 24 harrison rhodes chevrolet 197 19 18 ross chastain chevrolet 197 20 20 ryan sieg chevrolet 197 21 26 jeremy clements chevrolet 197 22 39 dylan lupton toyota 196 23 25 garrett smithley chevrolet 195 24 15 dakoda armstrong toyota 195 25 34 joey gase chevrolet 195 26 27 bj mcleod chevrolet 194 27 32 spencer boyd chevrolet 193 28 33 timmy hill dodge 186 29 31 tommy joe martins chevrolet 185 30 28 david starr chevrolet 184 31 38 mike harmon dodge 178 32 11 justin allgaier chevrolet 173 33 37 martin roy chevrolet engine 163 34 22 brandon jones chevrolet 157 35 17 spencer gallagher chevrolet suspension 156 36 36 carl long chevrolet electrical 67 37 35 morgan shepherd chevrolet suspension 59 38 30 jeff green chevrolet electrical 15 39 29 reed sorensoni chevrolet brakes 7 40 40 john jackson dodge vibration 4 average speed race winner 109276 mph time race 01 hrs 56 mins 11 secs margin victory 10425 seconds caution flags 3 15 laps lead changes 13 among 7 drivers lap leaders k buschi 12 b keselowskii 37 k buschi 827 b keselowskii 2833 j allgaier 3435 e sadler 3640 k larsoni 4151 r preece 5253 k buschi 5471 b keselowskii 7293 k buschi 94101 b keselowskii 102170 tifft 171 k buschi 172200 leaders summary driver times lead laps led b keselowskii 4 times 102 laps k buschi 5 times 77 laps k larsoni 1 time 11 laps e sadler 1 time 5 laps r preece 1 time 2 laps j allgaier 1 time 2 laps tifft 1 time 1 lap stage 1 top ten 4220181227483919 stage 2 top ten 2218422091319482 | 733 |
<p>As we seem to be well into the “if only they had done what I would have done” stage of post-election analysis, I’m happy to admit that I believe that if the Romney campaign had offered a more coherent <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/our-age-anxiety_645175.html" type="external">agenda and case</a>&#160;regarding our economic predicament and positioned it within a <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/real-debate_653224.html?nopager=1" type="external">broader argument</a>&#160;about the nature of American life they could well have had far more success with the voters they didn’t effectively turn out on Tuesday. I’d like to think that view is probably not much less (though it is certainly not much more) plausible than many of the various “if only” arguments of the past few days. But I would acknowledge it is also not self-evidently more or less plausible than the strategy the Romney team did pursue given the circumstances they were in.</p>
<p>What matters more is what happens next. Some reflection on the implications of the election is certainly necessary for answering that, but it is not the only necessary thing.</p>
<p>The implications of the election for the things we as conservatives care about (and therefore, in this conservative’s view, also for the country) are very grave, and there is no getting around it. That this was in effect a status quo election (retaining a Democratic president and Senate with a Republican House) should not blind us to what the electorate on Tuesday abided and accepted, and even actively endorsed. The Republican House of Representatives survived this election remarkably intact largely because Republicans did well enough in 2010 to control the redistricting process in a lot of places, and they used that power intelligently and well. The 2010 election seems likely to enable Republicans to do pretty well in House elections throughout this decade. Thank God for the Tea Party. But that’s about it for silver linings. In essentially every other way, the electorate that turned out for this election was not the sort of center-right electorate that Republicans have assumed in most recent elections, and that has often forced Democrats at least rhetorically to tack to the center.</p>
<p>On this much, everyone probably agrees. But it seems to me that a lot of people, including perhaps some on the Right, risk drawing the wrong lessons from this election and this electorate. Above all, the notion that Republicans must now adjust their positions to make an essentially race-based appeal to Hispanics and craven interest-group appeals elsewhere strikes me as very wrong-headed–both as a reading of the election and as advice to the losing party.</p>
<p>First of all, the figures we have so far (even acknowledging that the exit polls were incomplete and imperfect, and that there are still some votes here and there to be tallied) suggest to me that the story of this election is not massive turnout of the Democratic base but exceptionally depressed turnout of a portion of the electorate that, when it votes, tends to vote Republican. Those were after all the two parts of President Obama’s cynical and substance-free campaign strategy: to work the most intensely committed and reliable parts of his base into a frenzy while persuading the least committed and reliable part of the Republican base (white working-class voters) that Mitt Romney didn’t deserve their support so they should just sit it out. Much of the post-election analysis has focused on the sophistication of the former effort–finding every last tiny niche in the patchwork of clamoring interest groups that makes up the Democratic coalition and telling it exactly what it wanted to hear. But the election returns suggest the latter effort–using any low and mendacious tactic required to tell working-class voters (especially white, Midwestern ones) that Mitt Romney was an evil and uncaring plutocrat–was by far the more successful and important. Those voters were not going to support Obama, but they could be kept away from Romney, and evidently they were.</p>
<p>The full crosstabs of exit polls are not available yet (or at least not to me), but the information we do have allows for a fairly clear picture of this. As Sean Trende <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/11/08/the_case_of_the_missing_white_voters_116106-2.html" type="external">points out today</a>, the lower turnout in this election was driven almost entirely by lower turnout among such voters. “The increased share of the minority vote as a percent of the total vote is not the result of a large increase in minorities in the numerator,” he notes, “it is a function of many fewer whites in the denominator.” And as he further shows, these seem to be lower middle class white voters–precisely the targets of the Obama campaign’s effort to keep Romney’s marginal voters at home. The change in the makeup of the electorate thus seems to be far less a function of demographic shifts than of a failure to turn out potential Romney voters. It would seem that the commonly voiced concerns that Romney would have trouble connecting with working-class voters and that the attacks on him as a vulture capitalist might work were basically right.</p>
<p>This is both bad news and good news: It means Republicans are indeed vulnerable to attacks that paint them as plutocrats, but it also means that the demographics of the electorate have not turned decisively against them. The voters that could carry Republicans to victory are there, but far too many of them did not vote this time. If we must look at it through racial categories (which the exit polls encourage, alas), it’s certainly true that a significant gain in Hispanic votes (rather than a 3 point decline from McCain’s percentage of the Hispanic vote) would have helped Romney some, but there was no plausible path to increasing it enough to overcome the decline in the white vote (of which Romney won 72%). Trende estimates that there were 6.7 million fewer white voters at the polls in 2012 than in 2008, which is more than half of the entire Hispanic vote. Whatever you think about immigration, if poor turnout among working-class whites is the Republicans’ key problem then it would not be easy to argue that a more liberal immigration stance would help them. (Indeed, with these voters such a move would likely do more harm than good.)</p>
<p>But that is only the less important reason not to start shifting policy positions based on the demographics of election returns. The more important reason is that this is simply the wrong way–and especially the wrong way for Republicans–to think about how to win over voters, regardless of their race. And this applies to more than just immigration and the Hispanic vote, but to the larger lessons conservatives and Republicans should draw from an election loss.</p>
<p>The Democratic Party is mostly an incoherent amalgam of interest groups, most of which are vying for benefits for themselves and their members at the expense of other Americans. This kind of party is why America’s founders worried about partisanship and were, at least at first, eager to avoid a party system. It is a bunch of factions more than a party. The basic distinction between a faction and a proper party–a distinction proposed by Edmund Burke, among the first positive proponents of parties in the Anglo-American tradition–is that a faction seeks power over the whole for its own advantage while a party seeks power to advance its own vision of the good of the whole. “A party,” Burke wrote, “is a body of men united for promoting by their joint endeavor the national interest upon some principle in which they are all agreed.”</p>
<p>Some of today’s Democrats do advance such a view of the good of the whole–a progressive view by which the national interest is served by replacing traditional mediating institutions with the more rational and technocratic public institutions of the welfare state, replacing what they take to be a stifling combination of moral collectivism and economic individualism with what they take to be a liberating combination of moral individualism and economic collectivism. It is this view that conservatives call “the Left” and which we oppose and resist. But the Democrats are not united by this view and are by no means all agreed in it. The party’s electoral strength is not a function of its commitment to this view or of the public’s acceptance of it. Its electoral strength is a function of a coalition of special-interest groups that provide both voters and activists in return for the party protecting their interests at the expense of those of other Americans when it is in power.</p>
<p>The Republican Party has its own interest groups too, of course. It has often been too protective of big business, above all. But interest groups of this sort in Republican politics play nothing like the role they have in Democratic politics. The Republican Party, for good and bad, is much more of a real party–largely united and moved (and increasingly so) by a complicated and often contradictory but at bottom very coherent worldview we call conservatism which, to vastly overgeneralize, argues for traditional morality, free enterprise, and a robust national defense. The party’s electoral strength is without question a function of this view and of the public’s acceptance of it (or lack thereof). Its electoral fate therefore depends on its ability to lay out this vision of American life (at least in part translated into concrete policy) for voters in an appealing way and to persuade them of its virtues and its value to them and their country.</p>
<p>This can of course involve explaining to specific groups why a more conservative government would be better for them in particular, but it generally should not mean offering certain groups benefits or protections at the expense of others for the sake of their votes. I do think there are some parts of our society that deserve special consideration and special treatment. I would favor a tax code designed to be <a href="http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/taxes-and-the-family" type="external">more supportive of middle-class parents</a>, for instance–but that’s because I think it would be good for America, strengthening us where we are weak and helping to redress the mistreatment of families in our current tax code. I favor benefits and protections for the poor and the vulnerable, provided they are designed to encourage independence and to lift people out of poverty wherever possible. But those are, at least as I understand them, outgrowths of a broader conservative worldview–they are my conservatism applied to specific instances, and I think they should be persuasive to everyone, not just to people in the groups that might benefit, because I think they would be good for the country. I don’t think I would change my mind about them if an election went poorly, though I might change which of them I emphasize in response to the needs of the momentor I might change the way I argue about them to try to be more persuasive to one kind of fellow American or another.</p>
<p>There is much legitimate room for debate among conservatives about immigration, for instance. I <a href="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/fixing-immigration/" type="external">probably fall</a>&#160;on the less restrictionist end of that spectrum on the right. But I would not suggest that the Republican Party should move my way because there are more Hispanic voters in the country. I think it should move my way because I think that way is right for our country, and it’s my job to persuade other people of that.</p>
<p>And that, at the end of the day, is the challenge for conservatives in the wake of this election. The argument that any individual (and therefore party) should just change substantive positions (especially on crucially important issues) because there is more of one kind of voter or another than there used to be is just not a serious argument. It suggests that the substance of our politics is nothing more than cynical electioneering. Republicans tend not to believe that, and even those who do could never hope to compete with Democrats on that front. They should instead offer the country an applied conservatism.</p>
<p>The job of conservatism, and to the extent that it is a conservative party then also the job of the Republican Party, is to lay out its vision before voters in an attractive and serious way, to show them how it builds on America’s strengths to address America’s weaknesses, how it enables human thriving, how it could be applied to the particular problems we face today in ways that would help solve those problems, and why it is good for each and all of us Americans. That means we need to speak to a coherent and appealing understanding of American life today, and that we need to translate our ideas into very concrete policy particulars that would advance them.</p>
<p>That’s why, to return to where we started, I think the Romney campaign would have been well served by a more coherent <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/our-age-anxiety_645175.html" type="external">agenda and case</a>&#160;regarding our economic predicament positioned within a <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/real-debate_653224.html?nopager=1" type="external">broader argument</a>&#160;about the nature of American life. Such an agenda and such an argument are what the next Republican presidential contender will need too, and what conservatives will need in the meantime as we work to move America our way in a divided Washington in the aftermath of an election that has gone very poorly.</p>
<p>That means that conservatives need what conservatism says societies always need: to be ourselves but better. When the smoke clears, I’m confident we will see that, and will comport ourselves accordingly in the political struggles of the next four years. If we do, and if we help voters understand that reasonably well, we can and will get a shot at fixing what the Left is now so badly getting wrong and at advancing our agenda for a while.</p>
<p>We do have what this moment requires, and with the right mix of well-conceived policy and smart and savvy argument we can show American voters as much–whatever their ethnicity.</p>
<p>Yuval Levin is Hertog fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and editor of National Affairs.</p> | false | 1 | seem well done would done stage postelection analysis im happy admit believe romney campaign offered coherent agenda case160regarding economic predicament positioned within broader argument160about nature american life could well far success voters didnt effectively turn tuesday id like think view probably much less though certainly much plausible many various arguments past days would acknowledge also selfevidently less plausible strategy romney team pursue given circumstances matters happens next reflection implications election certainly necessary answering necessary thing implications election things conservatives care therefore conservatives view also country grave getting around effect status quo election retaining democratic president senate republican house blind us electorate tuesday abided accepted even actively endorsed republican house representatives survived election remarkably intact largely republicans well enough 2010 control redistricting process lot places used power intelligently well 2010 election seems likely enable republicans pretty well house elections throughout decade thank god tea party thats silver linings essentially every way electorate turned election sort centerright electorate republicans assumed recent elections often forced democrats least rhetorically tack center much everyone probably agrees seems lot people including perhaps right risk drawing wrong lessons election electorate notion republicans must adjust positions make essentially racebased appeal hispanics craven interestgroup appeals elsewhere strikes wrongheadedboth reading election advice losing party first figures far even acknowledging exit polls incomplete imperfect still votes tallied suggest story election massive turnout democratic base exceptionally depressed turnout portion electorate votes tends vote republican two parts president obamas cynical substancefree campaign strategy work intensely committed reliable parts base frenzy persuading least committed reliable part republican base white workingclass voters mitt romney didnt deserve support sit much postelection analysis focused sophistication former effortfinding every last tiny niche patchwork clamoring interest groups makes democratic coalition telling exactly wanted hear election returns suggest latter effortusing low mendacious tactic required tell workingclass voters especially white midwestern ones mitt romney evil uncaring plutocratwas far successful important voters going support obama could kept away romney evidently full crosstabs exit polls available yet least information allows fairly clear picture sean trende points today lower turnout election driven almost entirely lower turnout among voters increased share minority vote percent total vote result large increase minorities numerator notes function many fewer whites denominator shows seem lower middle class white votersprecisely targets obama campaigns effort keep romneys marginal voters home change makeup electorate thus seems far less function demographic shifts failure turn potential romney voters would seem commonly voiced concerns romney would trouble connecting workingclass voters attacks vulture capitalist might work basically right bad news good news means republicans indeed vulnerable attacks paint plutocrats also means demographics electorate turned decisively voters could carry republicans victory far many vote time must look racial categories exit polls encourage alas certainly true significant gain hispanic votes rather 3 point decline mccains percentage hispanic vote would helped romney plausible path increasing enough overcome decline white vote romney 72 trende estimates 67 million fewer white voters polls 2012 2008 half entire hispanic vote whatever think immigration poor turnout among workingclass whites republicans key problem would easy argue liberal immigration stance would help indeed voters move would likely harm good less important reason start shifting policy positions based demographics election returns important reason simply wrong wayand especially wrong way republicansto think win voters regardless race applies immigration hispanic vote larger lessons conservatives republicans draw election loss democratic party mostly incoherent amalgam interest groups vying benefits members expense americans kind party americas founders worried partisanship least first eager avoid party system bunch factions party basic distinction faction proper partya distinction proposed edmund burke among first positive proponents parties angloamerican traditionis faction seeks power whole advantage party seeks power advance vision good whole party burke wrote body men united promoting joint endeavor national interest upon principle agreed todays democrats advance view good wholea progressive view national interest served replacing traditional mediating institutions rational technocratic public institutions welfare state replacing take stifling combination moral collectivism economic individualism take liberating combination moral individualism economic collectivism view conservatives call left oppose resist democrats united view means agreed partys electoral strength function commitment view publics acceptance electoral strength function coalition specialinterest groups provide voters activists return party protecting interests expense americans power republican party interest groups course often protective big business interest groups sort republican politics play nothing like role democratic politics republican party good bad much real partylargely united moved increasingly complicated often contradictory bottom coherent worldview call conservatism vastly overgeneralize argues traditional morality free enterprise robust national defense partys electoral strength without question function view publics acceptance lack thereof electoral fate therefore depends ability lay vision american life least part translated concrete policy voters appealing way persuade virtues value country course involve explaining specific groups conservative government would better particular generally mean offering certain groups benefits protections expense others sake votes think parts society deserve special consideration special treatment would favor tax code designed supportive middleclass parents instancebut thats think would good america strengthening us weak helping redress mistreatment families current tax code favor benefits protections poor vulnerable provided designed encourage independence lift people poverty wherever possible least understand outgrowths broader conservative worldviewthey conservatism applied specific instances think persuasive everyone people groups might benefit think would good country dont think would change mind election went poorly though might change emphasize response needs momentor might change way argue try persuasive one kind fellow american another much legitimate room debate among conservatives immigration instance probably fall160on less restrictionist end spectrum right would suggest republican party move way hispanic voters country think move way think way right country job persuade people end day challenge conservatives wake election argument individual therefore party change substantive positions especially crucially important issues one kind voter another used serious argument suggests substance politics nothing cynical electioneering republicans tend believe even could never hope compete democrats front instead offer country applied conservatism job conservatism extent conservative party also job republican party lay vision voters attractive serious way show builds americas strengths address americas weaknesses enables human thriving could applied particular problems face today ways would help solve problems good us americans means need speak coherent appealing understanding american life today need translate ideas concrete policy particulars would advance thats return started think romney campaign would well served coherent agenda case160regarding economic predicament positioned within broader argument160about nature american life agenda argument next republican presidential contender need conservatives need meantime work move america way divided washington aftermath election gone poorly means conservatives need conservatism says societies always need better smoke clears im confident see comport accordingly political struggles next four years help voters understand reasonably well get shot fixing left badly getting wrong advancing agenda moment requires right mix wellconceived policy smart savvy argument show american voters muchwhatever ethnicity yuval levin hertog fellow ethics public policy center editor national affairs | 1,118 |
<p>On Dec. 29, 1959, Richard P. Feynman gave an after-dinner talk at an annual American Physical Society meeting in Pasadena, Calif. Feynman was not the public figure he would later become — he had not yet received a Nobel Prize, unraveled the cause of the Challenger accident, written witty books of popular science, or been the subject of biographies, documentaries and even a play starring Alan Alda. But the 41-year-old was already respected by fellow physicists for his originality, his crackling intellect, and his roguish charm.</p>
<p>The announced title of Feynman's lecture, “There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom,” mystified the attendees. One later told science writer Ed Regis that the puzzled physicists in the room feared Feynman meant that “there are plenty of lousy jobs in physics.”</p>
<p>Feynman said that he really wanted to discuss “the problem of manipulating and controlling things on a small scale.” By this he meant not mere miniaturization but something much more extreme. “As far as I can see,” Feynman said, the principles of physics “do not speak against the possibility of maneuvering things atom by atom.” In fact, he argued, it is “a development which I think cannot be avoided.” The physicist spoke of storing all the information in all the world's books on “the barest piece of dust that can be made out by the human eye.” He imagined shrinking computers and medical devices, and developing new techniques of manufacturing and mass production. In short, a half-century ago he anticipated what we now call nanotechnology — the manipulation of matter at the level of billionths of a meter.</p>
<p>Some historians depict the speech as the start of this now-burgeoning field of research. Yet Feynman didn't use the word “nanotechnology” himself, and his lecture went for years almost entirely unmentioned in the scientific literature. Not until the 1980s did nanotechnology researchers begin regularly citing Feynman's lecture. So why, then, does one encyclopedia call it “the impetus for nanotechnology”? Why would one of Feynman's biographers claim that nanotechnology researchers think of Feynman “as their spiritual father”?</p>
<p>The story of how his talk was forgotten and then, decades later, inserted into the history of nanotechnology is worth understanding less because of what it tells us about the past than because of what it hints about the future, a future in which billions of dollars in research and development funds are at stake.</p>
<p>Much of the work that now goes under the rubric of nanotechnology is essentially a specialized form of materials science. In the years ahead, it is expected to result in new medical treatments and diagnostic tools, ultraefficient water-filtration systems, strong and lightweight materials for military armor, and breakthroughs in energy, computing and medicine. Meanwhile, hundreds of consumer products using (or at least claiming to use) nanomaterials or nanoparticles went on the market in the past decade, including paints and cosmetics, stain-resistant garments, and bacteria-battling washing machines and food containers.</p>
<p>The most prominent scientists involved in this mainstream version of nanotechnology have admitted that Feynman's “Plenty of Room” talk had no influence on their work. Christopher Toumey, a University of South Carolina cultural anthropologist, interviewed several of nanotech's biggest names, including Nobel laureates; they uniformly told him that Feynman's lecture had no bearing on their research, and several said they had never even read it.</p>
<p>But there is another kind of nanotechnology, one associated with much more hype. First described in the 1980s by K. Eric Drexler, this vision involves building things “from the bottom up” through molecular manufacturing. It was Mr. Drexler who first brought the term “nanotechnology” to a wide audience, most prominently with his 1986 book “Engines of Creation.” And it is Mr. Drexler's interpretation that has captured the public imagination, as witness the novels, movies and video games that name-drop nanotechnology with the same casual hopefulness that the comic books of the 1960s mentioned the mysteries of radiation.</p>
<p>Using the theoretical techniques Mr. Drexler outlined, personal desktop nanofactories the size of a microwave oven could one day be programmed to convert raw materials into gleamingly perfect complex objects such as laptop computers. More radically, nanoscale machines might replace or repair damaged cells in your body, staving off aging — or they could be employed in terrible new weapons. In short, if mainstream nanotechnology promises to make our lives easier, Mr. Drexler's version aims to remake the world.</p>
<p>These two understandings of nanotechnology are regularly conflated in the press — a fact that vexes mainstream researchers, in part because Mr. Drexler's more ambitious take on nanotech is cherished by several colorful futurist movements (transhumanism, cryonics, and so forth). Worse, for all the fantastical speculation that Drexlerian nanotechnology invites, it has also driven critics, like the late novelist Michael Crichton and the software entrepreneur Bill Joy, to warn of nanotech nightmares.</p>
<p>Hoping to dissociate their nanotechnology work from dystopian scenarios and fringe futurists, some prominent mainstream researchers have taken to belittling Mr. Drexler and his theories. And that is where Feynman re-enters the story: Mr. Drexler regularly invokes the 1959 lecture, which broadly corresponds with his own thinking. As he told Mr. Regis, the science writer: “It's kind of useful to have a Richard Feynman to point to as someone who stated some of the core conclusions. You can say to skeptics, 'Hey, argue with him!'” It is thanks to Mr. Drexler that we remember Feynman's lecture as crucial to nanotechnology, since Mr. Drexler has long used Feynman's reputation as a shield for his own.</p>
<p>If this dispute over nano-nomenclature only involved some sniping scientists and a few historians watching over a tiny corner of Feynman's legacy, it would be of little consequence. But hundreds of companies and universities are teeming with nanotech researchers, and the U.S. government has been pouring billions of dollars into its multiagency National Nanotechnology Initiative.</p>
<p>So far, none of that federal R&amp;D funding has gone toward the kind of nanotechnology that Drexler proposed, not even toward the basic exploratory experiments that the National Research Council called for in 2006. If Drexler's revolutionary vision of nanotechnology is feasible, we should pursue it for its potential for good, while mindful of the dangers it may pose to human nature and society. And if Drexler's ideas are fundamentally flawed, we should find out — and establish just how much room there is at the bottom after all.</p>
<p>Mr. Keiper is the editor of The New Atlantis and a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | dec 29 1959 richard p feynman gave afterdinner talk annual american physical society meeting pasadena calif feynman public figure would later become yet received nobel prize unraveled cause challenger accident written witty books popular science subject biographies documentaries even play starring alan alda 41yearold already respected fellow physicists originality crackling intellect roguish charm announced title feynmans lecture theres plenty room bottom mystified attendees one later told science writer ed regis puzzled physicists room feared feynman meant plenty lousy jobs physics feynman said really wanted discuss problem manipulating controlling things small scale meant mere miniaturization something much extreme far see feynman said principles physics speak possibility maneuvering things atom atom fact argued development think avoided physicist spoke storing information worlds books barest piece dust made human eye imagined shrinking computers medical devices developing new techniques manufacturing mass production short halfcentury ago anticipated call nanotechnology manipulation matter level billionths meter historians depict speech start nowburgeoning field research yet feynman didnt use word nanotechnology lecture went years almost entirely unmentioned scientific literature 1980s nanotechnology researchers begin regularly citing feynmans lecture one encyclopedia call impetus nanotechnology would one feynmans biographers claim nanotechnology researchers think feynman spiritual father story talk forgotten decades later inserted history nanotechnology worth understanding less tells us past hints future future billions dollars research development funds stake much work goes rubric nanotechnology essentially specialized form materials science years ahead expected result new medical treatments diagnostic tools ultraefficient waterfiltration systems strong lightweight materials military armor breakthroughs energy computing medicine meanwhile hundreds consumer products using least claiming use nanomaterials nanoparticles went market past decade including paints cosmetics stainresistant garments bacteriabattling washing machines food containers prominent scientists involved mainstream version nanotechnology admitted feynmans plenty room talk influence work christopher toumey university south carolina cultural anthropologist interviewed several nanotechs biggest names including nobel laureates uniformly told feynmans lecture bearing research several said never even read another kind nanotechnology one associated much hype first described 1980s k eric drexler vision involves building things bottom molecular manufacturing mr drexler first brought term nanotechnology wide audience prominently 1986 book engines creation mr drexlers interpretation captured public imagination witness novels movies video games namedrop nanotechnology casual hopefulness comic books 1960s mentioned mysteries radiation using theoretical techniques mr drexler outlined personal desktop nanofactories size microwave oven could one day programmed convert raw materials gleamingly perfect complex objects laptop computers radically nanoscale machines might replace repair damaged cells body staving aging could employed terrible new weapons short mainstream nanotechnology promises make lives easier mr drexlers version aims remake world two understandings nanotechnology regularly conflated press fact vexes mainstream researchers part mr drexlers ambitious take nanotech cherished several colorful futurist movements transhumanism cryonics forth worse fantastical speculation drexlerian nanotechnology invites also driven critics like late novelist michael crichton software entrepreneur bill joy warn nanotech nightmares hoping dissociate nanotechnology work dystopian scenarios fringe futurists prominent mainstream researchers taken belittling mr drexler theories feynman reenters story mr drexler regularly invokes 1959 lecture broadly corresponds thinking told mr regis science writer kind useful richard feynman point someone stated core conclusions say skeptics hey argue thanks mr drexler remember feynmans lecture crucial nanotechnology since mr drexler long used feynmans reputation shield dispute nanonomenclature involved sniping scientists historians watching tiny corner feynmans legacy would little consequence hundreds companies universities teeming nanotech researchers us government pouring billions dollars multiagency national nanotechnology initiative far none federal rampd funding gone toward kind nanotechnology drexler proposed even toward basic exploratory experiments national research council called 2006 drexlers revolutionary vision nanotechnology feasible pursue potential good mindful dangers may pose human nature society drexlers ideas fundamentally flawed find establish much room bottom mr keiper editor new atlantis fellow ethics public policy center | 609 |
<p>By Letitia Stein</p>
<p>(Reuters) – Democrats desperate to rebuild after losing the White House last year have scored a string of election victories for statehouse seats, testing a new generation of candidates and activists eager to resist President Donald Trump’s conservative agenda.</p>
<p>From New Hampshire to Oklahoma, Democrats have flipped eight Republican-held seats in special legislative elections, having spent millions of dollars on low-turnout contests mostly being fought over local issues. The wins showcase how Democrats want to fight back after losing to Trump and hitting historic lows in statehouses.</p>
<p>But the party faces challenges carrying this momentum into the 2018 midterm elections when thousands of seats are at stake, interviews with nearly two dozen Democratic leaders, campaigns and other political experts show.</p>
<p>“Can we recruit enough capable candidates, and can we run enough modern races?” asked Simon Rosenberg, a Democratic political strategist. He said the party must test its future leaders in real time. “Are they ready? The answer is: We don’t know.”</p>
<p>In November, Democrats will get an early read.</p>
<p>One critical test is in Washington state, where first-time candidate Manka Dhingra is running for an up-for-grabs senate seat in Seattle’s suburbs. A victory on Nov. 7 would give Democrats full control of the state.</p>
<p>&#160;&#160; &#160;A prosecutor and school parent volunteer, Dhingra is a Sikh Indian American whose political awakening began with businessman Trump’s surprise election victory over experienced politician Hillary Clinton. Still, Dhingra steers clear of mentioning the president in her pitch to swing voters.</p>
<p>“The Trump reaction, the way it works is by invigorating volunteers,” Dhingra said. “There are a lot of people, like myself, who decided we cannot be bystanders.”</p>
<p>Nearly 2,000 volunteers have signed up through her campaign website alone, evidence of what the party calls unprecedented interest in legislative contests.</p>
<p>An August primary, where Dhingra finished 10 points ahead of her Republican competitor, had a relatively robust turnout, including nearly 6,000 voters who normally skip primaries.</p>
<p>Outside of Washington state, however, a few Democratic wins will do little to change the political map going into the 2018 midterm elections.</p>
<p>Republicans control 26 state governments and two-thirds of legislative chambers. Democrats hemorrhaged power at the state level during President Barack Obama’s eight years in office with their attention on national elections.</p>
<p>Now Democrats see the states as critical for rebuilding, and an opportunity to advance legislation pushing back against Trump’s agenda of gutting Democratic health care reforms and environmental protections and cracking down on immigration.</p>
<p>VOTER OUTREACH</p>
<p>The party plans to recruit hundreds of thousands of volunteers to contact more than 30 million voters – double their outreach in statehouse contests in the 2016 presidential cycle.</p>
<p>“Because of the gridlock in Washington, people are turning to statehouses for security from Donald Trump,” said Jessica Post, executive director of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee.</p>
<p>But the party’s many inexperienced candidates must beat battle-tested incumbents in elections next year with greater voter turnout.</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160; “If the Democrats have every bit of momentum and the wildest day they could think of, they may take us from super majorities to majorities,” said David Avella, chairman of the Republican group GOPAC. “But we will still have majorities.”</p>
<p>Democrats have flipped legislative seats in Florida, Oklahoma, New Hampshire and New York in 2017. Republicans picked up an uncontested seat in Louisiana.</p>
<p>In Oklahoma, where Trump won 65 percent of the vote in the 2016 general election, the Democrats flipped three seats in districts he carried. Candidates doubled down on local issues, such as a budget crisis forcing four-day school weeks.</p>
<p>They had a chance to “represent themselves as real people that weren’t actually attached to Nancy Pelosi, or Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama,” said Anna Langthorn, Oklahoma Democratic Party chairwoman.</p>
<p>Some of the special elections success reflects startup progressive groups rallying voters. But they have yet to figure out how to expand their scope for 2018.</p>
<p>Chris Walsh, a cofounder of Flippable, which is working to win back state governments, went to Florida last month to help Democrat Annette Taddeo beat a Republican former legislator who once competed on Trump’s reality TV show, “The Apprentice.”</p>
<p>“There is a lot of knowledge out there that is siloed,” Walsh said, adding the party could help by sharing information such as district voting data with new groups.</p>
<p>This year’s most revealing contests will come in a statewide election in Virginia, where Democrats face a long-shot bid in November to pick up 17 seats and take back the House of Delegates.</p>
<p>In a show of enthusiasm to rebuild, the party is fielding a ticket that is more than 50 percent larger than two years ago. Yet fewer than one in four of the mostly women vying for Republican-held seats have raised more money than their competitors, Virginia Public Access Project data showed.</p>
<p>Republicans are also ramping up in defense. They anticipate state contests will be central to Democratic efforts in 2018, given their longer odds of reclaiming the Republican-controlled U.S. Congress.</p>
<p>&#160;&#160;&#160; “The Democrats are trying to probe for the weakest link, and they are looking for that at the state level,” said Matt Walter, president of the Republican State Leadership Committee. “It is our job to make sure that doesn’t happen.”</p> | false | 1 | letitia stein reuters democrats desperate rebuild losing white house last year scored string election victories statehouse seats testing new generation candidates activists eager resist president donald trumps conservative agenda new hampshire oklahoma democrats flipped eight republicanheld seats special legislative elections spent millions dollars lowturnout contests mostly fought local issues wins showcase democrats want fight back losing trump hitting historic lows statehouses party faces challenges carrying momentum 2018 midterm elections thousands seats stake interviews nearly two dozen democratic leaders campaigns political experts show recruit enough capable candidates run enough modern races asked simon rosenberg democratic political strategist said party must test future leaders real time ready answer dont know november democrats get early read one critical test washington state firsttime candidate manka dhingra running upforgrabs senate seat seattles suburbs victory nov 7 would give democrats full control state 160160 160a prosecutor school parent volunteer dhingra sikh indian american whose political awakening began businessman trumps surprise election victory experienced politician hillary clinton still dhingra steers clear mentioning president pitch swing voters trump reaction way works invigorating volunteers dhingra said lot people like decided bystanders nearly 2000 volunteers signed campaign website alone evidence party calls unprecedented interest legislative contests august primary dhingra finished 10 points ahead republican competitor relatively robust turnout including nearly 6000 voters normally skip primaries outside washington state however democratic wins little change political map going 2018 midterm elections republicans control 26 state governments twothirds legislative chambers democrats hemorrhaged power state level president barack obamas eight years office attention national elections democrats see states critical rebuilding opportunity advance legislation pushing back trumps agenda gutting democratic health care reforms environmental protections cracking immigration voter outreach party plans recruit hundreds thousands volunteers contact 30 million voters double outreach statehouse contests 2016 presidential cycle gridlock washington people turning statehouses security donald trump said jessica post executive director democratic legislative campaign committee partys many inexperienced candidates must beat battletested incumbents elections next year greater voter turnout 160160160 democrats every bit momentum wildest day could think may take us super majorities majorities said david avella chairman republican group gopac still majorities democrats flipped legislative seats florida oklahoma new hampshire new york 2017 republicans picked uncontested seat louisiana oklahoma trump 65 percent vote 2016 general election democrats flipped three seats districts carried candidates doubled local issues budget crisis forcing fourday school weeks chance represent real people werent actually attached nancy pelosi hillary clinton barack obama said anna langthorn oklahoma democratic party chairwoman special elections success reflects startup progressive groups rallying voters yet figure expand scope 2018 chris walsh cofounder flippable working win back state governments went florida last month help democrat annette taddeo beat republican former legislator competed trumps reality tv show apprentice lot knowledge siloed walsh said adding party could help sharing information district voting data new groups years revealing contests come statewide election virginia democrats face longshot bid november pick 17 seats take back house delegates show enthusiasm rebuild party fielding ticket 50 percent larger two years ago yet fewer one four mostly women vying republicanheld seats raised money competitors virginia public access project data showed republicans also ramping defense anticipate state contests central democratic efforts 2018 given longer odds reclaiming republicancontrolled us congress 160160160 democrats trying probe weakest link looking state level said matt walter president republican state leadership committee job make sure doesnt happen | 552 |
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/006073132X/ref=ase_wwweppcorg-20/104-6284162-7691931?s=books&amp;v=glance&amp;n=283155&amp;tagActionCode=wwweppcorg-20" type="external">Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything</a>, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. HarperCollins, 256 pages, $25.95</p>
<p>According to Freakonomics, co-authored by University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt and freelance journalist Stephen Dubner, “economics is a science with excellent tools for gaining answers but a serious shortage of interesting questions.” This book, and its authors, have become well-known for asking all kinds of interesting questions. Do real estate agents act in their clients’ best interests? Why do so many drug dealers live with their mothers? Does campaign money determine election results?</p>
<p>Levitt and Dubner’s publisher proposed the book (and since then, a magazine column, blog, audio book, T-shirts, etc.) to capitalize upon a 2003 New York Times Magazine article Dubner had written about Levitt. Back then, Dubner quoted Levitt as saying, “I just don’t know very much about the field of economics. I’m not good at math, I don’t know a lot of econometrics, and I also don’t know how to do theory.” But once a media maelstrom erupted over the book’s assertion that legalized abortion has led to a reduction in crime, Levitt was forced to buttress the argument with his authority, telling the New York Times, for example, “As an economist, I am better than the typical person at figuring out whether abortion reduces crime….” Meanwhile, the book ignored the fatal weakness in his earlier research.</p>
<p>That original paper, co-authored with John J. Donohue, had many flaws, as economists have pointed out ever since Levitt posted it on the Internet in 1999. The paper argued that after abortion was legalized by several states starting in the late 1960s and nationwide by Roe v. Wade(1973), millions of fetuses were killed who, when old enough, would have been disproportionately likely to commit crimes. Abortion’s culling of them should therefore have lowered crime rates. To prove this, Levitt and Donohue looked at crime rates 15-18 years after Roe and found the drop they had predicted. But did abortion cause it? Many economists doubt it, pointing out, for example, that teenage crime soared in the late 1980s and early 1990s, just when the abortions’ effect should have manifested itself. But the paper examined only aggregate crime rates, not crime rates by age group.</p>
<p>Tellingly, Levitt and Donohue found their results indistinguishable whether they used 1970s or 1990s abortion rates to try to explain overall ’90s crime rates. But when both were included the models went statistically haywire (“standard errors explode due to multicollinearity”). This alarm goes off when research is “misspecified,” typically by omitting necessary variables. Failing to uncover any valid evidence for either a 20-year lag or for no lag, the two replaced the missing facts with an arbitrary assumption: “Consequently, it must be recognized that our interpretation of the results relies on the assumption that there will be a fifteen-to-twenty year lag before abortion materially affects crime.”</p>
<p>They justified their assumption by quipping that “infants commit little crime.” But nearly all violent crime is committed by men (women are equal only in nonviolent crime) precisely the ages of the fathers of aborted children. In short, the missing variable is “economic fatherhood.” (“Economic” fatherhood is defined not by residency with but by provision for one’s children.) Including this variable not only invalidates Levitt’s claim but reverses it. One can see this in a comparison of homicide rates and economic fatherhood, the latter defined by the Total Fertility Rate for the same demographic mix as prisoners (though measured for women, it’s almost exactly the same for men) minus men in prison (who cannot provide for children) and children on welfare (who aren’t supported by fathers). Though strong for all categories of crime, the trade-off with economic fatherhood strengthens with the crime’s violence, and is strongest for the most violent of all, homicide.</p>
<p>(Click to enlarge.)</p>
<p>As far back as data exist, rates of economic fatherhood and homicide have been strongly, inversely “cointegrated” — a stringent statistical test characterizing inherently related events, like the number of cars entering and leaving the Lincoln Tunnel. Legalizing abortion didn’t lower homicide rates 15-20 years later by eliminating infants who might, if they survived, have become murderers: it raised the homicide rate almost at once by turning their fathers back into men without dependent children — a small but steady share of whom do murder. The homicide rate rose sharply in the 1960s and ’70s when expanding welfare and legal abortion sharply reduced economic fatherhood, and it dropped sharply in the ’90s partly due to a recovering birth rate, but mostly because welfare reform and incarceration raised the share of men outside prison who were supporting children.</p>
<p>This scenario didn’t occur to Levitt not because of a lack of ingenuity or data but because of the inherent weakness of the theory he was trying to apply, which Nobel Prize-winning economists George J. Stigler and Gary S. Becker, Levitt’s mentor, called the “economic approach to human behavior.” Levitt was unable to see the true correlation between abortion and crime because he was among the first victims of an epic change in the teaching of economics orchestrated by Stigler, with Becker’s support.</p>
<p>Freakonomics relies heavily upon the theory of “information asymmetry,” which explains for example why a new car’s value drops sharply the moment it is driven off the lot (people assume that if anyone wants to resell a new car, it must be a lemon). Levitt and Dubner warn, “Experts — from criminologists to real-estate agents — use their information to serve their own agenda.” They don’t mention that Stigler and Becker viewed the teaching of economics exactly the same way. Stigler’s 1983 Nobel address advised his peers to consider themselves so many used-theory salesmen, whose livelihood was mortally threatened by students’ knowledge that newer (or older) theories are superior:</p>
<p>Gary Becker has suggested that…the established scholar possesses a valuable capital asset in his command over a particular body of knowledge. That capital would be reduced if his knowledge were made obsolete by the general acceptance of a new theory. Hence, established scholars should, in their own self-interest, attack new theories, possibly even more than they do in the absence of joint action.</p>
<p>For Stigler, this was not hypothetical. Until the mid-1950s, he had built his reputation as an expert in the history of economics on the strength of an excellent dissertation published in 1941, which covered 19th-century theory and had proceeded on the general assumption that economics began with Adam Smith. But Joseph Schumpeter’s History of Economic Analysis, published posthumously in 1954, demonstrated that all modern theory could be traced to the Scholastics who sifted and synthesized Biblical and Greco-Roman thought in light of Arabic and Jewish commentaries, and that “the Wealth of Nations does not contain a single analytic idea, principle, or method that was entirely new in 1776.” This fact revolutionized the field, but slashed Stigler’s relative expertise. He quickly switched from the history of economics to its modern sociology and urged others to do likewise. In a famous 1969 article he posed the question, “Does Economics Have a Useful Past?” and answered in the negative, explicitly opposing Schumpeter. In 1972, the University of Chicago’s economics department approved Stigler’s motion to abolish the requirement that students master its history before receiving a degree, and departments at all major universities quickly followed suit.</p>
<p>But Stigler was wrong in claiming “all that is useful and valid in earlier work is present — in purer and more elegant form — in the modern theory.” Economics has been taught at the highest university level since about 1250, when Thomas Aquinas integrated four theories from Aristotle and Augustine into a coherent whole: production; utility, which explains consumption; exchange; and final distribution, which explains personal gifts and crimes (as well as distributive justice in the family and government). All major economic thinkers taught the scholastic outline until Adam Smith.</p>
<p>Smith rejected the theories of utility and final distribution in The Theory of Moral Sentiments (substituting his famous “invisible hand”) and started classical economics with the outline chopped from four elements to two, production and exchange. The current neoclassical period began in 1870 when three economists dissatisfied with Smith’s revision (W.S. Jevons, Carl Menger, and Leon Walras) independently rediscovered the theory of utility. Since later neoclassical economists never reinvented final distribution, today’s theory contains no more than three elements — consumption, production, and exchange — and tries to explain final distribution with these three. This is why Levitt couldn’t reach a statistically valid conclusion about abortion and crime: he was trying to explain four things with only three explanatory equations.</p>
<p>Becker earned his 1992 Nobel Prize for building on Theodore Schultz’s rediscovery of Aristotle’s theory of the household production of so-called “human capital.” But on Stigler’s advice, Becker combined it with Jeremy Bentham’s incompatible notion that utility is a thing, a quantum of physiological pleasure that Bentham supposed is the ultimate good we all wish to consume. In Benthamite theory, all of us are selfish, sociopathic utility maximizers — freaks, as it were.</p>
<p>As Augustine explained 14 centuries before Bentham, utility is not a thing, but a relation: our order of preference (first, second, third, etc.) for the goods we want to distribute among the persons (including ourselves) who are the “end” or purpose of our actions. Our fundamental preference (also first, second, third, etc.) is for these persons, and we distribute our goods proportionally to our love for others relative to ourselves. This theory explains the near-perfect trade-off between homicide and economic fatherhood. Since parents spend so much time serving their children, they have less for themselves. A small but roughly constant fraction of all adult time spent on oneself is spent harming others. Hence for a few men, the choice is literally between giving life and taking it.</p>
<p>Historian Henry William Spiegel remarked of the “marginal revolution,” which ended classical economics and began the current neoclassical phase: “Outsiders ranked prominently among the pioneers of marginal analysis because its discovery required a perspective that the experts did not necessarily possess.” This will be true in coming decades as economists who understand the “human approach to economic behavior” of Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas find full employment rewriting neoclassical theories of the Bentham-Becker variety.</p>
<p>—John D. Mueller is author of Redeeming Economics: Free Markets and the Human Person (ISI Books), director of the Economics and Ethics program at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and president of LBMC LLC, a financial-market forecasting firm.</p> | false | 1 | freakonomics rogue economist explores hidden side everything steven levitt stephen j dubner harpercollins 256 pages 2595 according freakonomics coauthored university chicago economist steven levitt freelance journalist stephen dubner economics science excellent tools gaining answers serious shortage interesting questions book authors become wellknown asking kinds interesting questions real estate agents act clients best interests many drug dealers live mothers campaign money determine election results levitt dubners publisher proposed book since magazine column blog audio book tshirts etc capitalize upon 2003 new york times magazine article dubner written levitt back dubner quoted levitt saying dont know much field economics im good math dont know lot econometrics also dont know theory media maelstrom erupted books assertion legalized abortion led reduction crime levitt forced buttress argument authority telling new york times example economist better typical person figuring whether abortion reduces crime meanwhile book ignored fatal weakness earlier research original paper coauthored john j donohue many flaws economists pointed ever since levitt posted internet 1999 paper argued abortion legalized several states starting late 1960s nationwide roe v wade1973 millions fetuses killed old enough would disproportionately likely commit crimes abortions culling therefore lowered crime rates prove levitt donohue looked crime rates 1518 years roe found drop predicted abortion cause many economists doubt pointing example teenage crime soared late 1980s early 1990s abortions effect manifested paper examined aggregate crime rates crime rates age group tellingly levitt donohue found results indistinguishable whether used 1970s 1990s abortion rates try explain overall 90s crime rates included models went statistically haywire standard errors explode due multicollinearity alarm goes research misspecified typically omitting necessary variables failing uncover valid evidence either 20year lag lag two replaced missing facts arbitrary assumption consequently must recognized interpretation results relies assumption fifteentotwenty year lag abortion materially affects crime justified assumption quipping infants commit little crime nearly violent crime committed men women equal nonviolent crime precisely ages fathers aborted children short missing variable economic fatherhood economic fatherhood defined residency provision ones children including variable invalidates levitts claim reverses one see comparison homicide rates economic fatherhood latter defined total fertility rate demographic mix prisoners though measured women almost exactly men minus men prison provide children children welfare arent supported fathers though strong categories crime tradeoff economic fatherhood strengthens crimes violence strongest violent homicide click enlarge far back data exist rates economic fatherhood homicide strongly inversely cointegrated stringent statistical test characterizing inherently related events like number cars entering leaving lincoln tunnel legalizing abortion didnt lower homicide rates 1520 years later eliminating infants might survived become murderers raised homicide rate almost turning fathers back men without dependent children small steady share murder homicide rate rose sharply 1960s 70s expanding welfare legal abortion sharply reduced economic fatherhood dropped sharply 90s partly due recovering birth rate mostly welfare reform incarceration raised share men outside prison supporting children scenario didnt occur levitt lack ingenuity data inherent weakness theory trying apply nobel prizewinning economists george j stigler gary becker levitts mentor called economic approach human behavior levitt unable see true correlation abortion crime among first victims epic change teaching economics orchestrated stigler beckers support freakonomics relies heavily upon theory information asymmetry explains example new cars value drops sharply moment driven lot people assume anyone wants resell new car must lemon levitt dubner warn experts criminologists realestate agents use information serve agenda dont mention stigler becker viewed teaching economics exactly way stiglers 1983 nobel address advised peers consider many usedtheory salesmen whose livelihood mortally threatened students knowledge newer older theories superior gary becker suggested thatthe established scholar possesses valuable capital asset command particular body knowledge capital would reduced knowledge made obsolete general acceptance new theory hence established scholars selfinterest attack new theories possibly even absence joint action stigler hypothetical mid1950s built reputation expert history economics strength excellent dissertation published 1941 covered 19thcentury theory proceeded general assumption economics began adam smith joseph schumpeters history economic analysis published posthumously 1954 demonstrated modern theory could traced scholastics sifted synthesized biblical grecoroman thought light arabic jewish commentaries wealth nations contain single analytic idea principle method entirely new 1776 fact revolutionized field slashed stiglers relative expertise quickly switched history economics modern sociology urged others likewise famous 1969 article posed question economics useful past answered negative explicitly opposing schumpeter 1972 university chicagos economics department approved stiglers motion abolish requirement students master history receiving degree departments major universities quickly followed suit stigler wrong claiming useful valid earlier work present purer elegant form modern theory economics taught highest university level since 1250 thomas aquinas integrated four theories aristotle augustine coherent whole production utility explains consumption exchange final distribution explains personal gifts crimes well distributive justice family government major economic thinkers taught scholastic outline adam smith smith rejected theories utility final distribution theory moral sentiments substituting famous invisible hand started classical economics outline chopped four elements two production exchange current neoclassical period began 1870 three economists dissatisfied smiths revision ws jevons carl menger leon walras independently rediscovered theory utility since later neoclassical economists never reinvented final distribution todays theory contains three elements consumption production exchange tries explain final distribution three levitt couldnt reach statistically valid conclusion abortion crime trying explain four things three explanatory equations becker earned 1992 nobel prize building theodore schultzs rediscovery aristotles theory household production socalled human capital stiglers advice becker combined jeremy benthams incompatible notion utility thing quantum physiological pleasure bentham supposed ultimate good wish consume benthamite theory us selfish sociopathic utility maximizers freaks augustine explained 14 centuries bentham utility thing relation order preference first second third etc goods want distribute among persons including end purpose actions fundamental preference also first second third etc persons distribute goods proportionally love others relative theory explains nearperfect tradeoff homicide economic fatherhood since parents spend much time serving children less small roughly constant fraction adult time spent oneself spent harming others hence men choice literally giving life taking historian henry william spiegel remarked marginal revolution ended classical economics began current neoclassical phase outsiders ranked prominently among pioneers marginal analysis discovery required perspective experts necessarily possess true coming decades economists understand human approach economic behavior aristotle augustine aquinas find full employment rewriting neoclassical theories benthambecker variety john mueller author redeeming economics free markets human person isi books director economics ethics program ethics public policy center president lbmc llc financialmarket forecasting firm | 1,035 |
<p>Republican Senators Richard Burr, Tom Coburn, and Orrin Hatch recently released&#160; <a href="http://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/bf0c9823-29c7-4078-b8af-aa9a12213eca/The%20Patient%20CARE%20Act%20-%20LEGISLATIVE%20PROPOSAL.pdf" type="external">a blueprint</a>&#160;for repealing and replacing Obamacare, called the Patient Choice, Affordability, Responsibility, and Empowerment Act, or the Patient CARE Act (PCA).&#160; The plan is getting significant attention from supporters and critics alike (including&#160; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/opinion/sunday/what-gop-style-reform-looks-like.html" type="external">the editorial page of the&#160;New York Times</a>) because both sides recognize that it is a serious effort to address the problems in U.S. health care in a manner that is strikingly different from Obamacare.&#160; The debate over the merits (or perceived drawbacks) of the PCA proposal was given further impetus by an&#160; <a href="http://healthandeconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/2014-01-29-CARE-Act-Score.pdf" type="external">assessment of its coverage and cost implications</a>&#160;from the Center for Health and Economy (H&amp;E), a new think tank headed by former Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Holtz-Eakin (and&#160; <a href="http://healthandeconomy.org/about/board/" type="external">with a board including several other academics, including Uwe Reinhardt of Princeton University</a>) and devoted to providing independent analytical assessments of major public policy initiatives.</p>
<p>In this short post, we describe the major provisions of the PCA, as we understand them from the descriptive material and conversations with the authors’ staffs.&#160; We also offer our views on how to think about the budgetary and coverage implications of the PCA proposal in the context of the estimates produced by H&amp;E.</p>
<p>Major Provisions of the Patient CARE Act (PCA)</p>
<p>Repeal of Obamacare.&#160; The starting point for the PCA is repeal of Obamacare in its entirety, with the exception of the law’s Medicare provisions. &#160;We do not take the retention of the Medicare provisions from Obamacare as an endorsement of them by the authors.&#160; That would be inconsistent with the public record.&#160; For instance, Senator Coburn has proposed sweeping reforms of Medicare that differ substantially from the Obamacare Medicare provisions.&#160; The retention of the Obamacare Medicare provisions would seem instead to be an acknowledgement that it will be difficult enough politically to enact a sensible reform of the insurance market for the under age-65 population without also having to pass in the same legislation a comprehensive reform of Medicare.&#160; A reworking of Medicare is badly needed, of course, but it can be addressed on a separate legislative track from an Obamacare replacement plan.</p>
<p>By repealing Obamacare rather than trying to fix that law, the PCA presents a clear alternative with all of the key elements of a market-based health reform.&#160; In any event, Obamacare is too lengthy and interconnected to address coherently through a series of one-off amendments.&#160; Having cleared the slate, the authors of the PCA provide an internally consistent reform that avoids the heavy emphasis on mandates and federal regulatory control that permeates Obamacare.</p>
<p>Continuous Coverage Protection and Other Insurance Rules.&#160; The PCA would address the question of pre-existing health conditions in a very different manner from Obamacare.&#160; Persons who stayed continuously insured would be allowed to move between insurance coverage platforms without their health status factoring into the premiums they must pay for coverage.&#160; The 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) smoothed the transition between employer group plans for Americans with pre-existing conditions, and included provisions aimed at easing the transition between group coverage and state-regulated individual market plans.&#160; But the provisions addressing group-to-individual market transitions left large gaps through which many people can, and do, still fall.</p>
<p>The PCA would fill in those gaps and require state-regulated insurance plans to offer coverage to the continuously insured, and to guarantee its renewal.&#160; The continuous coverage requirement does not need to be burdensome.&#160; It can be satisfied through the purchase of low-cost catastrophic coverage as well as more comprehensive insurance plans.</p>
<p>After enactment, there would be a one-time open enrollment period during which persons who had not been previously insured could opt into coverage without facing higher premiums based on their health conditions.&#160; States would be allowed to authorize risk rating of premiums for those who do not maintain continuous coverage following that initial enrollment period.</p>
<p>In general, the PCA does not include federal benefit mandates.&#160; Benefit regulation would be left to the states.&#160; However, the PCA would establish a presumption that insurers will allow dependents under age 26 to enroll in their parents’ coverage, though states could override this rule with their own regulations.&#160; The PCA would also establish a ban on lifetime limits on coverage, but states could choose to write alternative regulations on that issue as well. Finally, the PCA would establish an upper limit on age rating of 5:1, meaning that insurers could charge their oldest enrollees no more than five times the premiums assessed on the youngest enrollees.&#160; Again, however, states could choose to establish their own age-rating limitations that differ from the general federal rule.</p>
<p>Broadening Insurance Coverage Enrollment.&#160;&#160;The PCA would establish income-tested refundable tax credits for persons with incomes up to 300 percent of the federal poverty limit (FPL) who either work for small employers (defined 100 or fewer workers) or who do not have access at all to employer-sponsored insurance.&#160; The maximum credit amounts would be available for persons with incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty line (FPL).&#160; The credits would be phased down for those with higher incomes, and individuals with incomes above 300 percent of FPL would not be eligible for the tax credit.&#160; The credits would also be adjusted by three age categories (18 to 34, 35 to 49, and 50 to 64) and individual versus family insurance coverage, with higher subsidies for older persons and for those with families.&#160; The credits could be used to enroll in health insurance sponsored by a small employer or to purchase coverage offered in the individual insurance market.</p>
<p>States would also be allowed to establish a default insurance option.&#160; Persons who are eligible for a tax credit for insurance but fail to choose an insurance plan could be enrolled in a default plan offered by private insurers.&#160; These plans would establish premiums equal to the credit amounts (by adjusting deductibles) so that the individuals would not owe additional premiums for the coverage.</p>
<p>The combination of continuous coverage protection, refundable tax credits for lower and moderate income households, and the default insurance option should dramatically expand insurance coverage in the United States.</p>
<p>Cost Discipline in Employer-Sponsored Insurance.&#160;&#160;The PCA does not seek to disrupt or alter the employer-sponsored insurance market.&#160; Firms would be allowed to sponsor health insurance plans for their employees without new benefit requirements or burdensome federal regulations, and, as a general rule, the payment of premiums by employers for their workers would continue to be treated as tax-free compensation to the workers.&#160; The retention of this large tax preference should ensure the continuation of most employer-sponsored plans without change.</p>
<p>The PCA does seek to ensure additional cost discipline in job-based insurance by placing an upper limit, at a relatively high level, on the tax preference for employer-paid premiums.&#160; This limit would replace Obamacare’s “Cadillac” tax, which imposes a 40 percent excise tax on the value of health plans exceeding $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for family coverage.&#160; Although levied on insurers, the Cadillac tax would be paid by the individuals and families through higher insurance premiums.</p>
<p>For purposes of creating a cost estimate the PCA proposal, the H&amp;E analysis of the plan assumed that the upper limit would be placed at roughly 65 percent of high cost coverage. (See&#160;Note 1) &#160; In 2013 terms, that would mean a cap of about $5,400 for individual coverage and $11,250 for family coverage.&#160; These upper limit levels would then be indexed to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus one percentage point in every subsequent year.&#160; Premiums payments by an employer above the upper limit levels would count as taxable income to the worker, both for income and payroll tax purposes.</p>
<p>Scores of economic analyses over the years have shown that the presence of open-ended tax preference for employer-paid premiums is a primary reason for excessive cost inflation in the health system.&#160; By placing an upper limit on this tax preference, the Senators sponsoring the PCA seek to inject much more cost discipline into the system while retaining extensive job-based insurance coverage.&#160; Employers and their workers who today have the most expensive insurance arrangements are likely to respond to the new incentives of an upper limit by adjusting their plans to lower their premiums.</p>
<p>Medicaid Reform.&#160;&#160;The PCA would restructure Medicaid in a number of important ways.&#160; First, Medicaid participants would be allowed to opt for the federal tax credit in lieu of enrolling in Medicaid insurance.&#160; Further, the states would be given flexible funding – called health grants — to design and run a health insurance program for the non-elderly, non-disable participants in the program.&#160; One approach the PCA authors clearly envision the states could take would be to use this flexible funding to supplement the federal tax credits.&#160; This would allow the Medicaid participants to use the combined resources to purchase the coverage that best suits their needs.</p>
<p>In the first year, health grants would be set based on historical spending for the covered acute-care population.&#160; In future years, the grants would grow by CPI plus one percentage point and by changes in the low income population in the state.&#160; Long-term care services and supports would be funded in a separate, fixed grant to the states, but the acute-care insurance needs of the elderly and disabled would continue to be addressed by the current Medicaid program structure, including current federal-state matching rates and rules.</p>
<p>In addition to these reforms, the authorization for testing Health Opportunity Accounts within Medicaid, originally enacted in 2005, would be extended.</p>
<p>Other Provisions.&#160; Beyond the core reforms to insurance regulations, the tax treatment of health insurance, and Medicaid, the PCA would also make a few additional changes to other elements of the health system.</p>
<p>The PCA would seek to reduce the costs of defensive medicine by examining creative options for avoiding costly lawsuits.&#160; A heavy emphasis would be placed on incentivizing states to experiment and pursue promising reforms, such as administrative tribunals, health courts, and pre-negotiated injury compensation systems.</p>
<p>The PCA would also leverage existing programs to push those provider medical services to be more transparent and clear about pricing for consumers.</p>
<p>Finally, Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) would be promoted by removing the restrictions on them enacted in Obamacare and by removing current law barriers that keep certain excluded population out of HSAs.&#160; In addition, the PCA would allow more flexible use of HSA funds and more spousal coordination within an HSA.</p>
<p>Estimating the PCA</p>
<p>The Center for Health and Economy used a microsimulation model to estimate the coverage and cost implications of the PCA.&#160; &#160;The H&amp;E estimates that the PCA would reduce the ranks of the uninsured to a level that is comparable to what will occur under Obamacare.&#160; By 2023, there would be approximately 1 percent more insured Americans under the PCA than under Obamacare, according to the H&amp;E, with many more people enrolled in the individual insurance market and a comparable reduction in the Medicaid population.</p>
<p>Further, the H&amp;E estimates that this coverage expansion would occur with far less federal spending than Obamacare.&#160; According to the H&amp;E, the PCA would reduce the federal deficit by nearly $1.5 trillion over the next decade, largely by imposing an upper limit on the tax preference for employer-provided coverage.&#160; That provision would generate substantial new revenue — $226 billion in 2023 alone. (SeeNote 2)</p>
<p>Controversy has arisen over the meaning of those estimates.&#160;&#160; <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2014/01/28/the-proposed-republican-replacement-for-obamacare-is-a-big-tax-hike/" type="external">Critics</a>&#160;argue that the proposal creates a big tax hike for millions of American households by capping the tax preference for employer-paid health premiums.&#160; That is based on a misinterpretation of both the proposal and the H&amp;E analysis.</p>
<p>First, the cap on the tax preference is not as restrictive as some believe.&#160; The&#160; <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=2&amp;ved=0CC0QFjAB&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hatch.senate.gov%2Fpublic%2F_cache%2Ffiles%2Fbf0c9823-29c7-4078-b8af-aa9a12213eca%2FThe%2520Patient%2520CARE%2520Act%2520-%2520LEGISLATIVE%2520PROPOSAL.pdf&amp;ei=s6_zUsrAJaTgyQHSh4DAAw&amp;usg=AFQjCNH8gTs5Qrl-40GeNijcnuCvg6pQHw&amp;bvm=bv.60799247,d.aWc&amp;cad=rja" type="external">summary</a>&#160;of the PCA gives the impression that workers would be taxed on their employers’ contributions to health insurance premiums that exceed 65 percent of the average plan’s cost.&#160; As&#160; <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=1&amp;ved=0CCcQFjAA&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.coburn.senate.gov%2Fpublic%2Findex.cfm%3Fa%3DFiles.Serve%26File_id%3Dee64bd80-5830-4c9b-acd5-b4225cbc1cd8&amp;ei=s6_zUsrAJaTgyQHSh4DAAw&amp;usg=AFQjCNEa70B74G9RtYWn5kEd3atzqX10Kg&amp;bvm=bv.60799247,d.aWc&amp;cad=rja" type="external">later clarified</a>, the actual policy limits the tax preference to 65 percent of the cost of a more expensive high-option insurance plan.&#160; That means most employer plans would&#160; <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/369883/much-better-obamacare-james-c-capretta" type="external">fall well below the cap</a>, with a smaller percentage of workers enrolled in plans that would exceed the capped amount.</p>
<p>Second, the H&amp;E analysis does not include the effects of other tax reductions included in the PCA.&#160; The H&amp;E budget impact table shows an increase in tax revenue of $1.057 trillion with a corresponding reduction in the federal budget deficit (labeled “net budget effect”) of $1.473 trillion.&#160; Those estimates overstate both the tax increase and the deficit reduction that would result from considering all provisions in the PCA.</p>
<p>Unlike a typical cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the H&amp;E exercise focused on only the parts of the PCA that affect health insurance choices for persons under age 65.&#160; That includes replacing the Obamacare exchange structure (along with its subsidies and taxes) and the Medicaid provisions with the PCA reforms.&#160; It did not estimate the budget impact of the full proposal, which would repeal the entirety of the Obamacare tax hikes, including the Medicare payroll tax increases, and the taxes on devices, drugs, and insurers.&#160; None of these tax cuts were factored into the H&amp;E budgetary tables.</p>
<p>We can approximate the net budget impact of the PCA using CBO’s most recent complete&#160; <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43471" type="external">budget estimate</a>&#160;of Obamacare. Repealing the Medicare payroll tax hike and the taxes on devices, drugs, and insurers would reduce revenue by $533 billion over the period 2014 to 2022. Extending the tax cut by one additional year would bring the tax cut for these provisions to about $613 billion.</p>
<p>When this tax cut is factored into the H&amp;E assessment, the net tax increase and overall reduction in the federal deficit are reduced substantially.&#160; On balance, taxes increase by about $444 billion and deficits decline by $860 billion over the next decade.</p>
<p>But even these estimates overstate the intended tax consequences of the PCA.&#160; It is clear from discussions with the offices of the Senators who wrote the PCA proposal that they will &#160;adjust the proposed upper limit on tax–preferred employer premium payments as necessary to ensure the overall proposal is tax-neutral.&#160; Based on the H&amp;E model, we believe there is substantial room, even after considering the additional tax cuts, to raise the upper limit to levels well above 65 percent of high-cost coverage and achieve the goals of the PCA authors.</p>
<p>There is, of course, a trade-off between cost discipline and political resistance in setting the upper limit on the tax preference.&#160; The lower the limit, the more effective it would be in encouraging cost-saving adjustments in health coverage, but also the more likely it would be to encounter significant political opposition.&#160; That is why it might be desirable to set a goal of achieving revenue neutrality over a longer period (such as ten years) rather than on a year-by-year basis.&#160; Such an approach would allow for easing in the upper limit at a relatively high level in the initial years, and then allowing it to become more constraining in future years by raising it with an index that lags behind health care cost inflation.</p>
<p>A revenue-neutral PCA proposal (using Obamacare as a current law baseline) would still substantially reduce the federal budget deficit because the Medicaid reforms and the medical malpractice reforms included in the PCA proposal are projected in the H&amp;E analysis to reduce spending, relative to Obamacare, by nearly $240 billion over the period 2017 to 2023.</p>
<p>Conclusion</p>
<p>The introduction and analysis of the Patient CARE Act proposal is an important development in the health reform debate.&#160; The proposal provides a very clear alternative to Obamacare.&#160; It is a decentralized, less regulatory and more consumer-driven model than Obamacare, and the H&amp;E analysis clearly shows it has the potential to cover millions of Americans with insurance at far less cost than Obamacare.&#160; That is likely to be an appealing selling point to millions of people who remain uneasy about what was passed in 2010.&#160; The introduction of the PCA as a credible alternative plan might also mean that the next round of health reform legislation, probably unavoidable at some point given Obamacare’s shortcomings and continued political turbulence over the issue, will be far less one-sided than the last round.</p>
<p>Note 1.&#160; The PCA blueprint described the upper limit on the tax preference as being set at 65 percent of an average plan.&#160; In subsequent conversations, it was made clear that the intent was to describe how the tax limitation was estimated in the H&amp;E analysis.&#160; The H&amp;E analysis used 65 percent of a typical, higher cost insurance plan.</p>
<p>Note 2.&#160; The tax revenue that would be collected as a result of placing a limit on the tax preference for employer-provided coverage is reported by the H&amp;E in a table labeled “Spending Projections Under the CARE Act.”&#160; That table shows gross spending and revenue flows resulting from the enrollment-related provisions of the PCA without netting out the budget impact of repealing Obamacare.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.&#160;</p>
<p>Joseph Antos is the Wilson H. Taylor Scholar in Health Care and Retirement Policy at the American Enterprise Institute.&#160;</p> | false | 1 | republican senators richard burr tom coburn orrin hatch recently released160 blueprint160for repealing replacing obamacare called patient choice affordability responsibility empowerment act patient care act pca160 plan getting significant attention supporters critics alike including160 editorial page the160new york times sides recognize serious effort address problems us health care manner strikingly different obamacare160 debate merits perceived drawbacks pca proposal given impetus an160 assessment coverage cost implications160from center health economy hampe new think tank headed former congressional budget office director doug holtzeakin and160 board including several academics including uwe reinhardt princeton university devoted providing independent analytical assessments major public policy initiatives short post describe major provisions pca understand descriptive material conversations authors staffs160 also offer views think budgetary coverage implications pca proposal context estimates produced hampe major provisions patient care act pca repeal obamacare160 starting point pca repeal obamacare entirety exception laws medicare provisions 160we take retention medicare provisions obamacare endorsement authors160 would inconsistent public record160 instance senator coburn proposed sweeping reforms medicare differ substantially obamacare medicare provisions160 retention obamacare medicare provisions would seem instead acknowledgement difficult enough politically enact sensible reform insurance market age65 population without also pass legislation comprehensive reform medicare160 reworking medicare badly needed course addressed separate legislative track obamacare replacement plan repealing obamacare rather trying fix law pca presents clear alternative key elements marketbased health reform160 event obamacare lengthy interconnected address coherently series oneoff amendments160 cleared slate authors pca provide internally consistent reform avoids heavy emphasis mandates federal regulatory control permeates obamacare continuous coverage protection insurance rules160 pca would address question preexisting health conditions different manner obamacare160 persons stayed continuously insured would allowed move insurance coverage platforms without health status factoring premiums must pay coverage160 1996 health insurance portability accountability act hipaa smoothed transition employer group plans americans preexisting conditions included provisions aimed easing transition group coverage stateregulated individual market plans160 provisions addressing grouptoindividual market transitions left large gaps many people still fall pca would fill gaps require stateregulated insurance plans offer coverage continuously insured guarantee renewal160 continuous coverage requirement need burdensome160 satisfied purchase lowcost catastrophic coverage well comprehensive insurance plans enactment would onetime open enrollment period persons previously insured could opt coverage without facing higher premiums based health conditions160 states would allowed authorize risk rating premiums maintain continuous coverage following initial enrollment period general pca include federal benefit mandates160 benefit regulation would left states160 however pca would establish presumption insurers allow dependents age 26 enroll parents coverage though states could override rule regulations160 pca would also establish ban lifetime limits coverage states could choose write alternative regulations issue well finally pca would establish upper limit age rating 51 meaning insurers could charge oldest enrollees five times premiums assessed youngest enrollees160 however states could choose establish agerating limitations differ general federal rule broadening insurance coverage enrollment160160the pca would establish incometested refundable tax credits persons incomes 300 percent federal poverty limit fpl either work small employers defined 100 fewer workers access employersponsored insurance160 maximum credit amounts would available persons incomes 200 percent federal poverty line fpl160 credits would phased higher incomes individuals incomes 300 percent fpl would eligible tax credit160 credits would also adjusted three age categories 18 34 35 49 50 64 individual versus family insurance coverage higher subsidies older persons families160 credits could used enroll health insurance sponsored small employer purchase coverage offered individual insurance market states would also allowed establish default insurance option160 persons eligible tax credit insurance fail choose insurance plan could enrolled default plan offered private insurers160 plans would establish premiums equal credit amounts adjusting deductibles individuals would owe additional premiums coverage combination continuous coverage protection refundable tax credits lower moderate income households default insurance option dramatically expand insurance coverage united states cost discipline employersponsored insurance160160the pca seek disrupt alter employersponsored insurance market160 firms would allowed sponsor health insurance plans employees without new benefit requirements burdensome federal regulations general rule payment premiums employers workers would continue treated taxfree compensation workers160 retention large tax preference ensure continuation employersponsored plans without change pca seek ensure additional cost discipline jobbased insurance placing upper limit relatively high level tax preference employerpaid premiums160 limit would replace obamacares cadillac tax imposes 40 percent excise tax value health plans exceeding 10200 individual coverage 27500 family coverage160 although levied insurers cadillac tax would paid individuals families higher insurance premiums purposes creating cost estimate pca proposal hampe analysis plan assumed upper limit would placed roughly 65 percent high cost coverage see160note 1 160 2013 terms would mean cap 5400 individual coverage 11250 family coverage160 upper limit levels would indexed consumer price index cpi plus one percentage point every subsequent year160 premiums payments employer upper limit levels would count taxable income worker income payroll tax purposes scores economic analyses years shown presence openended tax preference employerpaid premiums primary reason excessive cost inflation health system160 placing upper limit tax preference senators sponsoring pca seek inject much cost discipline system retaining extensive jobbased insurance coverage160 employers workers today expensive insurance arrangements likely respond new incentives upper limit adjusting plans lower premiums medicaid reform160160the pca would restructure medicaid number important ways160 first medicaid participants would allowed opt federal tax credit lieu enrolling medicaid insurance160 states would given flexible funding called health grants design run health insurance program nonelderly nondisable participants program160 one approach pca authors clearly envision states could take would use flexible funding supplement federal tax credits160 would allow medicaid participants use combined resources purchase coverage best suits needs first year health grants would set based historical spending covered acutecare population160 future years grants would grow cpi plus one percentage point changes low income population state160 longterm care services supports would funded separate fixed grant states acutecare insurance needs elderly disabled would continue addressed current medicaid program structure including current federalstate matching rates rules addition reforms authorization testing health opportunity accounts within medicaid originally enacted 2005 would extended provisions160 beyond core reforms insurance regulations tax treatment health insurance medicaid pca would also make additional changes elements health system pca would seek reduce costs defensive medicine examining creative options avoiding costly lawsuits160 heavy emphasis would placed incentivizing states experiment pursue promising reforms administrative tribunals health courts prenegotiated injury compensation systems pca would also leverage existing programs push provider medical services transparent clear pricing consumers finally health savings accounts hsas would promoted removing restrictions enacted obamacare removing current law barriers keep certain excluded population hsas160 addition pca would allow flexible use hsa funds spousal coordination within hsa estimating pca center health economy used microsimulation model estimate coverage cost implications pca160 160the hampe estimates pca would reduce ranks uninsured level comparable occur obamacare160 2023 would approximately 1 percent insured americans pca obamacare according hampe many people enrolled individual insurance market comparable reduction medicaid population hampe estimates coverage expansion would occur far less federal spending obamacare160 according hampe pca would reduce federal deficit nearly 15 trillion next decade largely imposing upper limit tax preference employerprovided coverage160 provision would generate substantial new revenue 226 billion 2023 alone seenote 2 controversy arisen meaning estimates160160 critics160argue proposal creates big tax hike millions american households capping tax preference employerpaid health premiums160 based misinterpretation proposal hampe analysis first cap tax preference restrictive believe160 the160 summary160of pca gives impression workers would taxed employers contributions health insurance premiums exceed 65 percent average plans cost160 as160 later clarified actual policy limits tax preference 65 percent cost expensive highoption insurance plan160 means employer plans would160 fall well cap smaller percentage workers enrolled plans would exceed capped amount second hampe analysis include effects tax reductions included pca160 hampe budget impact table shows increase tax revenue 1057 trillion corresponding reduction federal budget deficit labeled net budget effect 1473 trillion160 estimates overstate tax increase deficit reduction would result considering provisions pca unlike typical cost estimate congressional budget office cbo hampe exercise focused parts pca affect health insurance choices persons age 65160 includes replacing obamacare exchange structure along subsidies taxes medicaid provisions pca reforms160 estimate budget impact full proposal would repeal entirety obamacare tax hikes including medicare payroll tax increases taxes devices drugs insurers160 none tax cuts factored hampe budgetary tables approximate net budget impact pca using cbos recent complete160 budget estimate160of obamacare repealing medicare payroll tax hike taxes devices drugs insurers would reduce revenue 533 billion period 2014 2022 extending tax cut one additional year would bring tax cut provisions 613 billion tax cut factored hampe assessment net tax increase overall reduction federal deficit reduced substantially160 balance taxes increase 444 billion deficits decline 860 billion next decade even estimates overstate intended tax consequences pca160 clear discussions offices senators wrote pca proposal 160adjust proposed upper limit taxpreferred employer premium payments necessary ensure overall proposal taxneutral160 based hampe model believe substantial room even considering additional tax cuts raise upper limit levels well 65 percent highcost coverage achieve goals pca authors course tradeoff cost discipline political resistance setting upper limit tax preference160 lower limit effective would encouraging costsaving adjustments health coverage also likely would encounter significant political opposition160 might desirable set goal achieving revenue neutrality longer period ten years rather yearbyyear basis160 approach would allow easing upper limit relatively high level initial years allowing become constraining future years raising index lags behind health care cost inflation revenueneutral pca proposal using obamacare current law baseline would still substantially reduce federal budget deficit medicaid reforms medical malpractice reforms included pca proposal projected hampe analysis reduce spending relative obamacare nearly 240 billion period 2017 2023 conclusion introduction analysis patient care act proposal important development health reform debate160 proposal provides clear alternative obamacare160 decentralized less regulatory consumerdriven model obamacare hampe analysis clearly shows potential cover millions americans insurance far less cost obamacare160 likely appealing selling point millions people remain uneasy passed 2010160 introduction pca credible alternative plan might also mean next round health reform legislation probably unavoidable point given obamacares shortcomings continued political turbulence issue far less onesided last round note 1160 pca blueprint described upper limit tax preference set 65 percent average plan160 subsequent conversations made clear intent describe tax limitation estimated hampe analysis160 hampe analysis used 65 percent typical higher cost insurance plan note 2160 tax revenue would collected result placing limit tax preference employerprovided coverage reported hampe table labeled spending projections care act160 table shows gross spending revenue flows resulting enrollmentrelated provisions pca without netting budget impact repealing obamacare james c capretta senior fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow american enterprise institute160 joseph antos wilson h taylor scholar health care retirement policy american enterprise institute160 | 1,719 |
<p>A clever headline to the New York Times review of Charlie’s Angels read “Sleek, Tough, Frosted? Must Be Empowerment.” The irony is meant to be a gentle one, as is that of the film itself, which in true postmodern style tries to make a virtue out the patent preposterousness of the kick-fighting, acrobatic babes of the 1970s TV series, now doing their obligatory turn on the big screen with (of course) new personnel—Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz and Lucy Liu. But you would think that feminists would be troubled. Female “empowerment” made into a joke in this fashion is really a confirmation of female disempowerment, isn’t it? You can’t make it look real, so instead you revel in its unreality, making it as much like kandy-kolored TV-reality as possible and hoping that everyone will “get” it. Indeed, it marks you out as a long-headed sophisticate if you can appreciate such clever ironic humor.</p>
<p>The trouble is that it is way too cheap an avenue to sophistication. Anyone can get it, even the dimmest of the pubescent girls to which the CA concept—where it is not merely a T-A concept for the equally dim boys—has always chiefly appealed. In fact, their knowledge that the Angels myth is related to feminist ideology and its influence on one of the cheesier chapters of TV history is almost a corollary of their knowledge that it is not related to reality. Pretending that the girls are just like the guys is so much a part of what young people today spend their time doing—at school and in their social lives as well as when they consume popular entertainment—that making fun of the pretense in an affectionate sort of way could be taken as the means by which they mute the cognitive dissonance that it must inevitably set up in them.</p>
<p>That is as near as I can come to an explanation of why such a spectacularly awful movie is so spectacularly popular. Its awfulness, though not productive of anything like so much unintended mirth as the best awful movies, seems to me to be not only its point but a point worth making quite emphatically in the view of those who are going back to see it again and again. Presumably it is comforting, even (dare we say it?) empowering, to be reminded so insistently that it is the action-hero stuff—the girls’ effortless, acrobatic kick-fighting with and vanquishing of large and heavily armed men—which is the fantastical part of their lives and the typical-girl stuff which is the real part.</p>
<p>Thus at one point in the film the bad-girl played by Kelly Lynch (there is a bad-guy as well, but he is chiefly bad for enticing Miss Barrymore into bed with a hurt little-boy act and then announcing with a Snidely Whiplash crow of triumph and a gun in his hand that “I don’t think it’s going to work out between you and me” ) sends a couple of her plug-uglies to beat up Miss Diaz. When, instead, Miss Diaz beats them up, Miss Lynch, looking fantastic enough to be a (fallen) angel herself, sighs with exasperation: “Never send a man to do a woman’s job.” When she arrives with mayhem in her heart to find Miss Diaz’s character chatting happily on her cell phone to a new boyfriend (who of course has no clue as to this superbabe’s superpowers), she breaks the phone, terminating the conversation and so inspiring her opponent to new heights of pugilistic skill. Sitting astride her victim after yet another victorious tussle, the latter cries: “Do you know how hard it is to find a quality man in Los Angeles?”</p>
<p>Now there’s a new-womanly sentiment that young girls can understand.</p>
<p>But you would think that feminists would be troubled. Female “empowerment” made into a joke in this fashion is really a confirmation of female disempowerment, isn’t it? You can’t make it look real, so instead you revel in its unreality, making it as much like kandy-kolored TV-reality as possible and hoping that everyone will “get” it. Indeed, it marks you out as a long-headed sophisticate if you can appreciate such clever ironic humor.</p>
<p>The trouble is that it is way too cheap an avenue to sophistication. Anyone can get it, even the dimmest of the pubescent girls to which the CA concept—where it is not merely a T-A concept for the equally dim boys—has always chiefly appealed. In fact, their knowledge that the Angels myth is related to feminist ideology and its influence on one of the cheesier chapters of TV history is almost a corollary of their knowledge that it is not related to reality. Pretending that the girls are just like the guys is so much a part of what young people today spend their time doing—at school and in their social lives as well as when they consume popular entertainment—that making fun of the pretense in an affectionate sort of way could be taken as the means by which they mute the cognitive dissonance that it must inevitably set up in them.</p>
<p>That is as near as I can come to an explanation of why such a spectacularly awful movie is so spectacularly popular. Its awfulness, though not productive of anything like so much unintended mirth as the best awful movies, seems to me to be not only its point but a point worth making quite emphatically in the view of those who are going back to see it again and again. Presumably it is comforting, even (dare we say it?) empowering, to be reminded so insistently that it is the action-hero stuff—the girls’ effortless, acrobatic kick-fighting with and vanquishing of large and heavily armed men—which is the fantastical part of their lives and the typical-girl stuff which is the real part.</p>
<p>Thus at one point in the film the bad-girl played by Kelly Lynch (there is a bad-guy as well, but he is chiefly bad for enticing Miss Barrymore into bed with a hurt little-boy act and then announcing with a Snidely Whiplash crow of triumph and a gun in his hand that “I don’t think it’s going to work out between you and me” ) sends a couple of her plug-uglies to beat up Miss Diaz. When, instead, Miss Diaz beats them up, Miss Lynch, looking fantastic enough to be a (fallen) angel herself, sighs with exasperation: “Never send a man to do a woman’s job.” When she arrives with mayhem in her heart to find Miss Diaz’s character chatting happily on her cell phone to a new boyfriend (who of course has no clue as to this superbabe’s superpowers), she breaks the phone, terminating the conversation and so inspiring her opponent to new heights of pugilistic skill. Sitting astride her victim after yet another victorious tussle, the latter cries: “Do you know how hard it is to find a quality man in Los Angeles?”</p>
<p>Now there’s a new-womanly sentiment that young girls can understand.</p> | false | 1 | clever headline new york times review charlies angels read sleek tough frosted must empowerment irony meant gentle one film true postmodern style tries make virtue patent preposterousness kickfighting acrobatic babes 1970s tv series obligatory turn big screen course new personneldrew barrymore cameron diaz lucy liu would think feminists would troubled female empowerment made joke fashion really confirmation female disempowerment isnt cant make look real instead revel unreality making much like kandykolored tvreality possible hoping everyone get indeed marks longheaded sophisticate appreciate clever ironic humor trouble way cheap avenue sophistication anyone get even dimmest pubescent girls ca conceptwhere merely ta concept equally dim boyshas always chiefly appealed fact knowledge angels myth related feminist ideology influence one cheesier chapters tv history almost corollary knowledge related reality pretending girls like guys much part young people today spend time doingat school social lives well consume popular entertainmentthat making fun pretense affectionate sort way could taken means mute cognitive dissonance must inevitably set near come explanation spectacularly awful movie spectacularly popular awfulness though productive anything like much unintended mirth best awful movies seems point point worth making quite emphatically view going back see presumably comforting even dare say empowering reminded insistently actionhero stuffthe girls effortless acrobatic kickfighting vanquishing large heavily armed menwhich fantastical part lives typicalgirl stuff real part thus one point film badgirl played kelly lynch badguy well chiefly bad enticing miss barrymore bed hurt littleboy act announcing snidely whiplash crow triumph gun hand dont think going work sends couple pluguglies beat miss diaz instead miss diaz beats miss lynch looking fantastic enough fallen angel sighs exasperation never send man womans job arrives mayhem heart find miss diazs character chatting happily cell phone new boyfriend course clue superbabes superpowers breaks phone terminating conversation inspiring opponent new heights pugilistic skill sitting astride victim yet another victorious tussle latter cries know hard find quality man los angeles theres newwomanly sentiment young girls understand would think feminists would troubled female empowerment made joke fashion really confirmation female disempowerment isnt cant make look real instead revel unreality making much like kandykolored tvreality possible hoping everyone get indeed marks longheaded sophisticate appreciate clever ironic humor trouble way cheap avenue sophistication anyone get even dimmest pubescent girls ca conceptwhere merely ta concept equally dim boyshas always chiefly appealed fact knowledge angels myth related feminist ideology influence one cheesier chapters tv history almost corollary knowledge related reality pretending girls like guys much part young people today spend time doingat school social lives well consume popular entertainmentthat making fun pretense affectionate sort way could taken means mute cognitive dissonance must inevitably set near come explanation spectacularly awful movie spectacularly popular awfulness though productive anything like much unintended mirth best awful movies seems point point worth making quite emphatically view going back see presumably comforting even dare say empowering reminded insistently actionhero stuffthe girls effortless acrobatic kickfighting vanquishing large heavily armed menwhich fantastical part lives typicalgirl stuff real part thus one point film badgirl played kelly lynch badguy well chiefly bad enticing miss barrymore bed hurt littleboy act announcing snidely whiplash crow triumph gun hand dont think going work sends couple pluguglies beat miss diaz instead miss diaz beats miss lynch looking fantastic enough fallen angel sighs exasperation never send man womans job arrives mayhem heart find miss diazs character chatting happily cell phone new boyfriend course clue superbabes superpowers breaks phone terminating conversation inspiring opponent new heights pugilistic skill sitting astride victim yet another victorious tussle latter cries know hard find quality man los angeles theres newwomanly sentiment young girls understand | 589 |
<p>By Dave McNary</p>
<p>LOS ANGELES (Variety.com) – Warner Bros.-DC’s costly “Justice League” has dominated the North American box office but fallen well short of expectations with a $96 million opening weekend at 4,051 locations.</p>
<p>It’s a decidedly gloomy result for the tentpole, which had been forecast by the studio just prior to the weekend to open in the $110 million range. Instead, “Justice League” is launching with only the eighth largest opening of 2017. It’s not even in the top 50 domestic openings of all time, ranking 53rd behind “Fast and Furious 6.”</p>
<p>“For every macro budget superhero movie the stakes are incredibly high and with that comes an enormous pressure to exceed all expectations and for DC, this has never been more true,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst with comScore. “In the wake of the much-needed home run that was ‘Wonder Woman,’ the momentum was with the brand and great expectations placed on the very broad shoulders of ‘Justice League’ to keep that train moving.”</p>
<p>Dergarabedian noted that the movie will gross $285 million worldwide this weekend and that initial reception among audiences is positive. The overall CinemaScore was B+ with males comprising 58% of the audience while females gave the movie an A-, as did moviegoers under 25.</p>
<p>“With the rightfully heightened expectations for a movie of this magnitude comes a greater scrutiny of both the quality of the movie as determined by critics and of course the profitability of the film, but the ultimate arbiter are moviegoers who seem to have found the concept and the event nature of the film enough to get them out to the movie theater even if the overall North American opening weekend number may be less than many expected,” Dergarabedian said.</p>
<p>Jeff Goldstein, Warner Bros. domestic distribution president, said there were several positive signs such as a 28% hike in business from Friday to Saturday and the start of Thanksgiving vacations this week.</p>
<p>“The movie is on a path different from what we were hoping but we’re optimistic going into the Thanksgiving holiday,” he added. “There will be 35% of schoolchildren out of school on Monday and Tuesday and 75% out on Wednesday.”</p>
<p>“Justice League” had been on track for an opening weekend of $110 million since late October. Stakes are particularly high for Warner Bros., which hasn’t revealed the cost of “Justice League” — estimated to be as much as $300 million. The movie is the fifth installment of its DC Extended Universe, aimed at duplicating the success of Disney-Marvel’s interconnected franchises. And it’s by far the lowest launch, trailing “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” ($166 million); “Suicide Squad” ($133 million); “Man of Steel” ($116 million); and “Wonder Woman” ($103 million).</p>
<p>The six films that have cracked the $100 million opening mark this year are Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast” at $174.8 million, Disney-Marvel’s “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” at $146.5 million, Warner-New Line’s “It” at $123.4 million, Disney-Marvel’s “Thor: Ragnarok” at $122.7 million, Sony-Marvel’s “Spider-Man: Homecoming” at $117 million, and Warner-DC’s “Wonder Woman” at $103.3 million. Universal’s “Fate of the Furious” took in $98.8 million in April for the seventh-best launch of 2017.</p>
<p>Gal Gadot stars as Wonder Woman along with Ben Affleck as Batman, Henry Cavill as Superman, Jason Momoa as Aquaman, Ezra Miller as the Flash, and Ray Fisher as Cyborg. Amy Adams, Amber Heard, Jeremy Irons, J.K. Simmons, and Willem Dafoe also appear. Zack Snyder began shooting “Justice League” in April of 2016, from a script by Chris Terrio. Joss Whedon — director of Disney-Marvel’s two “Avengers” movies — assumed directing duties following the tragic suicide of Snyder’s daughter in March.</p>
<p>Reviewers have not been impressed with “Justice League,” which carries a 40% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Its opening comes two weeks after Disney-Marvel’s “Thor: Ragnarok” debuted above forecasts with a $122.7 million opening weekend in what was the fourth-biggest launch of the year.</p>
<p>Lionsgate’s family drama “Wonder” provided positive news for the weekend, opening far above expectations with $27 million at 3,096 sites — three times the level prior to the weekend. “Wonder,” starring Jacob Tremblay as a fifth grader with a facial deformity, received an A+ CinemaScore with an audience that was 68% female and 66% over 25. Julia Roberts and Owen Wilson star as the parents.</p>
<p>Production companies include Mandeville Films, Walden Media, Participant Media and TIK Films. Critics have embraced “Wonder” with an 84% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.</p>
<p>Producer Todd Lieberman told Variety that “Wonder” outperformed estimates due to the strong underlying popularity of R.J. Palacio’s 2012 novel and impressive participation by school groups. “The book has sold over 8 million copies and so many kids are reading it,” he added.</p>
<p>Producer Todd Lieberman credited Lionsgate with making an astute counterprogramming scheduling move and added, ” The timing was great because people really want a feel-good movie.”</p>
<p>“Thor: Ragnarok” followed in third with $21.8 million at 4,080 venues for a 17-day domestic total of $247.4 million. Paramount’s second weekend of “Daddy’s Home 2” finished fourth with $14.8 million at 3,575 sites, followed by Fox’s second weekend of “Murder on the Orient Express” with $13.8 million at 3,354 locations.</p>
<p>Sony’s opening of its faith-based animated drama “The Star” came in above expectations in sixth place with $10 million at 2,837 sites. The film — which tells the Nativity story through the eyes of talking animals — is co-financed by Walden Media and received an A CinemaScore.</p>
<p>STXfilms’ third weekend of “A Bad Moms Christmas” followed in seventh with $6.9 million at 2,948 locations to push its 19-day domestic total to more than $50 million. The original “Bad Moms” grossed $113 million last year.</p>
<p>A24’s third weekend of Saoirse Ronan’s comedy-drama “Lady Bird” moved up from 10th to eighth place with $2.5 million at 253 sites as the distributor added 201 locations. A24 plans to further expand the coming-of-age movie, which marks Greta Gerwig’s feature directorial debut, over the Thanksgiving holiday.</p>
<p>Fox Searchlight’s second weekend of “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri” cracked the top 10 with $1.1 million at 53 venues following its stellar limited launch last weekend.</p>
<p>Overall business topped $200 million for the weekend — a robust 27.8% gain over the same weekend a year ago. The year-to-date deficit dropped from 5% to 4.3% in one week with the current 2017 total at 9.39 billion, according to comScore.</p> | false | 1 | dave mcnary los angeles varietycom warner brosdcs costly justice league dominated north american box office fallen well short expectations 96 million opening weekend 4051 locations decidedly gloomy result tentpole forecast studio prior weekend open 110 million range instead justice league launching eighth largest opening 2017 even top 50 domestic openings time ranking 53rd behind fast furious 6 every macro budget superhero movie stakes incredibly high comes enormous pressure exceed expectations dc never true said paul dergarabedian senior media analyst comscore wake muchneeded home run wonder woman momentum brand great expectations placed broad shoulders justice league keep train moving dergarabedian noted movie gross 285 million worldwide weekend initial reception among audiences positive overall cinemascore b males comprising 58 audience females gave movie moviegoers 25 rightfully heightened expectations movie magnitude comes greater scrutiny quality movie determined critics course profitability film ultimate arbiter moviegoers seem found concept event nature film enough get movie theater even overall north american opening weekend number may less many expected dergarabedian said jeff goldstein warner bros domestic distribution president said several positive signs 28 hike business friday saturday start thanksgiving vacations week movie path different hoping optimistic going thanksgiving holiday added 35 schoolchildren school monday tuesday 75 wednesday justice league track opening weekend 110 million since late october stakes particularly high warner bros hasnt revealed cost justice league estimated much 300 million movie fifth installment dc extended universe aimed duplicating success disneymarvels interconnected franchises far lowest launch trailing batman v superman dawn justice 166 million suicide squad 133 million man steel 116 million wonder woman 103 million six films cracked 100 million opening mark year disneys beauty beast 1748 million disneymarvels guardians galaxy vol 2 1465 million warnernew lines 1234 million disneymarvels thor ragnarok 1227 million sonymarvels spiderman homecoming 117 million warnerdcs wonder woman 1033 million universals fate furious took 988 million april seventhbest launch 2017 gal gadot stars wonder woman along ben affleck batman henry cavill superman jason momoa aquaman ezra miller flash ray fisher cyborg amy adams amber heard jeremy irons jk simmons willem dafoe also appear zack snyder began shooting justice league april 2016 script chris terrio joss whedon director disneymarvels two avengers movies assumed directing duties following tragic suicide snyders daughter march reviewers impressed justice league carries 40 rating rotten tomatoes opening comes two weeks disneymarvels thor ragnarok debuted forecasts 1227 million opening weekend fourthbiggest launch year lionsgates family drama wonder provided positive news weekend opening far expectations 27 million 3096 sites three times level prior weekend wonder starring jacob tremblay fifth grader facial deformity received cinemascore audience 68 female 66 25 julia roberts owen wilson star parents production companies include mandeville films walden media participant media tik films critics embraced wonder 84 rating rotten tomatoes producer todd lieberman told variety wonder outperformed estimates due strong underlying popularity rj palacios 2012 novel impressive participation school groups book sold 8 million copies many kids reading added producer todd lieberman credited lionsgate making astute counterprogramming scheduling move added timing great people really want feelgood movie thor ragnarok followed third 218 million 4080 venues 17day domestic total 2474 million paramounts second weekend daddys home 2 finished fourth 148 million 3575 sites followed foxs second weekend murder orient express 138 million 3354 locations sonys opening faithbased animated drama star came expectations sixth place 10 million 2837 sites film tells nativity story eyes talking animals cofinanced walden media received cinemascore stxfilms third weekend bad moms christmas followed seventh 69 million 2948 locations push 19day domestic total 50 million original bad moms grossed 113 million last year a24s third weekend saoirse ronans comedydrama lady bird moved 10th eighth place 25 million 253 sites distributor added 201 locations a24 plans expand comingofage movie marks greta gerwigs feature directorial debut thanksgiving holiday fox searchlights second weekend three billboards outside ebbing missouri cracked top 10 11 million 53 venues following stellar limited launch last weekend overall business topped 200 million weekend robust 278 gain weekend year ago yeartodate deficit dropped 5 43 one week current 2017 total 939 billion according comscore | 668 |
<p>The Revolution Betrayed?</p>
<p>It seems that Marx got it a tad wrong when he saw the inexorable victory of communism over the self-destruction of capitalism. It seems, however, that Marxism itself contained the seeds of its own destruction and has served as part of a dialectical process – for capitalism.[1] This is because Marxism sprang from the same zeitgeist as capitalism: that of the 19th Century Manchester School of Economics. In fact, Marx conceded something of the type when he stated that he supported Free Trade as part of a dialectical process that would internationalize the productive processes and the proletariat.[2] As history has shown, including recent history and that which is continuing to unfold before our eyes, there has been a dialectical process at work, but the result has not been that of socialism as a transitional phase towards communism, but rather as a transitional phase towards capitalist globalization,[3] with the reanimation of the corpse of 19th Century English economics as the global economic model.[4]</p>
<p>As H G Wells observed when touring the young Soviet state at the time that Washington Vanderlip was over their getting a Far Eastern concession on behalf of a consortium of US big business:</p>
<p>Big business is by no means antipathetic to Communism. The larger big business grows the more it approximates to Collectivism. It is the upper road of the few instead of the lower road of the masses to Collectivism.[5]</p>
<p>From this dialectical viewpoint, Marxian revolution served to break down traditional states, based on religion, aristocracy, and a peasant economy; just as the Soros “color revolutions” serve the same purpose in our own times. Socialist revolutions seem to have been a means of radically and even violently imposing an industrial economic structure upon societies that are viewed as anachronistic by international capitalism.</p>
<p>Most of the former communist states have succumbed to international capitalism, with China serving as a model of what international capitalism would like to achieve on a world scale: centralized economics backed by draconian laws, police and guns; a definition that the Left has historically and dogmatically applied to define “fascism.”</p>
<p>As I have sought to show, even brave little Vietnam, having fought for sovereignty – whether one calls it “communism” or “nationalism” is not crucial – for literally centuries against colonial powers, including the China, France and the USA – has now apparently succumbed to international capital, and is as much part of the world economic system, and its foundation in usury, as any Western state.[6] As I have shown in that article, Vietnam has opened its economy up to world capitalism, and has embarked also on a course of debt-finance to the international banking system. This article poses the question as to whether Cuba is about to embark on the same course, and what the present strategy of international capitalism is for Cuba.</p>
<p>Cuba on the Capitalist Path?</p>
<p>It now seems that with a string of former “socialist’ states succumbing to the “market economy” one of the last remnants of the socialist dream – Cuba – is to go the same way. It seems plausible that the recent interview by Castro with Atlantic Monthly journalist Jeffrey Goldberg is a tentative move toward Cuba’s expression of intent to dismantle its sovereign economy, and to become a client state of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and transnational corporations.</p>
<p>It is of interest that the ostensible reason that Castro requested an interview with Goldberg was over the matter of Israel and the Cuban statesman’s joining the chorus of Western world leaders, Zionists and their allies to castigate Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “anti-Semitism” and “Holocaust denial.”[7] It is surely reasonable to suppose that Castro thought the best way to ingratiate himself to the USA in particular was to say something that would be pleasing to the Zionists and their American underlings. Likewise, to offer what amounts to an apology for his actions regarding the Cuban missile crisis amounts to knee-bending penitence before the altar of the Yankee Dollar. Castro could surely have indicated his intention for economic reform and for entering the world economic system like Vietnam has done, without such a dramatic act of groveling to Zion.</p>
<p>An article by Al Kamen in principal Establishment mouthpiece, The Washington Post, states that Castro’s comments to Goldberg that the socialist economic model “doesn’t even work for us anymore” in reaction to a question about the old policy of spreading the socialist revolution throughout Latin America, comes at a time when his brother Raul is trying to push through reforms in the face of opposition with the Communist Party. [8]</p>
<p>Kamen cites other sources as stating that what Raul is looking at is the China model. Significantly Kamen describes the China model succinctly as being: “Rampant capitalism in the economy, tight communist control of the government.” That is precisely the type of regime beloved by Rockefeller, et al; precisely the type of regime that I believe has always been intended as the end product of the capitalist dialectic.</p>
<p>Goldberg brought with him as his adviser to the interviewer his friend Julia Sweig, “a leading Latin American scholar”[9] at the Establishment think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).</p>
<p>The background of Ms Sweig is of interest. She is “Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies and Director for Latin America Studies” at the CFR. The Council’s policy of moving towards Cuba might be compared to the long-term, gradual policy the CFR pursued for the recognition of Mao’s China in the face of public opposition.[10] The recognition of China was also preceded by apparently minor events, such as the so-called “Ping Pong” diplomacy and gradually increasing cultural exchanges. Sweig wrote a CFR study on Cuba, drawing from Cuban archives including the personal archives of Castro, which seems to have been intended to throw a positive light on the revolution from a globalist Establishmentarian perspective, after years of declaring Cuba to be a world pariah.[11] It seems that now is the time for Cuba to come into the “world community” from the Cold, by mutual consent.</p>
<p>David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies</p>
<p>As one should expect, groundwork for a change in Cuba is being fostered by Rockefeller interests in a manner typical of the way the plutocrats work above and beyond the public posturing of politicians on the world stage. Despite the decades’ long economic sanctions on Cuba by US administrations for e.g., University of Havana’s Center for the Study of the Cuban Economy works in partnership with a Rockefeller body, the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies (DRCLAS) at Harvard, studying ways by which the Cuban economy can be restructured for integration into the world economy. A joint 2005 study was published by the Rockefeller Center and distributed by Harvard University Press. Entitled The Cuban Economy at the Start of the Twenty-First Century,[12] the Ford Foundation has assisted in the publication of a Spanish edition. Castro should have shut the whole business down from the start for the same reasons that some states have shut down the Soros subversive networks.</p>
<p>There are numerous ongoing programs initiated by the Rockefeller Centre under a special “Cuban Studies Program”[13] which, as is the practice of the globalist elite, proceeds ahead regardless of petty politics.</p>
<p />
<p /> | false | 1 | revolution betrayed seems marx got tad wrong saw inexorable victory communism selfdestruction capitalism seems however marxism contained seeds destruction served part dialectical process capitalism1 marxism sprang zeitgeist capitalism 19th century manchester school economics fact marx conceded something type stated supported free trade part dialectical process would internationalize productive processes proletariat2 history shown including recent history continuing unfold eyes dialectical process work result socialism transitional phase towards communism rather transitional phase towards capitalist globalization3 reanimation corpse 19th century english economics global economic model4 h g wells observed touring young soviet state time washington vanderlip getting far eastern concession behalf consortium us big business big business means antipathetic communism larger big business grows approximates collectivism upper road instead lower road masses collectivism5 dialectical viewpoint marxian revolution served break traditional states based religion aristocracy peasant economy soros color revolutions serve purpose times socialist revolutions seem means radically even violently imposing industrial economic structure upon societies viewed anachronistic international capitalism former communist states succumbed international capitalism china serving model international capitalism would like achieve world scale centralized economics backed draconian laws police guns definition left historically dogmatically applied define fascism sought show even brave little vietnam fought sovereignty whether one calls communism nationalism crucial literally centuries colonial powers including china france usa apparently succumbed international capital much part world economic system foundation usury western state6 shown article vietnam opened economy world capitalism embarked also course debtfinance international banking system article poses question whether cuba embark course present strategy international capitalism cuba cuba capitalist path seems string former socialist states succumbing market economy one last remnants socialist dream cuba go way seems plausible recent interview castro atlantic monthly journalist jeffrey goldberg tentative move toward cubas expression intent dismantle sovereign economy become client state international monetary fund world bank transnational corporations interest ostensible reason castro requested interview goldberg matter israel cuban statesmans joining chorus western world leaders zionists allies castigate iranian president mahmoud ahmadinejad antisemitism holocaust denial7 surely reasonable suppose castro thought best way ingratiate usa particular say something would pleasing zionists american underlings likewise offer amounts apology actions regarding cuban missile crisis amounts kneebending penitence altar yankee dollar castro could surely indicated intention economic reform entering world economic system like vietnam done without dramatic act groveling zion article al kamen principal establishment mouthpiece washington post states castros comments goldberg socialist economic model doesnt even work us anymore reaction question old policy spreading socialist revolution throughout latin america comes time brother raul trying push reforms face opposition communist party 8 kamen cites sources stating raul looking china model significantly kamen describes china model succinctly rampant capitalism economy tight communist control government precisely type regime beloved rockefeller et al precisely type regime believe always intended end product capitalist dialectic goldberg brought adviser interviewer friend julia sweig leading latin american scholar9 establishment think tank council foreign relations cfr background ms sweig interest nelson david rockefeller senior fellow latin america studies director latin america studies cfr councils policy moving towards cuba might compared longterm gradual policy cfr pursued recognition maos china face public opposition10 recognition china also preceded apparently minor events socalled ping pong diplomacy gradually increasing cultural exchanges sweig wrote cfr study cuba drawing cuban archives including personal archives castro seems intended throw positive light revolution globalist establishmentarian perspective years declaring cuba world pariah11 seems time cuba come world community cold mutual consent david rockefeller center latin american studies one expect groundwork change cuba fostered rockefeller interests manner typical way plutocrats work beyond public posturing politicians world stage despite decades long economic sanctions cuba us administrations eg university havanas center study cuban economy works partnership rockefeller body david rockefeller center latin american studies drclas harvard studying ways cuban economy restructured integration world economy joint 2005 study published rockefeller center distributed harvard university press entitled cuban economy start twentyfirst century12 ford foundation assisted publication spanish edition castro shut whole business start reasons states shut soros subversive networks numerous ongoing programs initiated rockefeller centre special cuban studies program13 practice globalist elite proceeds ahead regardless petty politics | 666 |
<p>By Chen Aizhu</p>
<p>YUTIAN, China (Reuters) – On a recent morning in Yutian, a dusty town bisected by the highway that connects Beijing to the sea, Su Meiquan strolled into a dealership packed with hulking trucks and prepared to drive off with a brand new rig.</p>
<p>After years of driving a diesel truck for a trucking company, he had decided to buy his own vehicle – a bright red rig fueled with liquefied , capable of hauling as much as 40 tonnes of loads like steel or slabs of marble.</p>
<p>Su hopes the LNG truck – less polluting and cheaper to operate than diesel ones – will be the cornerstone of his own business, plying the route to the western fringes of China.</p>
<p>“Everybody says gas is cleaner with nearly no emissions,” he said after signing a stack of paperwork in the dealer’s office. In front of him, photos of proud drivers posing in front of their own new LNG trucks had been taped to the wall.</p>
<p>Sales of large LNG trucks are expected to hit record levels in China this year as the government steps up an anti-pollution campaign that includes curbs on heavy-duty diesel vehicles.</p>
<p>LNG trucks account for about four percent of the more than six million heavy vehicles able to haul 40 to 49 tonnes of goods that are currently on China’s roads. The vast majority of the 43 billion tonnes of freight transported across China last year was by highway.</p>
<p>But demand for LNG trucks is soaring as companies and manufacturers shift to vehicles that run on the gas that Beijing sees as a key part of its war against smog.</p>
<p>Sales of LNG heavy trucks surged 540 percent to nearly 39,000 in the first seven months of the year, according to Cassie Liu, a truck analyst with the IHS Markit consultancy.</p>
<p>That was partly fueled by a ban this year on the use of diesel trucks to transport coal at northern ports in provinces like Hebei and Shandong, and in the city of Tianjin.</p>
<p>“We are seeing a blowout in LNG trucks this year, thanks to the government’s policy push,” said Mu Lei, marketing manager for China National Heavy Duty Truck Group [CNHTC.UL], known as Sinotruk, the country’s largest manufacturer of heavy-duty trucks.</p>
<p>The shift to gas trucks is helping fuel demand for LNG in China, as are other government measures aimed at clearing the air, especially in the north, which is shrouded in a hazardous coal-fueled smog for much of the winter.</p>
<p>One major project is piping gas to 1.4 million households across the north for heating this winter, shifting away from coal.</p>
<p>China, already the world’s No.3 LNG consumer, has seen imports jump 45 percent so far this year. [O/CHINA7]</p>
<p>Chinese companies like Jereh Group and ENN Energy Holding, which build LNG filling stations, and Zhangjiagang CIMC Sanctum Cryogenic Equipment Co., Ltd, which specialises in LNG tanks, are expected to benefit from the gas boom, analysts said.</p>
<p>OVERLOAD, PORTS</p>
<p>Government restrictions on cargo overloading last year, for safety reasons, has also driven truck sales as operators rushed to buy bigger trucks.</p>
<p>Next month, Beijing will also impose restrictions on thousands of northern factories using diesel trucks, forcing many to use more rail and others to consider gas-powered lorries.</p>
<p>Sales of new heavy-duty trucks, including diesel and LNG vehicles, jumped 75 percent in the January-August period to 768,214, according to industry website www.chinatruck.org.</p>
<p>It did not break down the numbers, but companies say that diesel growth is being dwarfed by that of the LNG trucks.</p>
<p>Last week, Sinotruk netted new orders for 1,371 heavy-duty trucks, 900 of which run on LNG, at an event bringing together coal transport companies from seven northern Chinese cities, Mu said. In the first half of this year, Sinotruk sold 5,200 LNG trucks, up 650 percent year on year.</p>
<p>“Gas trucks are both more environmentally friendly and more economic,” said Lai Wei, general manager of Tianjin Shengteng Transport Company, a privately-run trucking company.</p>
<p>Lai is tripling his LNG fleet to more than 100 by the end of this year, adding 65 new trucks made by Shaanxi Heavy Duty Automobile Co. Ltd [WCPOWA.UL], the country’s largest LNG vehicle producer.</p>
<p>He is also cutting back his diesel fleet to 30 from 50 previously because of the new emissions rules in Tianjin that come into effect this month.</p>
<p>Only vehicles meeting “National Five” emissions standards, similar to Euro V standards for trucks and buses in Europe, will be allowed to operate at the port.</p>
<p>Lai said he was also concerned that there might be further restrictions on diesel trucks in a few years.</p>
<p>CLEANER, CHEAPER</p>
<p>China, the world’s top energy guzzler, wants gas, which emits half the carbon dioxide as that of burning coal, to supply 15 percent of energy demand by 2030, up from 6 percent currently.</p>
<p>That effort stalled in 2014 as an oil price slump lifted demand for diesel. But as oil prices have risen in the past 20 months, rebounding to above $50, LNG sales, especially from Australia and the United States, have soared.[O/CHINA7]</p>
<p>Diesel costs between 10-30 percent more than gas on average currently at Chinese gas stations, according to truck companies.</p>
<p>For Su, the new truck owner in Yutian, about 140 kilometers to the east of Beijing, price is a major reason for making the switch from diesel.</p>
<p>He plans to hire two drivers to shuttle the 3,500 kilometers between Yutian and Urumqi, in the northwestern region of Xinjiang, to carry steel products west and coal or other goods on the way back.</p>
<p>“It really suits our journeys as the longer the trip, the more you save on fuel on an LNG truck,” he said. He is paying 390,000 yuan for a Sinotruk rig, about 60,000 yuan more than a diesel truck would have cost.</p>
<p>“On a return trip, we can save 3,000 yuan in fuel,” he added. “That means we’ll be able to recoup within a year the extra cost on the vehicle.”</p> | false | 1 | chen aizhu yutian china reuters recent morning yutian dusty town bisected highway connects beijing sea su meiquan strolled dealership packed hulking trucks prepared drive brand new rig years driving diesel truck trucking company decided buy vehicle bright red rig fueled liquefied capable hauling much 40 tonnes loads like steel slabs marble su hopes lng truck less polluting cheaper operate diesel ones cornerstone business plying route western fringes china everybody says gas cleaner nearly emissions said signing stack paperwork dealers office front photos proud drivers posing front new lng trucks taped wall sales large lng trucks expected hit record levels china year government steps antipollution campaign includes curbs heavyduty diesel vehicles lng trucks account four percent six million heavy vehicles able haul 40 49 tonnes goods currently chinas roads vast majority 43 billion tonnes freight transported across china last year highway demand lng trucks soaring companies manufacturers shift vehicles run gas beijing sees key part war smog sales lng heavy trucks surged 540 percent nearly 39000 first seven months year according cassie liu truck analyst ihs markit consultancy partly fueled ban year use diesel trucks transport coal northern ports provinces like hebei shandong city tianjin seeing blowout lng trucks year thanks governments policy push said mu lei marketing manager china national heavy duty truck group cnhtcul known sinotruk countrys largest manufacturer heavyduty trucks shift gas trucks helping fuel demand lng china government measures aimed clearing air especially north shrouded hazardous coalfueled smog much winter one major project piping gas 14 million households across north heating winter shifting away coal china already worlds no3 lng consumer seen imports jump 45 percent far year ochina7 chinese companies like jereh group enn energy holding build lng filling stations zhangjiagang cimc sanctum cryogenic equipment co ltd specialises lng tanks expected benefit gas boom analysts said overload ports government restrictions cargo overloading last year safety reasons also driven truck sales operators rushed buy bigger trucks next month beijing also impose restrictions thousands northern factories using diesel trucks forcing many use rail others consider gaspowered lorries sales new heavyduty trucks including diesel lng vehicles jumped 75 percent januaryaugust period 768214 according industry website wwwchinatruckorg break numbers companies say diesel growth dwarfed lng trucks last week sinotruk netted new orders 1371 heavyduty trucks 900 run lng event bringing together coal transport companies seven northern chinese cities mu said first half year sinotruk sold 5200 lng trucks 650 percent year year gas trucks environmentally friendly economic said lai wei general manager tianjin shengteng transport company privatelyrun trucking company lai tripling lng fleet 100 end year adding 65 new trucks made shaanxi heavy duty automobile co ltd wcpowaul countrys largest lng vehicle producer also cutting back diesel fleet 30 50 previously new emissions rules tianjin come effect month vehicles meeting national five emissions standards similar euro v standards trucks buses europe allowed operate port lai said also concerned might restrictions diesel trucks years cleaner cheaper china worlds top energy guzzler wants gas emits half carbon dioxide burning coal supply 15 percent energy demand 2030 6 percent currently effort stalled 2014 oil price slump lifted demand diesel oil prices risen past 20 months rebounding 50 lng sales especially australia united states soaredochina7 diesel costs 1030 percent gas average currently chinese gas stations according truck companies su new truck owner yutian 140 kilometers east beijing price major reason making switch diesel plans hire two drivers shuttle 3500 kilometers yutian urumqi northwestern region xinjiang carry steel products west coal goods way back really suits journeys longer trip save fuel lng truck said paying 390000 yuan sinotruk rig 60000 yuan diesel truck would cost return trip save 3000 yuan fuel added means well able recoup within year extra cost vehicle | 616 |
<p>Norway has adopted a new term into its official lexicon, inspired by the one and only Donald Trump. The phrase “fake news” has now been formally recognized by the country’s Language Council, which cited its recent “explosion.”</p>
<p>“The word [phrase] is not completely new, but its use has exploded over the last year,” language researcher Ole Vage, a senior advisor to the Language Council of Norway told the NTB news outlet. He added the term was “the most used new word amongst this year’s (US presidential) candidates.”</p>
<p>“It is a word [phrase] that has set the agenda and was given a lot of attention during the 2016 US election, and that attention has continued,” language researcher Bente Karlsnes told broadcaster <a href="https://www.nrk.no/kultur/karet-til-arets-nyord-1.13811887" type="external">NRK</a>.</p>
<p>Trump propelled ‘fake news’ into the spotlight during his campaign, and as president, he continues to use it on a weekly, sometimes daily, basis. “Another false story, this time in the failing @nytimes, that I watch 4-8 hours of television a day – wrong! Also, I seldom, if ever, watch CNN or MSNBC, both of which I consider fake news…,” Trump tweeted Monday.</p>
<p>Another false story, this time in the Failing <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" type="external">@nytimes</a>, that I watch 4-8 hours of television a day – Wrong! Also, I seldom, if ever, watch CNN or MSNBC, both of which I consider Fake News. I never watch Don Lemon, who I once called the “dumbest man on television!” Bad Reporting.</p>
<p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/940223974985871360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" type="external">December 11, 2017</a></p>
<p>And before that, on Sunday, “Very little discussion of all the purposely false and defamatory stories put out this week by the fake news media.”</p>
<p>Very little discussion of all the purposely false and defamatory stories put out this week by the Fake News Media. They are out of control – correct reporting means nothing to them. Major lies written, then forced to be withdrawn after they are exposed…a stain on America!</p>
<p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/939967625362276354?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" type="external">December 10, 2017</a></p>
<p>The Language Council of Norway, in conjunction with Norwegian School of Economics professor, Gisle Andersen, identifies a new word or phrase to be recognized each year. It can be completely new, or a modern word which has made an impact on the year’s vocabulary. The process of selecting the word or phrase also involves data from major national and regional newspapers.</p>
<p>The adoption of the expression, “fake news,” hasn’t been accepted by everyone, though, including Kristoffer Egeberg, the head of <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/412792-norway-fake-news-trump/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=RSS" type="external">faktisk.no</a>, a site which aims to fact-check news and prevent the spread of fictional messages. “The expression has become very well known in a short period of time, but at the same time it has been broken and twisted by the American president. Donald Trump uses it about real news he does not like,” Egeberg said, as quoted by NRK.</p>
<p>Like it or not, Trump’s use of the phrase has undeniably made waves across the US and the rest of the world. It’s been turned into everyday vocabulary, and has become a running joke on Saturday Night Live. In February, the late-night comedy show famously featured a sketch of former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer – played by Melissa McCarthy – putting CNN in “jail” for misbehaving. “We’re not fake news!” the CNN journalist shouts from behind bars.</p>
<p>[embedded content]</p>
<p>But not all of Trump’s “fake news” assertions have been incorrect, particularly when it comes to CNN. The outlet reportedly apologized to Trump just days ago, over a debunked report which claimed the Trump campaign had secret advance access to hacked Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails from WikiLeaks. However, the network got the date of an email wrong, which was central to their story.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/412538-cnn-wikileaks-trump-report-dud/" type="external" /></p>
<p>“CNN apologized a little while ago,” Trump said during a Pensacola rally last Friday, adding that CNN “should’ve been apologizing for the last two years.” (RT LINK ) Three CNN journalists were also <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/394223-journalists-leave-cnn-retracted-story/" type="external">forced to resign</a> over the summer following the retraction of a story on an alleged Congress investigation into a “Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials.”</p>
<p>A Washington Post reporter also apologized to the president over the weekend after tweeting a photo of an empty venue ahead of a rally in Pensacola, Florida. “Packed to the rafters,” the caption said, referencing a previous tweet by Trump which said the “arena was packed to the rafters, the crowd was loud.” <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/412661-weigel-trump-tweet-washingtonpost-apology/)" type="external">The reporter apologized</a> on Twitter after Trump demanded he do so. The journalist admitted he “got it wrong,” but noted that the photo was on his personal account, not the Washington Post’s.</p>
<p>But of course, fake news wouldn’t be fake news if Russia and its alleged meddling claims are not woven into the fabric somehow. RT recently took the liberty of <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/412560-russia-meddling-fake-news/" type="external">compiling some of the worst offenders</a> when it comes to Kremlin-bashing. From CNN to ABC News, the list of guilty media outlets is anything but small.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/news/412560-russia-meddling-fake-news/" type="external" /></p>
<p>One rather unorthodox take on misreporting <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/412714-trust-cnn-mistakes-trump-frum/" type="external">has been voiced</a> by the editor of The Atlantic, who told CNN Monday, that factually inaccurate reports are simply a by-product of fighting Trump’s “system of lies,” and that such mistakes are “precisely the reason people should trust the media.”</p>
<p>As the struggle to determine what’s real and what’s not continue, the UK’s press regulator <a href="https://www.rt.com/uk/412008-fake-news-accuracy-ipso/" type="external">has developed a log</a> to fight fake news. Papers which are members of the watchdog can use it, despite the fact that many outlets have already been accused of spreading false news stories.</p> | false | 1 | norway adopted new term official lexicon inspired one donald trump phrase fake news formally recognized countrys language council cited recent explosion word phrase completely new use exploded last year language researcher ole vage senior advisor language council norway told ntb news outlet added term used new word amongst years us presidential candidates word phrase set agenda given lot attention 2016 us election attention continued language researcher bente karlsnes told broadcaster nrk trump propelled fake news spotlight campaign president continues use weekly sometimes daily basis another false story time failing nytimes watch 48 hours television day wrong also seldom ever watch cnn msnbc consider fake news trump tweeted monday another false story time failing nytimes watch 48 hours television day wrong also seldom ever watch cnn msnbc consider fake news never watch lemon called dumbest man television bad reporting donald j trump realdonaldtrump december 11 2017 sunday little discussion purposely false defamatory stories put week fake news media little discussion purposely false defamatory stories put week fake news media control correct reporting means nothing major lies written forced withdrawn exposeda stain america donald j trump realdonaldtrump december 10 2017 language council norway conjunction norwegian school economics professor gisle andersen identifies new word phrase recognized year completely new modern word made impact years vocabulary process selecting word phrase also involves data major national regional newspapers adoption expression fake news hasnt accepted everyone though including kristoffer egeberg head faktiskno site aims factcheck news prevent spread fictional messages expression become well known short period time time broken twisted american president donald trump uses real news like egeberg said quoted nrk like trumps use phrase undeniably made waves across us rest world turned everyday vocabulary become running joke saturday night live february latenight comedy show famously featured sketch former white house press secretary sean spicer played melissa mccarthy putting cnn jail misbehaving fake news cnn journalist shouts behind bars embedded content trumps fake news assertions incorrect particularly comes cnn outlet reportedly apologized trump days ago debunked report claimed trump campaign secret advance access hacked democratic national committee dnc emails wikileaks however network got date email wrong central story read cnn apologized little ago trump said pensacola rally last friday adding cnn shouldve apologizing last two years rt link three cnn journalists also forced resign summer following retraction story alleged congress investigation russian investment fund ties trump officials washington post reporter also apologized president weekend tweeting photo empty venue ahead rally pensacola florida packed rafters caption said referencing previous tweet trump said arena packed rafters crowd loud reporter apologized twitter trump demanded journalist admitted got wrong noted photo personal account washington posts course fake news wouldnt fake news russia alleged meddling claims woven fabric somehow rt recently took liberty compiling worst offenders comes kremlinbashing cnn abc news list guilty media outlets anything small read one rather unorthodox take misreporting voiced editor atlantic told cnn monday factually inaccurate reports simply byproduct fighting trumps system lies mistakes precisely reason people trust media struggle determine whats real whats continue uks press regulator developed log fight fake news papers members watchdog use despite fact many outlets already accused spreading false news stories | 522 |
<p>President Donald Trump’s unexpected decision to spurn his Republican allies in Congress by striking a short-term debt-limit deal with Democrats leaves the GOP reeling and lawmakers bracing for a bruising battle in December.</p>
<p>Trump’s move undercut GOP leaders in the House and Senate, as well as his own Treasury secretary, who had been arguing for a longer-term extension. It also left Republicans, who were blindsided by the deal, angry and disappointed with their own leaders and, to a lesser degree, Trump.</p>
<p>“Democrats got exactly what they wanted,” House Freedom Caucus head Mark Meadows said, adding that the deal “gives them the greatest leverage in the world to get exactly what they want later.”</p>
<p>During an Oval Office meeting Wednesday, Trump accepted a proposal by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and his House counterpart, Nancy Pelosi, to tie a three-month suspension of the debt limit to a Hurricane Harvey relief measure —&#160;and throw in a stopgap continuing resolution to fund the government into December.</p>
<p>The episode provided the latest illustration of the bind Republicans find themselves in. Even though they control the White House and both chambers of Congress, they’ve been unable to set aside their own differences to get much done. Instead, this latest deal may have simply handed Democrats the upper hand heading into a confrontational end-of-the-year negotiation.</p>
<p>The agreement sets up what could be a major fight in December over government funding that is expected to include Trump’s proposed border wall with Mexico and his decision to end a program that lets young undocumented immigrants stay in the U.S., as well as perhaps the debt ceiling.</p>
<p>House Speaker Paul Ryan, who was in the meeting with Trump, didn’t see it coming.&#160;Hours before Trump’s deal, he had told reporters that the Democratic proposal for a short-term debt limit deal would be “unworkable” and “ridiculous.”</p>
<p>By late Wednesday, Senate Republicans released a new version of a Harvey aid bill that included the debt ceiling extension and would fund the government through Dec. 8. It also would nearly double the total disaster funding to $15.25 billion from what the House passed earlier in the day. The additional funding would go toward the Community Development Block Grant program to address housing needs in disaster zones.</p>
<p>The actual fight over the debt limit could slip into 2018, since the Treasury Department can usually deploy so-called extraordinary measures to extend its ability to operate. The drop-dead date could come as early as February if tax refund outlays are “relatively high,” according to Jefferies economists Ward McCarthy and Thomas Simons.</p>
<p>Trump’s deal with Democrats did soothe the most immediate concerns in the short-term Treasury market, with rates on Treasury bills maturing around the previous late-September debt-limit deadline plunging. But they surged on securities coming due around mid-December, suggesting Wall Street sees more legislative strife ahead.</p>
<p>“All this really means is that while it’s unlikely the U.S. would ever default on Treasury bills, this move today just pushes this risk further out the curve,” said Jerome Schneider, head of the short-term and funding desk at Pacific Investment Management Co., which manages $1.6 trillion in assets.</p>
<p>The White House tried to sell the deal as a way to “clear the decks” for a tax overhaul, as Trump’s legislative director, Marc Short, put it to reporters.</p>
<p>Longer-term Treasuries also declined, suggesting investors saw better prospects that lawmakers will act on measures to spur economic growth.</p>
<p>“The market is pricing in less gridlock in Washington,” said Alex Li, head of rates strategy at Credit Agricole. “The market seems to be suggesting that the administration and congressional leaders are more open now to get something done in terms of the legislative agenda,” including addressing the nation’s tax system.</p>
<p>But conservatives were fuming over the deal, with one senior Republican aide saying that the deal undercut GOP leaders and bolstered the power of Democrats in Congress.</p>
<p>Asked about the compromise, Freedom Caucus member Ted Yoho of Florida said sarcastically, “It’s great to be in the majority.”</p>
<p>“The Pelosi-Schumer-Trump deal is bad,” Republican Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska said in a statement.</p>
<p>Trump himself might have agreed, at least back in 2013 when he was still considering a run for the White House. He wrote on Twitter then, “The worst negotiators in history (otherwise known as Republicans) have just offered to suspend debt ceiling for four months. Pathetic!”</p>
<p>Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell tried to put the best face on the deal while noting that Trump cut it with Democratic leaders.</p>
<p>“The president can speak for himself,” McConnell told reporters. “But his feeling was that we needed to come together, to not create a picture of divisiveness at a time of genuine national crisis.”</p>
<p>Congress is rushing to pass Hurricane Harvey relief funds by the end of the week because the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s disaster-relief fund is set to run out of money Friday as a more powerful storm, Hurricane Irma, bears down on Florida.</p>
<p>The House voted 419-3 on Wednesday to pass $7.85 billion to provide relief to tens of thousands of homeowners from flooding caused by Harvey in Texas and other parts of the Gulf Coast. The measure includes $7.4 billion in FEMA disaster funds and $450 million for the Small Business Administration. Additional FEMA funding is to be provided later, according to House aides.</p>
<p>Shortly after the vote, Trump and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin met with Republican and Democratic congressional leaders at the White House. McConnell, Ryan and Mnuchin pushed for adding a debt-limit extension of as long as 18 months to the Harvey bill, according to several people with knowledge of the discussion. A three-month debt-limit deal was the last thing Mnuchin wanted, an administration official said.</p>
<p>But Trump said he wanted a deal, and he accepted the Democrats’ offer of a three-month debt-limit measure, one person said. At that point, McConnell stepped in to say a short-term government spending bill should also be added.</p>
<p>Several leaders of conservative groups said they blamed Republican leaders, not Trump, for the deal to add the debt-limit and spending measures to the House bill. They said McConnell and Ryan hadn’t been able to push forward a conservative plan to raise the debt limit in a measure that cut spending.</p>
<p>“This is going to be very bad for our common goal of fundamental tax reform,” Adam Brandon, president of the conservative FreedomWorks group, told reporters in a conference call. “This deal is straight out of the swamp.”</p>
<p>“I’m a little taken aback by it,” said Representative Mark Walker, the North Carolina Republican who chairs the Republican Study Committee.&#160;“Usually you get a heads up” on a major policy decision.</p>
<p>Asked if this deal undercuts Republican leadership’s ability to negotiate with Democrats, Walker replied, “It does.”</p>
<p>Walker said he will present a letter to Ryan on Thursday with a list of policy suggestions that would get more Republicans to support a debt limit deal. It will contain 19 specific suggestions, he said.</p>
<p>Republicans appeared resigned to the notion that the combined measure would likely pass both chambers of Congress, carried by Democratic votes. But a number of Republicans said they would vote against it.</p>
<p>The attempt to tie the Harvey aid passed in the House to the debt limit “is a poison pill &amp; a disservice to those who are suffering,” Representative Richard Hudson of North Carolina tweeted. He said the Senate should pass the House measure without adding more provisions.</p>
<p>The deal still left out a few key priorities that Congress will have to address by the end of the month. Lawmakers still need to pass an authorization for the Federal Aviation Administration so that it can keep operating after Sept. 30. They also have to pass a renewal of the nation’s flood insurance program, a high priority in the wake of Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Irma.</p>
<p>Democrats, for their part, luxuriated in the unexpected win.</p>
<p>“Today was a good day in a generally very partisan town,” Schumer told reporters. “And let’s hope we can continue to work together for the good of Americans, for the good of the working families who so much need our help.”</p> | false | 1 | president donald trumps unexpected decision spurn republican allies congress striking shortterm debtlimit deal democrats leaves gop reeling lawmakers bracing bruising battle december trumps move undercut gop leaders house senate well treasury secretary arguing longerterm extension also left republicans blindsided deal angry disappointed leaders lesser degree trump democrats got exactly wanted house freedom caucus head mark meadows said adding deal gives greatest leverage world get exactly want later oval office meeting wednesday trump accepted proposal senate minority leader chuck schumer house counterpart nancy pelosi tie threemonth suspension debt limit hurricane harvey relief measure 160and throw stopgap continuing resolution fund government december episode provided latest illustration bind republicans find even though control white house chambers congress theyve unable set aside differences get much done instead latest deal may simply handed democrats upper hand heading confrontational endoftheyear negotiation agreement sets could major fight december government funding expected include trumps proposed border wall mexico decision end program lets young undocumented immigrants stay us well perhaps debt ceiling house speaker paul ryan meeting trump didnt see coming160hours trumps deal told reporters democratic proposal shortterm debt limit deal would unworkable ridiculous late wednesday senate republicans released new version harvey aid bill included debt ceiling extension would fund government dec 8 also would nearly double total disaster funding 1525 billion house passed earlier day additional funding would go toward community development block grant program address housing needs disaster zones actual fight debt limit could slip 2018 since treasury department usually deploy socalled extraordinary measures extend ability operate dropdead date could come early february tax refund outlays relatively high according jefferies economists ward mccarthy thomas simons trumps deal democrats soothe immediate concerns shortterm treasury market rates treasury bills maturing around previous lateseptember debtlimit deadline plunging surged securities coming due around middecember suggesting wall street sees legislative strife ahead really means unlikely us would ever default treasury bills move today pushes risk curve said jerome schneider head shortterm funding desk pacific investment management co manages 16 trillion assets white house tried sell deal way clear decks tax overhaul trumps legislative director marc short put reporters longerterm treasuries also declined suggesting investors saw better prospects lawmakers act measures spur economic growth market pricing less gridlock washington said alex li head rates strategy credit agricole market seems suggesting administration congressional leaders open get something done terms legislative agenda including addressing nations tax system conservatives fuming deal one senior republican aide saying deal undercut gop leaders bolstered power democrats congress asked compromise freedom caucus member ted yoho florida said sarcastically great majority pelosischumertrump deal bad republican senator ben sasse nebraska said statement trump might agreed least back 2013 still considering run white house wrote twitter worst negotiators history otherwise known republicans offered suspend debt ceiling four months pathetic senate majority leader mitch mcconnell tried put best face deal noting trump cut democratic leaders president speak mcconnell told reporters feeling needed come together create picture divisiveness time genuine national crisis congress rushing pass hurricane harvey relief funds end week federal emergency management agencys disasterrelief fund set run money friday powerful storm hurricane irma bears florida house voted 4193 wednesday pass 785 billion provide relief tens thousands homeowners flooding caused harvey texas parts gulf coast measure includes 74 billion fema disaster funds 450 million small business administration additional fema funding provided later according house aides shortly vote trump treasury secretary steven mnuchin met republican democratic congressional leaders white house mcconnell ryan mnuchin pushed adding debtlimit extension long 18 months harvey bill according several people knowledge discussion threemonth debtlimit deal last thing mnuchin wanted administration official said trump said wanted deal accepted democrats offer threemonth debtlimit measure one person said point mcconnell stepped say shortterm government spending bill also added several leaders conservative groups said blamed republican leaders trump deal add debtlimit spending measures house bill said mcconnell ryan hadnt able push forward conservative plan raise debt limit measure cut spending going bad common goal fundamental tax reform adam brandon president conservative freedomworks group told reporters conference call deal straight swamp im little taken aback said representative mark walker north carolina republican chairs republican study committee160usually get heads major policy decision asked deal undercuts republican leaderships ability negotiate democrats walker replied walker said present letter ryan thursday list policy suggestions would get republicans support debt limit deal contain 19 specific suggestions said republicans appeared resigned notion combined measure would likely pass chambers congress carried democratic votes number republicans said would vote attempt tie harvey aid passed house debt limit poison pill amp disservice suffering representative richard hudson north carolina tweeted said senate pass house measure without adding provisions deal still left key priorities congress address end month lawmakers still need pass authorization federal aviation administration keep operating sept 30 also pass renewal nations flood insurance program high priority wake hurricane harvey hurricane irma democrats part luxuriated unexpected win today good day generally partisan town schumer told reporters lets hope continue work together good americans good working families much need help | 825 |
<p>In the 1970s and early ’80s, New York City embodied the revolution taking place in American cinema. It was brash and brutal, crude and powerful, sexy and grimey, and had a swagger that was unmistakable.</p>
<p>It was also a low point for the city. The Bronx was burning, crime was rising and city hall was broke. But even as respectable folks fled for the safety of the suburbs, New York became a canvas for talented filmmakers. From “The French Connection” to “Saturday Night Fever,” it posed as the setting of classic films that ushered in a new era of on-screen realism. It was the age of De Niro and Pacino, Scorsese and Lumet, talents who upended the sterile and factory-like approach to making movies that dominated the studio system.</p>
<p>It’s a revolution in filmmaking that’s over. Just as Times Square, the setting of “Taxi Driver,” has been replaced by a fantasyland for tourists, movies have had their harder edges sanded off. Instead of psychotic cabbies or law-bending cops, we get superheroes and battling robots.</p>
<p>To memorialize that period of artistic achievement, Variety spoke with six filmmakers behind the very best of New York cinema.</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/tag/william-friedkin/" type="external">William Friedkin</a>The French Connection (pictured above)The 1971 thriller centered on a driven police detective (Gene Hackman) who will stop at nothing to bust a drug syndicate. Oft-imitated, particularly for its set-piece car chase, but never equaled, the film snagged five Oscars, including Best Picture.</p>
<p>“I made ‘The French Connection’ so it looked like a documentary. It looked as though the camera just happened upon these events. I would do things like when staging a scene, I wouldn’t show it to the camera operator. He would have to search for the action as a documentary camera man does.</p>
<p>I did months of research. I went around every day for full shifts. I went to all the areas in Bedford Stuyvesant and Harlem, the 28th precinct. I saw all the aspects of the life that the cops we’re dealing with. There were black cops as well as white cops, and they all had the same basic attitude towards minorities. That’s what I reflected in ‘The French Connection.’ What I beheld is what I showed. When I hired Roy Scheider and Gene Hackman I sent them out for a month before they played cops in the film. They brought a lot of their own dialogue to their parts.</p>
<p>The police don’t operate the way they did in the ’70s. They were the princes of the city. They held court in the streets. If you did what they did today, you’d be prosecuted.</p>
<p>The seventies was a time in American cinema when there were more original films, even the genre films were unique and memorable. We were able to make the films we were interested in and loved. That time has changed because the audience has changed. I don’t believe it’s cyclical. This is the way it is now. I think what is coming is a further diminishment of people going to theaters.”</p>
<p />
<p>CREDIT: Gadd Prods./Kobal/REX/Shuttersto</p>
<p>Jerry SchatzbergThe Panic in Needle ParkThe 1971 drama about heroin addicts in love introduced Al Pacino to moviegoers and stunned critics with its unflinching portrayal of drug abuse.“The studio didn’t want Pacino because they said he was too old. We went through the charade of casting, and at the end we said it’s got to be Pacino. I read a lot of New York actors. The last one to come in to read for me was De Niro, and he was pretty good. One afternoon I’m on Third Avenue and looking into an Army Navy store, and I hear a voice in back of me saying, ‘hey man, I really want to do that part.’ It was De Niro.</p>
<p>We hired Kitty Winn [to play Pacino’s love interest]. I said, ‘How do you feel about the nudity?’ People who are living together and are druggies don’t pull the sheets up or grab a towel. They just live. When it came time to shoot, she kept putting off those scenes. I said we don’t have any more days. I found out her grandfather was Gen. George Marshall, and she was concerned about her grandmother seeing it.</p>
<p>The executives wanted Mia Farrow for the part, and I thought, she just divorced Frank Sinatra — nobody is going to believe her as a heroin addict.</p>
<p>You work with two actors and you find out what one needs. Al you had to hug and kiss. He needed love. Kitty was much stronger because she was brought up in a military family.”</p>
<p />
<p>CREDIT: Moviestore/REX/Shutterstock</p>
<p>Paul SchraderTaxi DriverThe 1976 drama — Schrader wrote it and Martin Scorsese directed — about Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro) and his violent plan to save a teenage prostitute (Jodie Foster) embodies Big Apple rot.</p>
<p>“I wrote it in Los Angeles. I was living mostly in my car. I just set it in New York because you wanted to have a city where the taxi is an all-important facet of everyday life. I got a number of the streets wrong, running the wrong way and stuff. Marty [Scorsese] said, ‘You know Sixth Avenue doesn’t go uptown.’ I said, ‘What are you going to do — change the avenue or change the script?’ The metaphor was the taxi and this troubled guy and New York City was the best place to have that metaphor roll around.</p>
<p>It was a unique period in the history of motion pictures. It’s not going to come back. The confluence of post-World War II events, the Baby Boomers coming of age, created a golden decade for movies. It was the times, it wasn’t the talent.”</p>
<p />
<p>CREDIT: Moviestore/REX/Shutterstock</p>
<p>John BadhamSaturday Night FeverJohn Travolta became a star, decked out in a white suit while dancing to “Stayin’ Alive.” That’s the film’s signature image, but the 1977 hit was more than that. It offered a penetrating look at working class Brooklyn and a young man who dreams of a brighter life across the river in Manhattan.</p>
<p>“I didn’t know what disco music was all about, but I understood this life. This was a guy with great talent who was trapped in an environment and doesn’t have the courage to get out. It resonated with me even though I’d spent all of five minutes in Brooklyn.</p>
<p>Travolta worked for three months on the dancing. He was phenomenal, bouncing down on his knees and jumping back up and all those slides. We used to finish the take and literally had to peel the wardrobe off him he was sweating so much. We were such a low-budget show that we dried the suit off with a hair dryer so it would be ready for the next take.</p>
<p />
<p>They were not through the roof at Paramount about the movie. They were worried because of the bad language and the rape scene. The language people used was sexist and racist and homophobic. [Then Paramount President] Michael Eisner and [Paramount Chairman] Barry Diller asked me to cut some of it down, but Robert Stigwood said, ‘don’t cut a thing.’ He believed that was how people talked. ‘Mean Streets’ had come out and he saw similarities to it.”</p>
<p />
<p>CREDIT: Paramount/Kobal/REX/Shutterstock</p>
<p>Walter HillThe WarriorsThe 1979 thriller was based on Xenophon’s “Anabasis” but added a twist to the Greek tale by centering it on warring gangs.</p>
<p>“It’s a fantasy dystopian picture with obvious social undertones. I thought nobody would ever let us make it because it didn’t lend itself to stars. But Paramount had a big success with ‘Saturday Night Fever,’ and this was about kids from Brooklyn.</p>
<p>We had a lot of trouble staying on schedule. In a lot of ways it was our own fault. We were California oriented. The movie had to be shot outdoors and it had to be shot almost entirely at night. What we had miscalculated was how short the nights were in New York. The New York contract at that time called for an hour crew lunch, and we didn’t have money for caterers, so the crew would be dismissed. They’d go off to a restaurant to buy their lunch, but by the time you reassembled, it was not on the dot of an hour. I think we were ten days over and in those days that was perceived to be catastrophic. Nowadays it’s no big deal.</p>
<p>It wasn’t the first what they call a gang movie, but it was the first one that accepted that the institution is not the social problem. You saw it from their point of view, which was it was a reasonable social choice in an aggressive, hostile world. This was pre-Giuliani. The crime in the streets was a big issue and the city was broke. I remember Pauline Kael said that the movie illustrated that the city didn’t work.</p>
<p>There were a number of violent incidents that were around the movie and there were questions if the movie inspired the violence. What happened was the audience for the movie were the gang populations. They went to see it and they would run into their old enemies in the theater. That made for a volatile situation.”</p>
<p />
<p>CREDIT: Contract Number (Programme)</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/tag/john-carpenter/" type="external">John Carpenter</a>Escape From New YorkThe 1981 dystopian sci-fi film gave the world Snake Plissken (Kurt Russell), an antihero who must rescue the U.S. president. Its depiction of New York City as a city so far gone it’s been converted into a maximum security prison took place at the tail-end of Manhattan’s era of lawlessness and decay.</p>
<p>“It began with a sci-fi story about the most dangerous planet in the universe having to send in the most dangerou man on a suicide mission. But I’d also remembered seeing ‘Death Wish’ and it just painted New York as crime ridden, frightening and dark. I combined those things.</p>
<p>Kurt told me, ‘I know how to be Snake Plissken.’ He wanted him to be cool and iconic. What he did was play him as Clint Eastwood.</p>
<p>There was also enormous distrust at the time. There was Watergate, the Vietnam War. People thought their government was lying to them. I don’t think the film would work as well today. People wouldn’t accept New York as a hell-scape. Now it’s such a Disneyland area. I guess I’m a lousy prognosticator of the future.”</p> | false | 1 | 1970s early 80s new york city embodied revolution taking place american cinema brash brutal crude powerful sexy grimey swagger unmistakable also low point city bronx burning crime rising city hall broke even respectable folks fled safety suburbs new york became canvas talented filmmakers french connection saturday night fever posed setting classic films ushered new era onscreen realism age de niro pacino scorsese lumet talents upended sterile factorylike approach making movies dominated studio system revolution filmmaking thats times square setting taxi driver replaced fantasyland tourists movies harder edges sanded instead psychotic cabbies lawbending cops get superheroes battling robots memorialize period artistic achievement variety spoke six filmmakers behind best new york cinema william friedkinthe french connection pictured abovethe 1971 thriller centered driven police detective gene hackman stop nothing bust drug syndicate oftimitated particularly setpiece car chase never equaled film snagged five oscars including best picture made french connection looked like documentary looked though camera happened upon events would things like staging scene wouldnt show camera operator would search action documentary camera man months research went around every day full shifts went areas bedford stuyvesant harlem 28th precinct saw aspects life cops dealing black cops well white cops basic attitude towards minorities thats reflected french connection beheld showed hired roy scheider gene hackman sent month played cops film brought lot dialogue parts police dont operate way 70s princes city held court streets today youd prosecuted seventies time american cinema original films even genre films unique memorable able make films interested loved time changed audience changed dont believe cyclical way think coming diminishment people going theaters credit gadd prodskobalrexshuttersto jerry schatzbergthe panic needle parkthe 1971 drama heroin addicts love introduced al pacino moviegoers stunned critics unflinching portrayal drug abusethe studio didnt want pacino said old went charade casting end said got pacino read lot new york actors last one come read de niro pretty good one afternoon im third avenue looking army navy store hear voice back saying hey man really want part de niro hired kitty winn play pacinos love interest said feel nudity people living together druggies dont pull sheets grab towel live came time shoot kept putting scenes said dont days found grandfather gen george marshall concerned grandmother seeing executives wanted mia farrow part thought divorced frank sinatra nobody going believe heroin addict work two actors find one needs al hug kiss needed love kitty much stronger brought military family credit moviestorerexshutterstock paul schradertaxi driverthe 1976 drama schrader wrote martin scorsese directed travis bickle robert de niro violent plan save teenage prostitute jodie foster embodies big apple rot wrote los angeles living mostly car set new york wanted city taxi allimportant facet everyday life got number streets wrong running wrong way stuff marty scorsese said know sixth avenue doesnt go uptown said going change avenue change script metaphor taxi troubled guy new york city best place metaphor roll around unique period history motion pictures going come back confluence postworld war ii events baby boomers coming age created golden decade movies times wasnt talent credit moviestorerexshutterstock john badhamsaturday night feverjohn travolta became star decked white suit dancing stayin alive thats films signature image 1977 hit offered penetrating look working class brooklyn young man dreams brighter life across river manhattan didnt know disco music understood life guy great talent trapped environment doesnt courage get resonated even though id spent five minutes brooklyn travolta worked three months dancing phenomenal bouncing knees jumping back slides used finish take literally peel wardrobe sweating much lowbudget show dried suit hair dryer would ready next take roof paramount movie worried bad language rape scene language people used sexist racist homophobic paramount president michael eisner paramount chairman barry diller asked cut robert stigwood said dont cut thing believed people talked mean streets come saw similarities credit paramountkobalrexshutterstock walter hillthe warriorsthe 1979 thriller based xenophons anabasis added twist greek tale centering warring gangs fantasy dystopian picture obvious social undertones thought nobody would ever let us make didnt lend stars paramount big success saturday night fever kids brooklyn lot trouble staying schedule lot ways fault california oriented movie shot outdoors shot almost entirely night miscalculated short nights new york new york contract time called hour crew lunch didnt money caterers crew would dismissed theyd go restaurant buy lunch time reassembled dot hour think ten days days perceived catastrophic nowadays big deal wasnt first call gang movie first one accepted institution social problem saw point view reasonable social choice aggressive hostile world pregiuliani crime streets big issue city broke remember pauline kael said movie illustrated city didnt work number violent incidents around movie questions movie inspired violence happened audience movie gang populations went see would run old enemies theater made volatile situation credit contract number programme john carpenterescape new yorkthe 1981 dystopian scifi film gave world snake plissken kurt russell antihero must rescue us president depiction new york city city far gone converted maximum security prison took place tailend manhattans era lawlessness decay began scifi story dangerous planet universe send dangerou man suicide mission id also remembered seeing death wish painted new york crime ridden frightening dark combined things kurt told know snake plissken wanted cool iconic play clint eastwood also enormous distrust time watergate vietnam war people thought government lying dont think film would work well today people wouldnt accept new york hellscape disneyland area guess im lousy prognosticator future | 889 |
<p>In today’s film news roundup, thriller “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/three-seconds/" type="external">Three Seconds</a>” gets distribution through Aviron, Samuel Goldwyn buys “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/saturday-church/" type="external">Saturday Church</a>,” Gravitas picks up frat thriller “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/haze/" type="external">Haze</a>,” and the fourth “Insidious” movie gets a new title.</p>
<p>ACQUISITIONS</p>
<p>Aviron Pictures has bought North American distribution rights to Andrea Di Stefano’s thriller “Three Seconds,” starring Joel Kinnaman, Rosamund Pike, Clive Owen, Common, and Ana de Armas.</p>
<p>The script, based on the Swedish novel by Anders Roslund and Börge Hellström, was written by Matt Cook with revisions by Rowan Joffé and Alex Garland, and current edits by Di Stefano.</p>
<p>Kinnaman plays a reformed criminal and former special ops soldier who, in order to free himself from jail,&#160; has been working undercover for crooked FBI handlers (played by Pike, Common, and Owen) to infiltrate the Polish mob’s drug trade in New York.</p>
<p>Thunder Road Pictures’ Basil Iwanyk and Erica Lee are producing alongside The Fyzz Facility’s Wayne Marc Godfrey, Robert Jones, Mark Lane and James Harris, and Ollie Madden. The Fyzz Facility is also financing the film. Thunder Road’s Jonathan Fuhrman and Magnolia Entertainment’s Shelley Browning are the executive producers.</p>
<p>Aviron picked up “Three Seconds” in advance of the Toronto Film Festival. Acquisitions head Jason Resnick brokered the deal for Aviron Pictures. Bloom handled international sales.</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>Samuel Goldwyn Films has acquired Damon Cardasis’ coming-of-age musical drama “Saturday Church,” and plans a release in January for theaters, on demand, and digital.</p>
<p>“Saturday Church” stars Luka Kain, Margot Bingham, Regina Taylor (“The Unit”), Marquis Rodriguez, MJ Rodriguez (“The Carrie Diaries”), Indya Moore, Alexia Garcia, Kate Bornstein, and Jaylin Fletcher.</p>
<p>The movie centers on a 14-year-old boy who finds himself coping with new responsibilities as “man of the house” after the death of his father — along with struggling with questions about his gender identity. He finds an escape by creating a world of fantasy filled with dance and music. His life takes a turn for the better when he encounters members of a transgender community who take him to “Saturday Church” — a program for LGBTQ youth.</p>
<p>“Saturday Church” is a Spring Pictures and Round Films presentation in association with 19340 Productions. The film was written and directed by Cardasis, who also produced with Mandy Tagger-Brockey, Adi Ezroni, and Rebecca Miller. The executive producers are Sharon Chang, Luigi Caiola, Isabel Henderson, and Lia Mayer-Sommer.</p>
<p>The deal was negotiated by Peter Goldwyn of Samuel Goldwyn Films and Marc Simon of Fox Rothschild on behalf of the filmmakers. CAA repped the film for North America and WestEnd Films handles international rights.</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>Gravitas Ventures has acquired&#160;North American rights to filmmaker David Burkman’s thriller “Haze,” Variety has learned exclusively.</p>
<p>Written and directed by Burkman, the film stars Kirk Curran, Mike Blejer, Jeremy O’Shea, Kristin Rogers, and Sophia Medley. “Haze” will hit theaters on Oct. 13, followed by a release on all digital platforms on Oct. 17.</p>
<p>The film takes place in the aftermath of a brutal hazing death, when a college freshman’s desire to join a fraternity is threatened when his older brother launches an anti-hazing crusade. Burkman also produced with Jayme Aronberg.</p>
<p>“Hollywood has always been fascinated with Greek Life, but ever since the seminal ‘Animal House,’ the genre tends towards comedy, and the depictions of hazing are usually innocuous,” Burkman said. “‘Haze’ is an uncompromising look at what really goes on behind fraternity and sorority house walls. We are thrilled to work with Gravitas and their daring team to get this unique film into the world.”</p>
<p>The&#160;deal was negotiated by Chad Miller of Gravitas, and by Verve on behalf of the filmmakers.</p>
<p>TITLES</p>
<p>Universal Pictures and Sony Pictures have re-titled “Insidious: Chapter 4” as “Insidious: The Last Key,” set for release on Jan. 5.</p>
<p>U.S. theatrical distribution will be handled by Universal, and Sony Pictures Releasing and SPWA’s Stage 6 Films will distribute the film outside of the U.S.</p>
<p>Lin Shaye returns as a parapsychologist facing a fearsome and personal haunting in&#160;her own family home.&#160;The film is written by co-creator Leigh Whannell — who also penned the trilogy and directed “Chapter 3” — and produced by Jason Blum, Oren Peli, and co-creator James Wan.</p>
<p>Series newcomer Adam Robitel (“The Taking of Deborah Logan”) directs. Also starring are Angus Sampson, Whannell, Josh Stewart, Caitlin Gerard, Kirk Acevedo, Javier Botet, Bruce Davison, Spencer Locke, Tessa Ferrer, Ava Kolker, and Marcus Henderson.</p>
<p>AWARDS</p>
<p>The <a href="http://variety.com/t/national-board-of-review/" type="external">National Board of Review</a> has moved its annual film awards gala back five days to Jan.&#160; 9.</p>
<p>Willie Geist will return as host for the fourth year in a row. The celebration will be held at Cipriani 42nd Street in New York City, where it has taken place for more than a decade. Recipients of the organization’s year-end honors will be named on Nov. 28, as previously announced.</p>
<p>The National Board of Review’s awards include best picture, director, actor and actress, original and adapted screenplay, breakthrough performance, and directorial debut, as well as the&#160;William K. Everson Award for Film History, Freedom of Expression, and the NBR Spotlight Award.</p>
<p>This past year’s NBR winners included Oscar recipients “Manchester by the Sea” and”Moonlight.”</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>The American Film Institute has set its <a href="http://variety.com/t/afi-awards/" type="external">AFI Awards</a> ceremonies for Jan. 5, when it will announce the 10 most outstanding films and 10 most outstanding television programs of the year.</p>
<p>The annual gathering at a private luncheon honors the creative ensemble as a whole — those in front of and behind the camera. It’s the 18th year in which the awards have been given.</p>
<p>Honorees are selected by a jury process comprised of experts from across the moving image communities — including film and television artists, critics, scholars, and AFI trustees.</p> | false | 1 | todays film news roundup thriller three seconds gets distribution aviron samuel goldwyn buys saturday church gravitas picks frat thriller haze fourth insidious movie gets new title acquisitions aviron pictures bought north american distribution rights andrea di stefanos thriller three seconds starring joel kinnaman rosamund pike clive owen common ana de armas script based swedish novel anders roslund börge hellström written matt cook revisions rowan joffé alex garland current edits di stefano kinnaman plays reformed criminal former special ops soldier order free jail160 working undercover crooked fbi handlers played pike common owen infiltrate polish mobs drug trade new york thunder road pictures basil iwanyk erica lee producing alongside fyzz facilitys wayne marc godfrey robert jones mark lane james harris ollie madden fyzz facility also financing film thunder roads jonathan fuhrman magnolia entertainments shelley browning executive producers aviron picked three seconds advance toronto film festival acquisitions head jason resnick brokered deal aviron pictures bloom handled international sales samuel goldwyn films acquired damon cardasis comingofage musical drama saturday church plans release january theaters demand digital saturday church stars luka kain margot bingham regina taylor unit marquis rodriguez mj rodriguez carrie diaries indya moore alexia garcia kate bornstein jaylin fletcher movie centers 14yearold boy finds coping new responsibilities man house death father along struggling questions gender identity finds escape creating world fantasy filled dance music life takes turn better encounters members transgender community take saturday church program lgbtq youth saturday church spring pictures round films presentation association 19340 productions film written directed cardasis also produced mandy taggerbrockey adi ezroni rebecca miller executive producers sharon chang luigi caiola isabel henderson lia mayersommer deal negotiated peter goldwyn samuel goldwyn films marc simon fox rothschild behalf filmmakers caa repped film north america westend films handles international rights gravitas ventures acquired160north american rights filmmaker david burkmans thriller haze variety learned exclusively written directed burkman film stars kirk curran mike blejer jeremy oshea kristin rogers sophia medley haze hit theaters oct 13 followed release digital platforms oct 17 film takes place aftermath brutal hazing death college freshmans desire join fraternity threatened older brother launches antihazing crusade burkman also produced jayme aronberg hollywood always fascinated greek life ever since seminal animal house genre tends towards comedy depictions hazing usually innocuous burkman said haze uncompromising look really goes behind fraternity sorority house walls thrilled work gravitas daring team get unique film world the160deal negotiated chad miller gravitas verve behalf filmmakers titles universal pictures sony pictures retitled insidious chapter 4 insidious last key set release jan 5 us theatrical distribution handled universal sony pictures releasing spwas stage 6 films distribute film outside us lin shaye returns parapsychologist facing fearsome personal haunting in160her family home160the film written cocreator leigh whannell also penned trilogy directed chapter 3 produced jason blum oren peli cocreator james wan series newcomer adam robitel taking deborah logan directs also starring angus sampson whannell josh stewart caitlin gerard kirk acevedo javier botet bruce davison spencer locke tessa ferrer ava kolker marcus henderson awards national board review moved annual film awards gala back five days jan160 9 willie geist return host fourth year row celebration held cipriani 42nd street new york city taken place decade recipients organizations yearend honors named nov 28 previously announced national board reviews awards include best picture director actor actress original adapted screenplay breakthrough performance directorial debut well the160william k everson award film history freedom expression nbr spotlight award past years nbr winners included oscar recipients manchester sea andmoonlight american film institute set afi awards ceremonies jan 5 announce 10 outstanding films 10 outstanding television programs year annual gathering private luncheon honors creative ensemble whole front behind camera 18th year awards given honorees selected jury process comprised experts across moving image communities including film television artists critics scholars afi trustees | 623 |
<p />
<p>In February 2010, <a href="../../../../../2010/02/24/the-my-lai-massacre-vietnams-holocaust/" type="external">I wrote about</a> a visit to the Vietnamese village of My Lai, Quang Ngai Province. During the Vietnam War, or Anti-American War as locals referred to it, 504 civilians were recorded to have been shot dead in four hours by members of the U.S. Military’s Charlie Company on March 16, 1968. Following the article’s publication, a man named Tran Van Duc contacted me and identified himself as a survivor of the massacre.</p>
<p>Tran Van Duc has agreed to talk about his experience of coping in a country exposed to conflict and his efforts to obtain answers from local authorities over wrongs committed against his family more than 40 years ago, a task that has seen him recently return to Vietnam and the village he once called home.</p>
<p>This account, originally written in German, has been translated and edited for grammatical purposes. Tran Van Duc has verified the version that appears here. He has advised me that the stories of his family’s life in various villages between 1959 and 1966 were told to him by his grandmother and various aunts.</p>
<p>Here is Tan Van Duc’s story, in his own words:</p>
<p>Part I</p>
<p>I was born Tran Van Duc in 1962, the third child and oldest son in my family. My mother sold food at a local market and my father was a tailor, selling clothes and western medicine. He had previously been held captive by the government, and as a result we were all under constant surveillance, reporting to authorities daily.</p>
<p>We had a large house near Son My Market. On one side, our neighbor owned a lot of coconuts and stored them in his yard, and I can still remember how refreshing they used to taste in the heat. On the other side of our house, there was a large pond, where villagers cultivated shrimp and fish. Behind us was My Khe, where the sea and endless white sand seemed to stretch far into the distance.</p>
<p>During my earliest memories of childhood, when the bombing raids commenced, my family became used to hiding in the ditches. Others were not so lucky, killed by collapsing tunnels as they attempted to emulate us. Many residents made the decision to flee My Son. Some went to neighboring Ly Son, others were separated and their whereabouts became unknown. Many children became orphaned and adults lost their homes. Fields and gardens were totally destroyed. Since my parents were in a fortunate position to provide help to those who had suffered losses, a number of families came to them in desperate need of food and shelter. As everybody left in search of safer grounds, we headed to Binh Duc, which due to its relative peace, seemed like paradise.</p>
<p>With a population comprised mainly of fishermen and salt producers, Binh Duc seemed like a wonderful place. People here were very friendly and always smiled. Red and green colored boats appeared by the sea, ready for their day’s fishing. The shelling in Binh Duc was not as bad as the fighting in Son My. As the war started getting worse, our family lived with Mr and Mrs. Dong Hue for two years. My parents continued to operate their business in sewing and the wholesale market. I played with other children, waiting until the late afternoon for the sun to cool down, where we would catch crabs by the sea or play football with a plastic ball.</p>
<p>As the bullets rained and bombs fell constantly, the local market in Binh Duc came under heavy attack and we moved again, to Thuan Yen, where my younger sister, Thi Ha, was born. My family built a small house on the property of Mrs. Bo and my father worked in nearby Ting Hiep as a nurse in the district of Son Tinh C12.</p>
<p>Even as a child, I understood the threat and impact of war, a reality confirmed when my family was also forced to live apart from each other. It was hard for me to accept that my grandmother, who had lived all of her life in Son Hoi, lived alone. Her children all had their own families and had since moved. My parents took it upon themselves to take care of grandmother. I loved my grandmother very much, because she reminded me of my mother in both shape and character. My sister My Hong and I often delivered money for her to buy rice, something that excited me a lot, and I can still remember how warm her hugs were. The idea of running along with my sisters was always such fun, but it would not take long before I got too tired and asked for a piggy back ride.</p>
<p>There was so much to like about travelling on the B24 road through Thuan Yen, which were lined with bamboo trees with a backdrop of the mountains. The villages, surrounded by wheat fields and rice paddies, were often dotted with people toiling hard in the rice fields, planting themselves deep into the mud. This road led to My Lai, a place where everybody seemed busy working out how to best cope with bombings. The village of My Lai had become a recent target for gunfire, and the safest time to undertake all activities was either early in the morning, which is when farmers tended to their rice and vegetable plantations, and watered and spread fertilizer on their crops. The only other safe time was late at night, as this is when the fewest shots reigned over the village. Consequently, daily life was frantic. Every day, residents woke early to greet the sunrise, for this is when family meals were prepared.</p>
<p>Even in such a hostile environment, nobody would have predicted the events that took place on that day, March 16, 1968. American military units fired artillery shots across Thuan Yen, My Khe, and My Lai for one hour. They sounded like fireworks. Our village and neighboring hamlets were completely surrounded. At 11:00 am, helicopters started flying over My Lai, and some people in the neighborhood heard rockets being fired. My family and I learned that some residents had already been injured by the shots because the rockets were flying flow and landed in rice paddies where people were working in the fields. I could hear people scream and cry in a high-pitched wailing sound. Any civilians who were caught were marched into the center of the village. It resembled a makeshift prison yard full of men, women and children.</p>
<p>My father was not present in the household because he was away working in Ty Vinh Tinh Hiep, leaving my mother in charge of the household. Without any hesitation, she prepared an emergency kit for the children, fearing that we would also be taken from our hut. She hurriedly prepared a large brown canvas bag, placed some of my clothes in the bags and gave each of my siblings and myself 10,000 Vietnamese Dong, which we hid in our socks. I felt guilty about taking the money because it seemed like a fortune. We were then instructed to hide behind our house, which stored our home-made oils, medicines, textiles and fabrics. But before anybody had a chance to move, American troops stormed into our house and forced my mother, brothers and sisters to move onto the streets where everybody else was assembled. The last item my mother grabbed with her one free hand was her traditional straw hat, while desperately holding onto my baby sister, Thi Ha, with the other.</p>
<p>Once we were marched outside and told where to sit, my mother looked around and noticed the chaotic scenes where villagers were being pushed and shoved by soldiers. She noticed a nearby ditch near a neighboring house own by Mrs. Nhieu and told us all to move quickly, but to our dismay we found that it was already full. Crouching low, we eventually settled on a space near a tunnel opening. American troops were patrolling the area and continued to search tunnels. One old woman was struck on the lower back by a soldier’s rifle butt so hard, she fell to the ground in agonizing pain and could no longer walk. Horrified by what had just happened, I heard somebody say, “My God, we will all die.” This memory still haunts me today.</p>
<p>One attribute I always remember about my mother was that no matter how hopeless the situation looked, she never accepted defeat. From our ditch, she spotted a nearby bamboo bush and hinted to us that we should head towards it immediately. The children went first and she following behind us. But no sooner had we begun to crawl through the crowd of people that a soldier saw my mother amidst the crowd, stormed into the ditch and grabbed my mother violently, ripping her clothes. I cried loudly in the hope that she would not be shot. Without warning, gun shots were fired into the ditch, hitting a number of bodies. As bullets, blood and flesh flew everywhere, my mother covered her body with her straw hat while hugging my little sister Ha close to her breast, and with her free hand, pushed me in the direction of a ditch adjacent to neighboring rice fields. She ordered me to protect my sister Ha and pretend to be dead so that the soldiers would leave us alone. We were not to move unless we knew the area was clear. For what seemed like hours, my little sister lay on her stomach and I sheltered her by doing the same.</p>
<p />
<p /> | false | 1 | february 2010 wrote visit vietnamese village lai quang ngai province vietnam war antiamerican war locals referred 504 civilians recorded shot dead four hours members us militarys charlie company march 16 1968 following articles publication man named tran van duc contacted identified survivor massacre tran van duc agreed talk experience coping country exposed conflict efforts obtain answers local authorities wrongs committed family 40 years ago task seen recently return vietnam village called home account originally written german translated edited grammatical purposes tran van duc verified version appears advised stories familys life various villages 1959 1966 told grandmother various aunts tan van ducs story words part born tran van duc 1962 third child oldest son family mother sold food local market father tailor selling clothes western medicine previously held captive government result constant surveillance reporting authorities daily large house near son market one side neighbor owned lot coconuts stored yard still remember refreshing used taste heat side house large pond villagers cultivated shrimp fish behind us khe sea endless white sand seemed stretch far distance earliest memories childhood bombing raids commenced family became used hiding ditches others lucky killed collapsing tunnels attempted emulate us many residents made decision flee son went neighboring ly son others separated whereabouts became unknown many children became orphaned adults lost homes fields gardens totally destroyed since parents fortunate position provide help suffered losses number families came desperate need food shelter everybody left search safer grounds headed binh duc due relative peace seemed like paradise population comprised mainly fishermen salt producers binh duc seemed like wonderful place people friendly always smiled red green colored boats appeared sea ready days fishing shelling binh duc bad fighting son war started getting worse family lived mr mrs dong hue two years parents continued operate business sewing wholesale market played children waiting late afternoon sun cool would catch crabs sea play football plastic ball bullets rained bombs fell constantly local market binh duc came heavy attack moved thuan yen younger sister thi ha born family built small house property mrs bo father worked nearby ting hiep nurse district son tinh c12 even child understood threat impact war reality confirmed family also forced live apart hard accept grandmother lived life son hoi lived alone children families since moved parents took upon take care grandmother loved grandmother much reminded mother shape character sister hong often delivered money buy rice something excited lot still remember warm hugs idea running along sisters always fun would take long got tired asked piggy back ride much like travelling b24 road thuan yen lined bamboo trees backdrop mountains villages surrounded wheat fields rice paddies often dotted people toiling hard rice fields planting deep mud road led lai place everybody seemed busy working best cope bombings village lai become recent target gunfire safest time undertake activities either early morning farmers tended rice vegetable plantations watered spread fertilizer crops safe time late night fewest shots reigned village consequently daily life frantic every day residents woke early greet sunrise family meals prepared even hostile environment nobody would predicted events took place day march 16 1968 american military units fired artillery shots across thuan yen khe lai one hour sounded like fireworks village neighboring hamlets completely surrounded 1100 helicopters started flying lai people neighborhood heard rockets fired family learned residents already injured shots rockets flying flow landed rice paddies people working fields could hear people scream cry highpitched wailing sound civilians caught marched center village resembled makeshift prison yard full men women children father present household away working ty vinh tinh hiep leaving mother charge household without hesitation prepared emergency kit children fearing would also taken hut hurriedly prepared large brown canvas bag placed clothes bags gave siblings 10000 vietnamese dong hid socks felt guilty taking money seemed like fortune instructed hide behind house stored homemade oils medicines textiles fabrics anybody chance move american troops stormed house forced mother brothers sisters move onto streets everybody else assembled last item mother grabbed one free hand traditional straw hat desperately holding onto baby sister thi ha marched outside told sit mother looked around noticed chaotic scenes villagers pushed shoved soldiers noticed nearby ditch near neighboring house mrs nhieu told us move quickly dismay found already full crouching low eventually settled space near tunnel opening american troops patrolling area continued search tunnels one old woman struck lower back soldiers rifle butt hard fell ground agonizing pain could longer walk horrified happened heard somebody say god die memory still haunts today one attribute always remember mother matter hopeless situation looked never accepted defeat ditch spotted nearby bamboo bush hinted us head towards immediately children went first following behind us sooner begun crawl crowd people soldier saw mother amidst crowd stormed ditch grabbed mother violently ripping clothes cried loudly hope would shot without warning gun shots fired ditch hitting number bodies bullets blood flesh flew everywhere mother covered body straw hat hugging little sister ha close breast free hand pushed direction ditch adjacent neighboring rice fields ordered protect sister ha pretend dead soldiers would leave us alone move unless knew area clear seemed like hours little sister lay stomach sheltered | 852 |
<p>Obituaries reporting the recent death of educational psychologist Kenneth B. Clark have quite properly highlighted the influential role that his research played in the Supreme Court’s landmark 1954 ruling in Brown v. Board of Education. Clark studied how black children described black and white dolls and concluded from their more favorable reaction to white dolls that black children regarded themselves as inferior. The Court in Brown cited his findings — and other “modern authority” on “psychological knowledge” — in determining that segregated public schools “generate[] a feeling of inferiority as to [black children’s] status in the community.” For that reason, the Court ruled, segregated public schools are “inherently unequal” and violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection of the laws.</p>
<p>The compelling moral case for the result in Brown has muffled contemporary discussion of the serious defects in its methodology. The Left’s current interest in Brown is in asserting that originalism — the traditional method of construing the provisions of the Constitution according to their original meaning — could not have produced Brown‘s mandate to end segregated schools and must therefore be regarded as illegitimate. As I discuss <a href="" type="internal">here</a>, that assertion is wrong. But there has been much less scrutiny of the actual reasoning of Brown. This is unfortunate, for although Brown‘s bottom-line result is both morally sound and legally right, the methodology of Brown illustrates — and has spawned — two characteristic operational defects in non-originalist decision-making.</p>
<p>The first of these defects is that the Supreme Court’s reasoning often is indeterminate and unworthy of being taken seriously as law. In Brown itself, are we to believe that the justices’ thinking actually rested on modern psychological research like Clark’s? Isn’t it telling that the Court does not even attempt to explain the less-than-obvious connection between how a black child describes black and white dolls and the relative effect of integrated vs. segregated schools on that child’s “feeling of inferiority”? What if research a few years later showed that integrated schools increased black children’s “feeling of inferiority”? Are we to suppose that the Supreme Court might have overturned the decision in Brown? If so, should we respect a methodology that yields results that are so flimsy? And, if (as seems surely the case) differing social-science data would never result in the overturning of Brown, doesn’t that show that the purported reasoning is entirely makeshift?</p>
<p>This defect in the Court’s reasoning is perhaps most clearly manifested in the absurd postmodernist proclamation set forth in the 1992 Casey abortion case (and reiterated without embarrassment in the 2003 Lawrence decision inventing a constitutional right to homosexual sodomy) that “[a]t the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” What this infamous “mystery” passage really means, of course, is that five justices will consult their own whims and preferences to define for all Americans which legislated crimes will be magically transformed into constitutional rights.</p>
<p>The second, more subtle defect in Brown is the Supreme Court’s disinclination to reexamine its own dubious precedents on the meaning of the Constitution. Contrary to the conventional understanding, the Court in Brown did not purport to overrule its infamous 1896 ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson, which established the “separate but equal” doctrine and allowed segregated streetcars. Rather, the question that the Court defined for itself was merely “whether Plessy v. Ferguson should be held inapplicable to public education.” The Court’s cursory and muddled discussion of its “inconclusive” “investigation” into the original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment strongly suggests that that investigation was not undertaken with any rigor or vigor. And its resulting refusal to revisit Plessy left its decision resting on contestable and unconvincing social-science data rather than on firm constitutional principle.</p>
<p>Again, this excessive adherence to erroneous precedent is prominent in Casey, where the Court set forth at length its bizarre view that the very fact that a decision has aroused intense criticism is somehow a strong reason that the decision, even though wrong, should not be overruled: “to overrule under fire in the absence of the most compelling reason to reexamine a watershed decision would subvert the Court’s legitimacy beyond any serious question.” In short, the Court was more concerned with managing imagined perceptions of its own legitimacy than with construing the Constitution correctly. As Justice Scalia, in dissent, aptly put it: “The Imperial Judiciary lives.”</p>
<p>The Supreme Court earned tremendous moral capital from the just and right result it reached in Brown — a result that this country’s political leaders did not have the courage to achieve. Unfortunately, over the last several decades the Court has squandered that moral capital by repeating the methodological defects of Brown in furtherance of results that are plainly inconsistent with the text and structure of the Constitution (as well as — in cases like Roe v. Wade — contrary to elemental justice). The Court has gone from relying on research about playing with dolls to playing its own elaborate game of make-believe jurisprudence. And, although the Court’s respect for its own precedent has been unprincipled and inconsistent, it has too often elevated adherence to its own wrong or dubious precedents above its obligation to faithfully construe the Constitution.</p>
<p>Contrary to the Left’s misuse of Brown, the real lesson to be drawn from its unhappy methodological legacy is the urgent need for the Court to commit itself to principled and reasoned originalist decision-making.</p>
<p>— <a href="" type="internal">Edward Whelan</a>&#160;is president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and directs EPPC’s program on the Constitution, the Courts, and the Culture.</p> | false | 1 | obituaries reporting recent death educational psychologist kenneth b clark quite properly highlighted influential role research played supreme courts landmark 1954 ruling brown v board education clark studied black children described black white dolls concluded favorable reaction white dolls black children regarded inferior court brown cited findings modern authority psychological knowledge determining segregated public schools generate feeling inferiority black childrens status community reason court ruled segregated public schools inherently unequal violate fourteenth amendments guarantee equal protection laws compelling moral case result brown muffled contemporary discussion serious defects methodology lefts current interest brown asserting originalism traditional method construing provisions constitution according original meaning could produced browns mandate end segregated schools must therefore regarded illegitimate discuss assertion wrong much less scrutiny actual reasoning brown unfortunate although browns bottomline result morally sound legally right methodology brown illustrates spawned two characteristic operational defects nonoriginalist decisionmaking first defects supreme courts reasoning often indeterminate unworthy taken seriously law brown believe justices thinking actually rested modern psychological research like clarks isnt telling court even attempt explain lessthanobvious connection black child describes black white dolls relative effect integrated vs segregated schools childs feeling inferiority research years later showed integrated schools increased black childrens feeling inferiority suppose supreme court might overturned decision brown respect methodology yields results flimsy seems surely case differing socialscience data would never result overturning brown doesnt show purported reasoning entirely makeshift defect courts reasoning perhaps clearly manifested absurd postmodernist proclamation set forth 1992 casey abortion case reiterated without embarrassment 2003 lawrence decision inventing constitutional right homosexual sodomy heart liberty right define ones concept existence meaning universe mystery human life infamous mystery passage really means course five justices consult whims preferences define americans legislated crimes magically transformed constitutional rights second subtle defect brown supreme courts disinclination reexamine dubious precedents meaning constitution contrary conventional understanding court brown purport overrule infamous 1896 ruling plessy v ferguson established separate equal doctrine allowed segregated streetcars rather question court defined merely whether plessy v ferguson held inapplicable public education courts cursory muddled discussion inconclusive investigation original understanding fourteenth amendment strongly suggests investigation undertaken rigor vigor resulting refusal revisit plessy left decision resting contestable unconvincing socialscience data rather firm constitutional principle excessive adherence erroneous precedent prominent casey court set forth length bizarre view fact decision aroused intense criticism somehow strong reason decision even though wrong overruled overrule fire absence compelling reason reexamine watershed decision would subvert courts legitimacy beyond serious question short court concerned managing imagined perceptions legitimacy construing constitution correctly justice scalia dissent aptly put imperial judiciary lives supreme court earned tremendous moral capital right result reached brown result countrys political leaders courage achieve unfortunately last several decades court squandered moral capital repeating methodological defects brown furtherance results plainly inconsistent text structure constitution well cases like roe v wade contrary elemental justice court gone relying research playing dolls playing elaborate game makebelieve jurisprudence although courts respect precedent unprincipled inconsistent often elevated adherence wrong dubious precedents obligation faithfully construe constitution contrary lefts misuse brown real lesson drawn unhappy methodological legacy urgent need court commit principled reasoned originalist decisionmaking edward whelan160is president ethics public policy center directs eppcs program constitution courts culture | 518 |
<p>California Governor Jerry Brown has signed into law protections for some 2.3 million immigrants living in the US illegally. The Trump administration warned against the first-of-its-kind law, but the trendsetting state may have a national impact.</p>
<p>Beginning in January, <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB54" type="external">Senate Bill 54</a>, dubbed the California Values Act, will prohibit local law enforcement from asking about immigration status “during routine interactions” or complying with “unconstitutional” detainer requests from federal immigration officers.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/405083-trump-deportations-down-sanctuary/" type="external" /></p>
<p>In a <a href="https://www.gov.ca.gov/docs/SB_54_Signing_Message_2017.pdf" type="external">signing statement</a> accompanying the bill, Brown explained that the bill also prohibits the federal government from using local authorities “to do the work of immigration agents.”</p>
<p>Law enforcement officers will also be prohibited from detaining an individual on a hold request from the federal government unless there is a felony or warrant, or they have been convicted of one of 800 crimes listed in the state’s <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB4" type="external">TRUST Act</a>.</p>
<p>Additionally, officers will be prohibited from arresting an individual solely based on a civil immigration warrant, becoming deputized as immigration agents, or participating in joint task forces with the federal government if the primary purpose is immigration enforcement.</p>
<p>Last month, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions publicly urged Brown to veto the bill, calling it “unconscionable.” Sessions and other officials with the Trump administration have come out against “sanctuary jurisdictions,” citing a connection between illegal immigrants and increases in violent crime.</p>
<p>This is not the first time the nation’s most populous state has defied the federal government. In 1996, California became the first US state to legalize medical marijuana. Since then, 29 states and the District of Columbia have passed laws legalizing marijuana in some form.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/395498-california-sanctuary-state-bill/" type="external">READ MORE: California bill to create sanctuary state passes key legislative hurdle</a></p>
<p>Legislators in 15 states and the District of Columbia have introduced similar immigration “sanctuary” bills in 2017, while another 33 states are considering legislation to prohibit them, according to the <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/sanctuary-policy-faq635991795.aspx" type="external">National Conference of State Legislators</a>.</p>
<p>“Sanctuary policies endanger us all, and especially the federal immigration officers who are forced to pursue criminal aliens outside of jails and prisons,” Sessions said in a <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-delivers-remarks-federal-law-enforcement-authorities-about" type="external">speech</a> to federal law enforcement officials in September.</p>
<p>Sessions has <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/397522-us-sessions-sanctuary-cities/" type="external">threatened to withhold federal grants</a> to “sanctuary jurisdictions” that do not allow federal immigration authorities access to local jails and give the Department 48 hours notice before releasing anyone wanted for immigration violations. That policy was temporarily blocked by a federal judge after being challenged by the city of Chicago, Illinois.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/398907-chicago-sues-trump-immigration-doj-sanctuary/" type="external" /></p>
<p>However, Brown said that the bill does not “prevent or prohibit Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the Department of Homeland Security from doing their own work in any way.”</p>
<p>Federal immigration officers are “free to use their own considerable resources” when enforcing federal law in the state. Brown also said that the bill does not prohibit local sheriffs from cooperating with deportation proceedings from federal immigration officers or letting them into their jails to conduct interviews.</p>
<p>“These are uncertain times for undocumented Californians and their families, and this bill strikes a balance that will protect public safety, while bringing a measure of comfort to those families who are now living in fear every day,” Brown wrote in his signing message.</p>
<p>In the weeks after the November 2016 presidential election, California Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Leon introduced Senate Bill 54 as a direct response to President Donald Trump’s campaign policies on immigration.</p>
<p>“We will not stand idly by as President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions seek to divide this nation by scapegoating honest, hardworking families and casting immigrants as threats to be neutralized,” de Leon said in a <a href="http://sd24.senate.ca.gov/news/2017-10-05-governor-brown-signs-senate-leader-de-leons-sb-54-california-values-act" type="external">statement</a> following Brown’s signing.</p>
<p>Asked for a comment about the bill, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the Trump administration is “spending every day we can trying to find the best way forward.”</p>
<p>“The President will be laying out his responsible immigration plan over the next week,” Huckabee Sanders said at Thursday’s <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/10/05/press-briefing-press-secretary-sarah-sanders-1052017-19" type="external">press briefing</a>. “And I hope that California will push back on their governor’s, I think, irresponsible decision moving forward.”</p>
<p>More than 10 million immigrants live in California, more than any other state in the US, according to the <a href="https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/immigrants-in-california" type="external">American Immigration Council</a>.</p>
<p>There are an estimated 2.3 million undocumented immigrants living in the state, according to the <a href="http://www.ppic.org/publication/undocumented-immigrants-in-california/" type="external">Public Policy Institute of California</a> (PPIC), a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank.</p>
<p>Brown also signed 10 other immigration bills on Thursday, meant to “enhance housing, school, workplace and civil protections for California’s immigrants.”</p>
<p>The other bills prohibit landlords from reporting their undocumented tenants, ban employers from authorizing federal immigration raids at the workplace, and allow students whose parents were deported to continue attending California schools.</p>
<p>“This action protects public safety and ensures hard-working people who contribute to our state are respected,” Brown said in a <a href="https://www.gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=19986" type="external">statement</a>.</p>
<p>Since Trump was elected US president, there have been three different ballot initiatives that would require the state Legislature to ask Congress for a federal constitutional convention in order to make California an independent state. The measure, known as “Calexit,” gained support from one-third of residents in the Golden State, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-california-secession/more-californians-dreaming-of-a-country-without-trump-poll-idUSKBN1572KB" type="external">poll</a> in January.</p> | false | 1 | california governor jerry brown signed law protections 23 million immigrants living us illegally trump administration warned firstofitskind law trendsetting state may national impact beginning january senate bill 54 dubbed california values act prohibit local law enforcement asking immigration status routine interactions complying unconstitutional detainer requests federal immigration officers read signing statement accompanying bill brown explained bill also prohibits federal government using local authorities work immigration agents law enforcement officers also prohibited detaining individual hold request federal government unless felony warrant convicted one 800 crimes listed states trust act additionally officers prohibited arresting individual solely based civil immigration warrant becoming deputized immigration agents participating joint task forces federal government primary purpose immigration enforcement last month us attorney general jeff sessions publicly urged brown veto bill calling unconscionable sessions officials trump administration come sanctuary jurisdictions citing connection illegal immigrants increases violent crime first time nations populous state defied federal government 1996 california became first us state legalize medical marijuana since 29 states district columbia passed laws legalizing marijuana form read california bill create sanctuary state passes key legislative hurdle legislators 15 states district columbia introduced similar immigration sanctuary bills 2017 another 33 states considering legislation prohibit according national conference state legislators sanctuary policies endanger us especially federal immigration officers forced pursue criminal aliens outside jails prisons sessions said speech federal law enforcement officials september sessions threatened withhold federal grants sanctuary jurisdictions allow federal immigration authorities access local jails give department 48 hours notice releasing anyone wanted immigration violations policy temporarily blocked federal judge challenged city chicago illinois read however brown said bill prevent prohibit immigration customs enforcement department homeland security work way federal immigration officers free use considerable resources enforcing federal law state brown also said bill prohibit local sheriffs cooperating deportation proceedings federal immigration officers letting jails conduct interviews uncertain times undocumented californians families bill strikes balance protect public safety bringing measure comfort families living fear every day brown wrote signing message weeks november 2016 presidential election california senate president pro tem kevin de leon introduced senate bill 54 direct response president donald trumps campaign policies immigration stand idly president trump attorney general jeff sessions seek divide nation scapegoating honest hardworking families casting immigrants threats neutralized de leon said statement following browns signing asked comment bill white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders said trump administration spending every day trying find best way forward president laying responsible immigration plan next week huckabee sanders said thursdays press briefing hope california push back governors think irresponsible decision moving forward 10 million immigrants live california state us according american immigration council estimated 23 million undocumented immigrants living state according public policy institute california ppic nonprofit nonpartisan think tank brown also signed 10 immigration bills thursday meant enhance housing school workplace civil protections californias immigrants bills prohibit landlords reporting undocumented tenants ban employers authorizing federal immigration raids workplace allow students whose parents deported continue attending california schools action protects public safety ensures hardworking people contribute state respected brown said statement since trump elected us president three different ballot initiatives would require state legislature ask congress federal constitutional convention order make california independent state measure known calexit gained support onethird residents golden state according reutersipsos opinion poll january | 532 |
<p>I recently <a href="https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/05/27/confirmation-bias-and-the-limits-of-human-knowledge/" type="external">wrote about&#160;confirmation bias and the limits of human knowledge</a>. In that discussion, I observed that in politics the desire to defend our “team” is often an even more powerful inducement to ignore contrary arguments than the desire to confirm our own personal assumptions.</p>
<p>In response to that post, I received a note from Whit Ayres, a prominent Republican pollster and political consultant. He alerted me to a polling experiment (sponsored by the Bipartisan Policy Center) that he had done in 2013 with Mark Mellman, a Democratic public opinion researcher and communications strategist. Mr. Mellman <a href="http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/mark-mellman/287789-relationship-of-parties-and-policies" type="external">wrote</a> about their findings in The Hill. They are fascinating:</p>
<p>We presented respondents with two different education plans, the details of which are unimportant in this context. What is important is that half the sample was told A was the Democratic plan and B was the Republican plan, while the other half of our national sample was told A was the Republican plan and B was the Democrats’ approach.</p>
<p>The questions dealt with substantive policy on a subject quite important to most Americans — education — and issues that people are familiar with — class size, teacher pay and the like.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, when the specifics in Plan A were presented as the Democratic plan and B as the Republican plan, Democrats preferred A by 75 percent to 17 percent, and Republicans favored B by 13 percent to 78 percent. When the exact same elements of A were presented in the exact same words, but as the Republicans’ plan, and with B as the Democrats’ plan, Democrats preferred B by 80 percent to 12 percent, while Republicans preferred “their party’s plan” by 70 percent to 10 percent. Independents split fairly evenly both times. In short, support for an identical education plan shifted by more than 60 points among partisans, depending on which party was said to back it. [emphasis added]</p>
<p>“Thus,” Mr. Mehlman writes, “policy positions were not driving partisanship, but rather partisanship was driving policy positions. Voters took whichever position was ascribed to their party, irrespective of the specific policies that position entailed.”</p>
<p>So what explains this? Some of it probably has to do with deference. Many people don’t follow public policy issues very closely — but they do know whose team they’re on. And so if their team endorses a particular policy, they’re strongly inclined to as well. They assume the position merits support based on who (and who does not) supports it.</p>
<p>The flip side of this is mistrust. If you’re a Democrat and you are told about the details of a Republican plan, you might automatically assume it’s a bad one (the same goes for how a Republican would receive a Democratic plan). If a party you despise holds a view on a certain issue, your reflex will be to hold that opposite view.</p>
<p>Still, the findings by Ayres and Mellman are striking. They underscore how much partisanship shapes our attitudes, probably much more than we like to admit. Many of us aren’t nearly as independent-minded as we like to think. What others in our intellectual and/or faith community believe significantly influences us. And a lot more goes into what positions we hold than a rigorous and disinterested analysis of the evidence. There are our worldviews and pre-existing biases; our past experiences and the “scripts” that have guided our lives; the company we keep and the people whose affirmation we seek.</p>
<p>“Moral reasoning is more like a politician seeking votes than a scientist seeking truth,” <a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2015/05/political-polarisation?fsrc=scn/tw_ec/not_persuaded" type="external">according to Jonathan Haidt</a>, who has written more insightfully on this topic than anyone. “We are obsessively concerned about what others think of us.”</p>
<p>A close friend of mine wrote me in response to my piece on confirmation bias and said this:</p>
<p>I find myself able to argue both sides [of the same-sex marriage debate] cogently. Finding oneself in the middle is deeply draining. Perhaps that’s why people don’t want to try to understand the other point of view: they’d prefer closure, which is easier emotionally.</p>
<p>Understanding the other point of view doesn’t come naturally to any of us, but in our more self-aware moments we believe it’s worth the effort. Doing so won’t (and shouldn’t necessarily) lead us to alter our stance, but what it can do is make us somewhat more understanding of those who disagree with us. And perhaps even a bit more charitable toward them.</p>
<p>The Ayres and Mellman survey is ingenious because it empirically revealed an uncomfortable reality: the views many of us hold are largely dictated by partisanship and ideological affiliations rather than intellectual rigor. Everything needs to fit into well-worn grooves, into familiar categories, into pre-existing patterns. This in turn leads to an almost chronic unwillingness to revisit and refine long-held positions. Our thinking on matters of politics and philosophy and faith not only can become lazy; it can easily ossify. It may be worth asking yourself (and me asking myself): In the last 15-20 years, on what issues of importance have you changed your mind, re-calibrated your thinking, or even attempted to take a fresh look at? Or has every event, serious study, and new set of facts merely confirmed what you already knew? To put it another way: do you think you’ve ever been wrong?</p>
<p>We are social animals; being part of a team is a natural, and in some respects an admirable, trait. But if it’s not checked, it can become a destructive one, too. Because being on a team, and being seen as being a loyal member of the team, can easily supersede our commitment to ascertain the truth of things.</p>
<p>I understand that politicians aren’t philosophers, and philosophers aren’t politicians. But politics needs what philosophy ought to provide, which is the search for wisdom. That search begins with the awareness that while truth exists, each of us — and our teams — are only in possession of partial truths. At best we see only part of the whole. Knowing that allows us to more easily follow where new evidence and arguments may lead; to venture beyond our political and intellectual cul-de-sacs. That may sound obvious until we acknowledge the power of conformity within political, intellectual and faith communities.</p>
<p>The author and Member of Parliament, John Buchan, wrote that while attending Oxford he realized that even eternal truths required “frequent spring-cleanings.” The limited outlook of his early years broadened. He was elected as a Conservative and, believing in party government, Buchan disliked the name of Independent. “But I held that a university member should sit a little loose to parties,” he wrote, “and I was independent in fact if not in name.”</p>
<p>We’d be better off if more of us did the same.</p>
<p>Peter Wehner is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a contributing opinion writer for the New York Times.</p> | false | 1 | recently wrote about160confirmation bias limits human knowledge discussion observed politics desire defend team often even powerful inducement ignore contrary arguments desire confirm personal assumptions response post received note whit ayres prominent republican pollster political consultant alerted polling experiment sponsored bipartisan policy center done 2013 mark mellman democratic public opinion researcher communications strategist mr mellman wrote findings hill fascinating presented respondents two different education plans details unimportant context important half sample told democratic plan b republican plan half national sample told republican plan b democrats approach questions dealt substantive policy subject quite important americans education issues people familiar class size teacher pay like nonetheless specifics plan presented democratic plan b republican plan democrats preferred 75 percent 17 percent republicans favored b 13 percent 78 percent exact elements presented exact words republicans plan b democrats plan democrats preferred b 80 percent 12 percent republicans preferred partys plan 70 percent 10 percent independents split fairly evenly times short support identical education plan shifted 60 points among partisans depending party said back emphasis added thus mr mehlman writes policy positions driving partisanship rather partisanship driving policy positions voters took whichever position ascribed party irrespective specific policies position entailed explains probably deference many people dont follow public policy issues closely know whose team theyre team endorses particular policy theyre strongly inclined well assume position merits support based supports flip side mistrust youre democrat told details republican plan might automatically assume bad one goes republican would receive democratic plan party despise holds view certain issue reflex hold opposite view still findings ayres mellman striking underscore much partisanship shapes attitudes probably much like admit many us arent nearly independentminded like think others intellectual andor faith community believe significantly influences us lot goes positions hold rigorous disinterested analysis evidence worldviews preexisting biases past experiences scripts guided lives company keep people whose affirmation seek moral reasoning like politician seeking votes scientist seeking truth according jonathan haidt written insightfully topic anyone obsessively concerned others think us close friend mine wrote response piece confirmation bias said find able argue sides samesex marriage debate cogently finding oneself middle deeply draining perhaps thats people dont want try understand point view theyd prefer closure easier emotionally understanding point view doesnt come naturally us selfaware moments believe worth effort wont shouldnt necessarily lead us alter stance make us somewhat understanding disagree us perhaps even bit charitable toward ayres mellman survey ingenious empirically revealed uncomfortable reality views many us hold largely dictated partisanship ideological affiliations rather intellectual rigor everything needs fit wellworn grooves familiar categories preexisting patterns turn leads almost chronic unwillingness revisit refine longheld positions thinking matters politics philosophy faith become lazy easily ossify may worth asking asking last 1520 years issues importance changed mind recalibrated thinking even attempted take fresh look every event serious study new set facts merely confirmed already knew put another way think youve ever wrong social animals part team natural respects admirable trait checked become destructive one team seen loyal member team easily supersede commitment ascertain truth things understand politicians arent philosophers philosophers arent politicians politics needs philosophy ought provide search wisdom search begins awareness truth exists us teams possession partial truths best see part whole knowing allows us easily follow new evidence arguments may lead venture beyond political intellectual culdesacs may sound obvious acknowledge power conformity within political intellectual faith communities author member parliament john buchan wrote attending oxford realized even eternal truths required frequent springcleanings limited outlook early years broadened elected conservative believing party government buchan disliked name independent held university member sit little loose parties wrote independent fact name wed better us peter wehner senior fellow ethics public policy center contributing opinion writer new york times | 609 |
<p>SPOILER ALERT: Do not read unless you have watched “Foisted!” the Oct. 1 episode of “ <a href="http://variety.com/tag/curb-your-enthusiasm/" type="external">Curb Your Enthusiasm</a>.”</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/tag/jeff-schaffer/" type="external">Jeff Schaffer</a> has seen all of the footage taped for “ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/reviews/curb-your-enthusiasm-larry-david-tv-review-1202577236/" type="external">Curb Your Enthusiasm</a>’s” Season 9 twice — once when he was shooting it, and at least once when he was editing it. Because of creator and showrunner <a href="http://variety.com/tag/larry-david/" type="external">Larry David</a>’s technique for the iconic show, returning after its Season 8 finale in 2011, Schaffer knows the every possible way that every punch line might have gone a little differently, for a slightly different affect. It means that he’s living and breathing “Curb Your Enthusiasm’s” ninth season. When&#160;Variety&#160;speaks to Schaffer, he’s in the middle of editing episodes nine and ten. But he took a break to talk to us about how “Foisted!” got made — and “Fatwa!” for that matter.</p>
<p>What was like filming this premiere after six years away?</p>
<p>The last time we were on was 2011. The summer of 2011, just think about what a different time it was. The movies that came out — a “Cars” movie sequel, “Pirates of the Caribbean” sequel, “Planet of the Apes” sequel, “Transformers” sequel. Completely different world, right?</p>
<p>We wrote six or seven episodes before we finally go, “Hey Larry, are we gonna tell HBO that we’re doing this, so we can hire a crew to shoot some of these?” He’s always the last person to know that he’s coming back. Once we sorted of landed on Larry writing “Fatwa! The Musical” that’s when I knew we were coming back.</p>
<p>Do you think that the Ayatollah might notice this arc?</p>
<p>Did we talk about Larry getting a real fatwa for fake Larry getting a fatwa for writing “Fatwa!”? Yeah, we talked about it.</p>
<p>And?</p>
<p>There’s no bad publicity. I think I’m still in a lawsuit. The Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade is still suing me for “Brüno.” Just add them to the list.</p>
<p>When Larry was doing the fake “Jimmy Kimmel Live!,” did Kimmel know what Larry was going to do?</p>
<p>Jimmy knew about “Fatwa! The Musical,” and that Larry was going to say some stuff about the Ayatollah. The rest of it, they just went. There’s a much longer interview. Larry was like, “This is the best late night experience I’ve ever had!”</p>
<p>How challenging is it to piece together an episode of “Curb Your Enthusiasm” in the editing room?</p>
<p>Here’s the thing: The show’s written three times. People don’t really appreciate how much time we spend writing the outline. It’s the same way we wrote “Seinfeld.” You come up with funny stories, then you have to do all this comedy geometry to get these stories interweaving. Then you get these brilliant actors saying these funny situations in their own ways. Every scene’s a live rewrite. We’re writing and shooting at the same time. Larry wants to be fresh, so you’ll whisper things he doesn’t want to know. If it really works, he laughs, and the take’s ruined. About half the time when I’m shooting, if I know something is going to really work, I’ll switch from overs to a single of the other person. So I don’t have Larry’s [shaking with laughter] shoulder ruining the shot.</p>
<p>Larry’s so good. He’s able to be in the scene and write and the same time. And see the scene from outside himself. We’ll be in the middle of a take sometimes and he’ll do this [puts finger over mouth, holds out other arm], he’ll start to laugh, and i know he’s laughing because of what he’s about to do. It’s like shooting a live comedy sporting event. You’re writing on the floor all the time — you have to know which threads to pursue. It’s fun. These are funny people.</p>
<p>What’s an example from the premiere?</p>
<p>J.B. loves surprising Larry. When Larry walked up to Leon’s guest house, and he goes “What are you doing?” and Leon goes “Lampin’,” Larry had never heard that before in his life. That’s just J.B. throwing Larry a curve and Larry hitting it back. That’s what the show is — knowing that we should keep talking about that. Let’s do more of that one. The trick is knowing when something worked — but did we cover it right? Can we even get to it? There could be a really funny section, but is there any way to get to it? You have to set that up so it makes sense. You’re writing live. Larry’s stamina is incredible, because he’s in every scene, and we’re doing this every scene, every time.</p>
<p>Is he in the editing room, too?</p>
<p>I’ll usually do a director’s cut, and then I’ll show that to Larry, but no matter what, he wants to go back and go through all the footage. I spent the last five months in the edit room on a couch with him. The editors Jon Corn and Steve Rasch, they don’t get enough credit for the amazing work they do. We’re weaving this together. They’re helping us shape the show.</p>
<p>What happens when your sense of humor differs from Larry’s?</p>
<p>Larry and I are on the same page most of the time. When Alec [Berg] and David [Mandel] were there, we used to have what I would call a three-to-one tie. The tie usually went to him — although in the edit room, he will let me try anything. In fact, there is some horse trading: I’ll give you that, but I’m keeping this.</p>
<p>What was your favorite punchline from the first episode?</p>
<p>When Richard [Lewis] and Larry both wanted to talk to each other and said, you come here, you come here. And then they meet and Richard goes, “Are you happy?” And Larry goes, “No! I had to take more steps than you!”</p>
<p>It is a really funny moment.</p>
<p>We were on a scout, and a lot of things come when we get to the real place. We knew Jeff [Greene, played by Jeff Garlin] and Larry were gonna be sitting at the bar. We needed to a scene with Richard, and oh, we’ll put him over there, and as we were doing it, it just came.</p>
<p>Is this open sandbox overwhelming for the actors?</p>
<p>They have a safety net, too. I’m the safety net. If you need lines, I will give you lines. I will be suggesting things. Larry’s suggesting things. No one’s ever gonna leave you high and dry. Input is coming in from every angle.</p> | false | 1 | spoiler alert read unless watched foisted oct 1 episode curb enthusiasm jeff schaffer seen footage taped curb enthusiasms season 9 twice shooting least editing creator showrunner larry davids technique iconic show returning season 8 finale 2011 schaffer knows every possible way every punch line might gone little differently slightly different affect means hes living breathing curb enthusiasms ninth season when160variety160speaks schaffer hes middle editing episodes nine ten took break talk us foisted got made fatwa matter like filming premiere six years away last time 2011 summer 2011 think different time movies came cars movie sequel pirates caribbean sequel planet apes sequel transformers sequel completely different world right wrote six seven episodes finally go hey larry gon na tell hbo hire crew shoot hes always last person know hes coming back sorted landed larry writing fatwa musical thats knew coming back think ayatollah might notice arc talk larry getting real fatwa fake larry getting fatwa writing fatwa yeah talked theres bad publicity think im still lawsuit alaqsa martyrs brigade still suing brüno add list larry fake jimmy kimmel live kimmel know larry going jimmy knew fatwa musical larry going say stuff ayatollah rest went theres much longer interview larry like best late night experience ive ever challenging piece together episode curb enthusiasm editing room heres thing shows written three times people dont really appreciate much time spend writing outline way wrote seinfeld come funny stories comedy geometry get stories interweaving get brilliant actors saying funny situations ways every scenes live rewrite writing shooting time larry wants fresh youll whisper things doesnt want know really works laughs takes ruined half time im shooting know something going really work ill switch overs single person dont larrys shaking laughter shoulder ruining shot larrys good hes able scene write time see scene outside well middle take sometimes hell puts finger mouth holds arm hell start laugh know hes laughing hes like shooting live comedy sporting event youre writing floor time know threads pursue fun funny people whats example premiere jb loves surprising larry larry walked leons guest house goes leon goes lampin larry never heard life thats jb throwing larry curve larry hitting back thats show knowing keep talking lets one trick knowing something worked cover right even get could really funny section way get set makes sense youre writing live larrys stamina incredible hes every scene every scene every time editing room ill usually directors cut ill show larry matter wants go back go footage spent last five months edit room couch editors jon corn steve rasch dont get enough credit amazing work weaving together theyre helping us shape show happens sense humor differs larrys larry page time alec berg david mandel used would call threetoone tie tie usually went although edit room let try anything fact horse trading ill give im keeping favorite punchline first episode richard lewis larry wanted talk said come come meet richard goes happy larry goes take steps really funny moment scout lot things come get real place knew jeff greene played jeff garlin larry gon na sitting bar needed scene richard oh well put came open sandbox overwhelming actors safety net im safety net need lines give lines suggesting things larrys suggesting things ones ever gon na leave high dry input coming every angle | 546 |
<p>(Bloomberg) — The $1.4 trillion item on President Donald Trump’s wish list — a package of tax cuts for businesses and individuals that he has said he wants to sign before year’s end — is headed into the legislative equivalent of a Black Friday scrum next week.</p>
<p>Senate Republican leaders plan a make-or-break floor vote on their bill as soon as Thursday — a dramatic moment that will come only after a marathon debate that could go all night. Democrats are expected to try to delay or derail the measure, and the GOP must hold together at least 50 votes from its thin, 52-vote majority in order to prevail.</p>
<p>Their chances improved this week when Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said she’ll support repealing the “individual mandate” imposed by Obamacare — a provision that Senate tax writers are counting on to help finance the tax cuts. Murkowski had earlier signaled some reservations about the provision; and her support was widely viewed as a positive sign for the tax bill’s chances.</p>
<p>Trump is scheduled to address Senate Republicans at their weekly luncheon Tuesday afternoon on taxes and the legislative agenda for the rest of the year, according to a statement from Senator John Barrasso, chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee.</p>
<p>The White House previously announced that the president would talk with Republican and Democratic congressional leaders at the White House the same day about an agreement on spending to keep the government open after funding expires on Dec. 8. David Popp, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Drew Hammill, a spokesman for House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, both said that meeting is still on the schedule.</p>
<p>If the tax bill clears the Senate — a step that’s by no means guaranteed — lawmakers in both chambers would have to hammer out a compromise between their differing bills, a process that presents potential pitfalls of its own. For now, though, much of the Senate’s attention will focus on its legislation’s price tag.</p>
<p>Three GOP senators — Bob Corker of Tennessee, Jeff Flake of Arizona and James Lankford of Oklahoma — have cited concerns about how the measure would affect federal deficits. Independent studies of the legislation have found that — contrary to its backers’ arguments — its tax cuts won’t stimulate enough growth to pay for themselves. Both the Senate bill, and one that cleared the House earlier this month, would reduce federal revenue over a decade by roughly $1.4 trillion, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.</p>
<p>On Wednesday, a report from the Penn Wharton Budget Model at the University of Pennsylvania said the bill would reduce federal revenue in each year from 2028 to 2033. That finding would mean it doesn’t comply with a key budget rule that Senate Republican leaders want to use to pass their bill with a simple majority over Democrats’ objections.</p>
<p>Budget Rule</p>
<p>In essence, that rule holds that any bill approved via that fast-track process can’t add to the deficit outside a 10-year budget window. The JCT has already found that the Senate bill would generate a surplus in its 10th year because it has set several tax breaks for businesses and individuals to expire.</p>
<p>But JCT hasn’t yet weighed in publicly on the revenue effects in subsequent years. Senate GOP leaders have expressed confidence that their proposal will satisfy the rule ultimately.</p>
<p>Another potential stumbling block stems from the fact that Congress is trying to act on complex tax legislation under a tight, self-imposed timeline in order to deliver on promises from Trump, House Speaker Paul Ryan and McConnell.</p>
<p>For example, Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has said he can’t support the current Senate bill because it would give corporations a tax advantage — a large rate cut to 20 percent from 35 percent — that other, closely held businesses wouldn’t get.</p>
<p>‘Change the Most’</p>
<p>His concern centers on the Senate’s plan for large partnerships, limited liability companies, sole proprietorships and other so-called “pass-through” businesses. Under current law, these businesses simply pass their earnings to their owners, who pay income taxes at their individual rates — currently, as high as 39.6 percent, depending on how much they earn.</p>
<p>Read more: A QuickTake guide to the tax-cut debate</p>
<p>The Senate bill would provide pass-through owners with a 17.4 percent deduction for income — but in combination with other provisions, that would result in an effective top tax rate for business income that’s more than 10 percentage points higher than the proposed corporate tax rate.</p>
<p>The House bill would use an entirely different approach, setting a top tax rate of 25 percent for pass-through business income, but then limiting how much of a business’s earnings could qualify for that rate.</p>
<p>Reconciling those differences — and addressing Johnson’s concern — may be a complicated process. “That’s part of the equation that could change the most over the next few weeks,” Isaac Boltansky, senior vice president and policy analyst at Compass Point Research and Trading LLC, told Bloomberg Tax. “No one is planning around it yet. There is uncertainty across the board.”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the Obamacare issue looms in the background — threatening at least one GOP senator’s vote. Susan Collins of Maine said earlier this week that tax bill “needs work,” and “I think there will be changes.”</p>
<p>The 2010 Affordable Care Act — popularly known as Obamacare — contained a provision requiring individuals to buy health insurance or pay a federal penalty. Removing that penalty in 2019, as the Senate tax bill proposes to do, would generate an estimated $318 billion in savings by 2027, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The savings would stem from about 13 million Americans dropping their coverage, eliminating the need for federal subsidies to help them afford it.</p>
<p>Because many of the newly uninsured would be younger, healthier people, insurance premiums would rise 10 percent in most years, the nonpartisan fiscal scorekeeper found.</p>
<p>(Updates with Trump’s visit to Capitol with Senate Republicans in fourth paragraph.)</p> | false | 1 | bloomberg 14 trillion item president donald trumps wish list package tax cuts businesses individuals said wants sign years end headed legislative equivalent black friday scrum next week senate republican leaders plan makeorbreak floor vote bill soon thursday dramatic moment come marathon debate could go night democrats expected try delay derail measure gop must hold together least 50 votes thin 52vote majority order prevail chances improved week republican senator lisa murkowski alaska said shell support repealing individual mandate imposed obamacare provision senate tax writers counting help finance tax cuts murkowski earlier signaled reservations provision support widely viewed positive sign tax bills chances trump scheduled address senate republicans weekly luncheon tuesday afternoon taxes legislative agenda rest year according statement senator john barrasso chairman senate republican policy committee white house previously announced president would talk republican democratic congressional leaders white house day agreement spending keep government open funding expires dec 8 david popp spokesman senate majority leader mitch mcconnell drew hammill spokesman house democratic leader nancy pelosi said meeting still schedule tax bill clears senate step thats means guaranteed lawmakers chambers would hammer compromise differing bills process presents potential pitfalls though much senates attention focus legislations price tag three gop senators bob corker tennessee jeff flake arizona james lankford oklahoma cited concerns measure would affect federal deficits independent studies legislation found contrary backers arguments tax cuts wont stimulate enough growth pay senate bill one cleared house earlier month would reduce federal revenue decade roughly 14 trillion according joint committee taxation wednesday report penn wharton budget model university pennsylvania said bill would reduce federal revenue year 2028 2033 finding would mean doesnt comply key budget rule senate republican leaders want use pass bill simple majority democrats objections budget rule essence rule holds bill approved via fasttrack process cant add deficit outside 10year budget window jct already found senate bill would generate surplus 10th year set several tax breaks businesses individuals expire jct hasnt yet weighed publicly revenue effects subsequent years senate gop leaders expressed confidence proposal satisfy rule ultimately another potential stumbling block stems fact congress trying act complex tax legislation tight selfimposed timeline order deliver promises trump house speaker paul ryan mcconnell example republican senator ron johnson wisconsin said cant support current senate bill would give corporations tax advantage large rate cut 20 percent 35 percent closely held businesses wouldnt get change concern centers senates plan large partnerships limited liability companies sole proprietorships socalled passthrough businesses current law businesses simply pass earnings owners pay income taxes individual rates currently high 396 percent depending much earn read quicktake guide taxcut debate senate bill would provide passthrough owners 174 percent deduction income combination provisions would result effective top tax rate business income thats 10 percentage points higher proposed corporate tax rate house bill would use entirely different approach setting top tax rate 25 percent passthrough business income limiting much businesss earnings could qualify rate reconciling differences addressing johnsons concern may complicated process thats part equation could change next weeks isaac boltansky senior vice president policy analyst compass point research trading llc told bloomberg tax one planning around yet uncertainty across board meanwhile obamacare issue looms background threatening least one gop senators vote susan collins maine said earlier week tax bill needs work think changes 2010 affordable care act popularly known obamacare contained provision requiring individuals buy health insurance pay federal penalty removing penalty 2019 senate tax bill proposes would generate estimated 318 billion savings 2027 according congressional budget office savings would stem 13 million americans dropping coverage eliminating need federal subsidies help afford many newly uninsured would younger healthier people insurance premiums would rise 10 percent years nonpartisan fiscal scorekeeper found updates trumps visit capitol senate republicans fourth paragraph | 614 |
<p>Our government is breaking down the rule of law and stripping away our rights in the name of protecting us.</p>
<p>The national religion of the United States of America is nationalism. Its god is the flag. Its prayer is the pledge of allegiance.</p>
<p>The flag’s powers include those of life and death, powers formerly possessed by traditional religions. Its myths are built around the sacrifice of lives to protect against the evils outside the nation. Its heroes are soldiers who make such sacrifices based on unquestioning faith. A “Dream Act” that would give citizenship to those immigrants who kill or die for the flag embodies the deepest dreams of flag worship. Its high priest is the Commander in Chief. Its slaughter of infidels is not protection of a nation otherwise engaged, but an act that in itself completely constitutes the nation as it is understood by its devotees. If the nation stopped killing it would cease to be.</p>
<p>What happens to myths like these when we discover that flying killer robots make better soldiers than soldiers do? Or when we learn that the president is using those flying robots to kill U.S. citizens? Which beliefs do we jettison to reduce the dissonance in our troubled brains?</p>
<p>Some 85% of U.S.ians, and shrinking rapidly, are theists. &#160;Flag worship may be on the decline as well, but its numbers are still high. A majority supports a ban on flag burning. A majority supports the power of the president to kill non-U.S.ians with drones, while a significantly smaller percentage supports the president’s power to kill U.S. citizens with drones abroad. That is to say, if the high priest declares someone an enemy of god, many people believe he should have the power to kill that enemy . . . unless that enemy is a U.S. citizen. In secular terms, which make this reality seem all the crazier, many of us support acts of murder based on the citizenship of the victim.</p>
<p>Of course, the Commander in Chief kills U.S. citizens all the time by sending them into wars. Drones don’t change that. Drone pilots have committed suicide. Drone pilots have been targeted and killed by retaliatory suicide bombings. Drones have killed U.S. citizens through accidental “friendly” fire. The hostility that drones are generating abroad has motivated terrorist attacks and attempted attacks abroad and within the national borders of the United States.</p>
<p>But feeding corpses to our holy flag looks different when we’re feeding them directly to the president’s flying robots without a foreign intermediary. And yet to approximately a quarter of the U.S. public it doesn’t look different after all. The president, in their own view, should have the power to kill them, or at least the power to kill anyone (including U.S. citizens) so contaminated as to be standing outside the United States of America—a frightening and primitive realm that many U.S.ians have never visited and feel no need to ever visit.</p>
<p>Popular support for murder-by-president drops off significantly if “innocent civilians may also be killed.” But a religious belief system perpetuates itself not through the positions it takes on existing facts so much as through its ability to select which facts one becomes aware of and <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/1QA/ni0YAA/t.22p/dtySHW5OSbWBdB4WLIX2SA/h0/AZ8tXuRykWDUZ-2BIpg-2B9Y3pY-2BuV7rA8RHm6O6M-2Fkqpd5TxSHY0-2FsJT2v8p9n37k8kqcCSv1-2BO0Fn57QPvI1HDRugBGreshl1UV3jbsuDf2mMteRhxMfwbNawEx-2BE4inogVK6wea8b8e70H6a-2BMPWwLlWmJn289Ab-2Bmo6vT-2FZVlR8wNxNsfanA-2B-2FmlelWX4g7-2B-2BJLjMxjbGvJhE7vw7y02MqbPzgjDQz8ZTBkojFNVWto-3D" type="external">which facts remain unknown</a>.</p>
<p>Many U.S.ians have avoided knowing that U.S. citizens, including minors, have been targeted and killed, that women and children are on the list of those to be killed, that hundreds of civilian deaths have been documented by serious journalists including victims’ names and identities, that U.S. peace activists went to Pakistan and met with victims’ families, that the U.S. ambassador in Pakistan said there was a U.S. government count of how many civilians had been killed but he wouldn’t say what it was, that the vast majority of those killed are not important leaders in any organization, that people are targeted and killed without knowing their name, that people are targeted and killed merely for the act of trying to rescue victims of previous strikes, that the wounded outnumber the dead, that the traumatized outnumber the wounded, that the refugees who have fled the drone strikes are over a million, that the drone wars did not replace ground wars but began war making in new nations so destabilized now by the drone strikes that ground wars may develop, that some top U.S. military officials have said the drones are creating more new enemies than they kill, or that what drones are doing to our reputation abroad makes Abu Ghraib look like the fun and games our media pundits said it was.</p>
<p>If our courts killed without trials there would be by definition a risk of killing the innocent. The same should be understood when a president and his flying robots, or missiles, or night raids, kill without trial.</p>
<p>If we were being bombed we would not deem it any more acceptable to kill those who resisted than those who did not. Therefore, the category of “innocent civilian” (as distinct from guilty non-civilian) is suspect at best.</p>
<p>The vast majority of the “worst of the worst” locked away in Guantanamo have been exonerated and freed, something that cannot be done with drone victims. Yet John Brennan, once deemed unacceptable for his role in detention and torture, is now deemed acceptable. The goodness of his murdering evil beings outweighs the badness of his detaining and torturing people who were sometimes misidentified. The dead cannot be misidentified. The president has declared that any unidentified dead male of fighting age was, by definition, a militant. After all, he was killed.</p>
<p>Yet, this we know for certain: He was someone’s child. He was someone’s loved one. He was someone’s friend.</p>
<p>We have a responsibility right now to grow up very, very quickly. Our government is breaking down the rule of law and stripping away our rights in the name of protecting us from an enemy it generates through the same process. Drones are not inevitable. Drones are not in charge of us. We don’t have to fill our local skies with “surveillance” drones and “crowd control” drones. That’s a choice that is up to us to make. We don’t have to transfer to mindless hunks of metal the heroism heretofore bestowed just as nonsensically on soldiers. There is no excuse for supporting the murder of foreigners in cases in which we would not support the murder of U.S. citizens. There is no excuse for supporting a policy of murdering anyone at all.</p>
<p>There is no excuse for allowing your government to take your son or daughter and give you back a flag. There is no excuse for allowing your government to take someone else’s son or daughter. Ever. Anywhere. No matter how scared you are. No matter what oath of loyalty you’ve robotically pledged to a colored piece of fabric since Kindergarten. Actual robots can perform the pledge of allegiance as well as any human. They do not, however, have any heart to place their hand over. We should reserve our hearts for actions robots cannot do.</p>
<p>­This article was originally published at <a href="http://davidswanson.org/node/3963" type="external">DavidSwanson.org</a>.</p> | false | 1 | government breaking rule law stripping away rights name protecting us national religion united states america nationalism god flag prayer pledge allegiance flags powers include life death powers formerly possessed traditional religions myths built around sacrifice lives protect evils outside nation heroes soldiers make sacrifices based unquestioning faith dream act would give citizenship immigrants kill die flag embodies deepest dreams flag worship high priest commander chief slaughter infidels protection nation otherwise engaged act completely constitutes nation understood devotees nation stopped killing would cease happens myths like discover flying killer robots make better soldiers soldiers learn president using flying robots kill us citizens beliefs jettison reduce dissonance troubled brains 85 usians shrinking rapidly theists 160flag worship may decline well numbers still high majority supports ban flag burning majority supports power president kill nonusians drones significantly smaller percentage supports presidents power kill us citizens drones abroad say high priest declares someone enemy god many people believe power kill enemy unless enemy us citizen secular terms make reality seem crazier many us support acts murder based citizenship victim course commander chief kills us citizens time sending wars drones dont change drone pilots committed suicide drone pilots targeted killed retaliatory suicide bombings drones killed us citizens accidental friendly fire hostility drones generating abroad motivated terrorist attacks attempted attacks abroad within national borders united states feeding corpses holy flag looks different feeding directly presidents flying robots without foreign intermediary yet approximately quarter us public doesnt look different president view power kill least power kill anyone including us citizens contaminated standing outside united states americaa frightening primitive realm many usians never visited feel need ever visit popular support murderbypresident drops significantly innocent civilians may also killed religious belief system perpetuates positions takes existing facts much ability select facts one becomes aware facts remain unknown many usians avoided knowing us citizens including minors targeted killed women children list killed hundreds civilian deaths documented serious journalists including victims names identities us peace activists went pakistan met victims families us ambassador pakistan said us government count many civilians killed wouldnt say vast majority killed important leaders organization people targeted killed without knowing name people targeted killed merely act trying rescue victims previous strikes wounded outnumber dead traumatized outnumber wounded refugees fled drone strikes million drone wars replace ground wars began war making new nations destabilized drone strikes ground wars may develop top us military officials said drones creating new enemies kill drones reputation abroad makes abu ghraib look like fun games media pundits said courts killed without trials would definition risk killing innocent understood president flying robots missiles night raids kill without trial bombed would deem acceptable kill resisted therefore category innocent civilian distinct guilty noncivilian suspect best vast majority worst worst locked away guantanamo exonerated freed something done drone victims yet john brennan deemed unacceptable role detention torture deemed acceptable goodness murdering evil beings outweighs badness detaining torturing people sometimes misidentified dead misidentified president declared unidentified dead male fighting age definition militant killed yet know certain someones child someones loved one someones friend responsibility right grow quickly government breaking rule law stripping away rights name protecting us enemy generates process drones inevitable drones charge us dont fill local skies surveillance drones crowd control drones thats choice us make dont transfer mindless hunks metal heroism heretofore bestowed nonsensically soldiers excuse supporting murder foreigners cases would support murder us citizens excuse supporting policy murdering anyone excuse allowing government take son daughter give back flag excuse allowing government take someone elses son daughter ever anywhere matter scared matter oath loyalty youve robotically pledged colored piece fabric since kindergarten actual robots perform pledge allegiance well human however heart place hand reserve hearts actions robots article originally published davidswansonorg | 615 |
<p>A Senate investigative committee released <a href="https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/hearings/combatting-the-opioid-crisis-exploiting-vulnerabilities-in-international-mail" type="external">a new report on Wednesday</a> revealing how overseas drug distributors have exploited weaknesses in the United States Postal Service to ship an untold amount of deadly, illicit fentanyl into the country.</p>
<p>The lead Republican author of the report, Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, described how foreign distributors, largely in China, have taken advantage of e-commerce and loopholes in the postal system to transmit hundreds of thousands of packages of fentanyl and other synthetic opioids to U.S. consumers.</p>
<p>In an effort to understand the flow of fentanyl into the United States, a bipartisan staff of Senate investigators produced a <a href="https://www.portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=12F93202-C8EC-4AF1-8A66-181EE6716F37" type="external">96-page report</a>identifying the weaknesses in the current fight against the opioid epidemic, specifically the overseas supply of those drugs. The investigation began with a simple online search: "fentanyl for sale." Within moments the investigative team was able to connect to an array of international distributors.</p>
<p>"That simple search returned hundreds of websites, many affiliated with Chinese labs, all openly advertising illegal drugs," Sen. Portman explained. "Ordering these drugs was as easy as buying any other product online."</p>
<p>When it came to shipping information, committee investigators noticed the drug distributors had one specific request. "Every single one of them preferred to use the postal service over private express carriers like DHL, FedEx and UPS," the senator said. The reason shippers gave, Portman explained, was that the chances of the drugs getting seized through the postal service were so insignificant "that delivery was essentially guaranteed."</p>
<p>The ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, Sen. Tom Carper of Deleware, used one word to describe the findings of the report: "alarming."</p>
<p>The committee never completed an order, but used the online sellers' payment information to track 300 U.S. buyers in 43 states and hundreds of packages sent through the U.S. Postal Service. A number of those packages were delivered to suspected "pill presses," illegal operations that produce and sell counterfeit prescription opioids often manufactured with a lethal degree of inaccuracy.</p>
<p>Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-North Dakota, spoke at length about the urgency of the problem. She reiterated the complexities of the ongoing drug epidemic, saying that the crisis knows no borders.</p>
<p>"Fentanyl in my state killed kids that led to a huge investigation--one of the first--came from China, to Canada, to Portland, Oregon, to North Dakota," she said during the hearing. "We can build a $20 billion wall but if we don't solve this problem, we will not have solved the problem of interdicting drugs."</p>
<p>On the opposite side of the aisle, Portman agreed. Though he has expressed support of Trump's border wall, he added that it won't solve the drug crisis alone.</p>
<p>"So the border is important, but it's not sufficient," he told Circa. "Even if we had a border wall that was really effective, you still would have this problem in the mail system."</p>
<p>Fentanyl, a synthetic opioid 50 times more potent than heroin and 100 times more potent than morphine, is generally considered to be lethal at 2 milligrams. For some perspective, 2 milligrams is less than one-tenth of a grain of salt.</p>
<p>According to the most recent data from the <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm" type="external">Centers for Disease Control</a>, more than 42,200 people in the United States died from opioid overdoses in 2016. The fatalities in 2017 are expected to be even greater. Approximately 20,000 of those overdose deaths were related to fentanyl or fentanyl analogs. That shockingly high overdose rate marks a 540 percent increase in the fentanyl-related deaths since 2014.</p>
<p>Though the postal service has implemented better screening methods in recent months, top officials had a difficult time defending the agency's past record. Unlike the private mail carriers, USPS is not legally required to collect <a href="file:///C:/Users/lbernstein/Downloads/Cintron%20Testimony.pdf" type="external">advance electronic data</a> on the packages shipped to the country from overseas. That data is as simple as the name and address of the shipper, the recipient and a description of the cargo.</p>
<p>In 2015, the postal service started a pilot program to improve its data gathering which went into effect mid-2017 and has also signed a bilateral agreement with Chinese postal operators and operators in 22 other countries, to try to crack down illicit fentanyl shipments.</p>
<p>As a result of the shipping data, Customs and Border Control (CBP) has been able to stop large amounts of fentanyl from ever entering the country through the mail system.</p>
<p>CBP executive assistant commissioner of field operations Todd Owen said on Thursday that his agents have gone from seizing 50 pounds of fentanyl shipped in international mail and express courier in 2015 to stopping 335 pounds of fentanyl in 2017.</p>
<p>"At our largest international mail facility at JFK airport, CBP officers have made more fentanyl seizures in the first 3-1/2 months [of fiscal year 2018], than they have all of last year," Owens told lawmakers. Much of that success has been related to the postal service demanding foreign postal operators, particularly in China, provide shipping data.</p>
<p>Despite the higher rate of interdictions of mail and express packages as well as increased seizures at the U.S.-Mexico border, Owens is not satisfied. "The trends continue to go up," he said, describing the volume of fentanyl entering the country is "overwhelming."</p>
<p>Additionally, Sen. Carper described the task of Customs and Border Patrol agents as "finding a needle in a haystack." More than 5 million pieces of mail were sent through the postal service in 2017, and until about six months ago, agents were forced to sort through the parcels manually.</p>
<p>The postal service's vice president of operations Robert Cintron noted that by December 2017, USPS was receiving advanced electronic data on about 40 percent of its foreign postal shipments and prioritizing information on shipments from China. That still leaves upwards of 2 million pieces of mail unchecked. Moreover, the U.S. Postal Service's Inspector General acknowledged that much of the data it does receive is "often incomplete or inaccurate."</p>
<p>"We are just getting inundated," Sen. Heitkamp said, noting that opioids are pouring in through the mail and across both the northern and southern borders.</p>
<p>The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has clearly documented how China serves as the primary supply source for fentanyl and its chemical precursors and the Senate report has now documented how easily the products can be bought online from Chinese laboratories and shipped through international mail.</p>
<p>Arguably, the delivery of fentanyl through the mail is more serious than the shipments across the southern border, according to data from Customs and Border Patrol. Owens explained that the fentanyl products CBP agents interdict through the mail have about a 90 percent purity, compared to the product agents seize at the U.S.-Mexican border, which typically has a 40 percent purity.</p>
<p>In Mexico, fentanyl is largely being mixed with other drugs, like heroin, or pressed into pills, and shipped across the southern U.S. border. According to the DEA, the majority of U.S. heroin originates in Mexico.</p>
<p>"We are failing," Heitkamp stressed. "We have to be more urgent. We can build a $20 billion wall, but we won't solve this problem... if we simply focus on China. We will not solve the problem of interdicting these drugs if we simply focus on Mexico."</p>
<p>The potency of these drugs combined with a continued surge in demand coming from the United States has meant immense profits for those involved at each stage of the fentanyl supply chain. A single kilogram of fentanyl purchased from a Chinese supplier for $3,000 to $5,000 can generate upwards of $1.5 million on the illicit market, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement data.</p>
<p>Because of current policies and enforcement practices, the potential gains in the illicit opioid trade are extremely high and the potential loss is minimal.</p>
<p>In addition to recommending more data on packages being sent to the United States, lawmakers and law enforcement agents are also pushing for a crackdown on suppliers.</p>
<p>Daniel Baldwin, section chief of DEA's Office of Global Enforcement, stressed that he wants to "take the head off the snakes" and target the synthetic opioids at their source in China.</p>
<p>"China is the small side of the funnel, meaning that's the place were things are originating," Baldwin explained. "We need to get the packages before they get to the United States and branch out to a thousand different locations within the United States."</p>
<p>Baldwin said that DEA along with its interagency partners can try to track every package and every trafficker within the United States, "but if we can get the small end of the funnel, attack some of those distributors in China that are sending tens of thousands of packages to the United States, we would have a greater impact."</p>
<p>Democrats and Republicans on the committee urged President Donald Trump to bring up the issue of synthetic opioids in his future discussions with Chinese President Xi Jinping, especially since Trump has said he has a "very good relationship" with the Chinese leader.</p>
<p>Portman suggested that the next step with regard to China is "taking action and prosecutions."</p>
<p>The Department of Justice recently indicted two Chinese nationals for using the U.S. mail system to deliver fentanyl to the United States. However, those two have not been tried in China and are currently not in custody.</p>
<p>"How about prosecuting these two individuals," Portman recommended. "Two individuals, out of the thousands of labs in Chian that are sending this poison into our communities. That would be a good step."</p>
<p>The Senate is currently reviewing a number of pieces of legislation to provide additional resources and authorities to the U.S. agencies at the forefront of the opioid fight. Earlier this month, President Trump signed the INTERDICT Act, a bipartisan bill providing an additional $9 million in funding for Customs and Border Patrol to purchase equipment for screening packages, mail and travelers for illicit opioids.</p> | false | 1 | senate investigative committee released new report wednesday revealing overseas drug distributors exploited weaknesses united states postal service ship untold amount deadly illicit fentanyl country lead republican author report sen rob portman ohio described foreign distributors largely china taken advantage ecommerce loopholes postal system transmit hundreds thousands packages fentanyl synthetic opioids us consumers effort understand flow fentanyl united states bipartisan staff senate investigators produced 96page reportidentifying weaknesses current fight opioid epidemic specifically overseas supply drugs investigation began simple online search fentanyl sale within moments investigative team able connect array international distributors simple search returned hundreds websites many affiliated chinese labs openly advertising illegal drugs sen portman explained ordering drugs easy buying product online came shipping information committee investigators noticed drug distributors one specific request every single one preferred use postal service private express carriers like dhl fedex ups senator said reason shippers gave portman explained chances drugs getting seized postal service insignificant delivery essentially guaranteed ranking democrat subcommittee sen tom carper deleware used one word describe findings report alarming committee never completed order used online sellers payment information track 300 us buyers 43 states hundreds packages sent us postal service number packages delivered suspected pill presses illegal operations produce sell counterfeit prescription opioids often manufactured lethal degree inaccuracy sen heidi heitkamp dnorth dakota spoke length urgency problem reiterated complexities ongoing drug epidemic saying crisis knows borders fentanyl state killed kids led huge investigationone firstcame china canada portland oregon north dakota said hearing build 20 billion wall dont solve problem solved problem interdicting drugs opposite side aisle portman agreed though expressed support trumps border wall added wont solve drug crisis alone border important sufficient told circa even border wall really effective still would problem mail system fentanyl synthetic opioid 50 times potent heroin 100 times potent morphine generally considered lethal 2 milligrams perspective 2 milligrams less onetenth grain salt according recent data centers disease control 42200 people united states died opioid overdoses 2016 fatalities 2017 expected even greater approximately 20000 overdose deaths related fentanyl fentanyl analogs shockingly high overdose rate marks 540 percent increase fentanylrelated deaths since 2014 though postal service implemented better screening methods recent months top officials difficult time defending agencys past record unlike private mail carriers usps legally required collect advance electronic data packages shipped country overseas data simple name address shipper recipient description cargo 2015 postal service started pilot program improve data gathering went effect mid2017 also signed bilateral agreement chinese postal operators operators 22 countries try crack illicit fentanyl shipments result shipping data customs border control cbp able stop large amounts fentanyl ever entering country mail system cbp executive assistant commissioner field operations todd owen said thursday agents gone seizing 50 pounds fentanyl shipped international mail express courier 2015 stopping 335 pounds fentanyl 2017 largest international mail facility jfk airport cbp officers made fentanyl seizures first 312 months fiscal year 2018 last year owens told lawmakers much success related postal service demanding foreign postal operators particularly china provide shipping data despite higher rate interdictions mail express packages well increased seizures usmexico border owens satisfied trends continue go said describing volume fentanyl entering country overwhelming additionally sen carper described task customs border patrol agents finding needle haystack 5 million pieces mail sent postal service 2017 six months ago agents forced sort parcels manually postal services vice president operations robert cintron noted december 2017 usps receiving advanced electronic data 40 percent foreign postal shipments prioritizing information shipments china still leaves upwards 2 million pieces mail unchecked moreover us postal services inspector general acknowledged much data receive often incomplete inaccurate getting inundated sen heitkamp said noting opioids pouring mail across northern southern borders drug enforcement administration dea clearly documented china serves primary supply source fentanyl chemical precursors senate report documented easily products bought online chinese laboratories shipped international mail arguably delivery fentanyl mail serious shipments across southern border according data customs border patrol owens explained fentanyl products cbp agents interdict mail 90 percent purity compared product agents seize usmexican border typically 40 percent purity mexico fentanyl largely mixed drugs like heroin pressed pills shipped across southern us border according dea majority us heroin originates mexico failing heitkamp stressed urgent build 20 billion wall wont solve problem simply focus china solve problem interdicting drugs simply focus mexico potency drugs combined continued surge demand coming united states meant immense profits involved stage fentanyl supply chain single kilogram fentanyl purchased chinese supplier 3000 5000 generate upwards 15 million illicit market according immigration customs enforcement data current policies enforcement practices potential gains illicit opioid trade extremely high potential loss minimal addition recommending data packages sent united states lawmakers law enforcement agents also pushing crackdown suppliers daniel baldwin section chief deas office global enforcement stressed wants take head snakes target synthetic opioids source china china small side funnel meaning thats place things originating baldwin explained need get packages get united states branch thousand different locations within united states baldwin said dea along interagency partners try track every package every trafficker within united states get small end funnel attack distributors china sending tens thousands packages united states would greater impact democrats republicans committee urged president donald trump bring issue synthetic opioids future discussions chinese president xi jinping especially since trump said good relationship chinese leader portman suggested next step regard china taking action prosecutions department justice recently indicted two chinese nationals using us mail system deliver fentanyl united states however two tried china currently custody prosecuting two individuals portman recommended two individuals thousands labs chian sending poison communities would good step senate currently reviewing number pieces legislation provide additional resources authorities us agencies forefront opioid fight earlier month president trump signed interdict act bipartisan bill providing additional 9 million funding customs border patrol purchase equipment screening packages mail travelers illicit opioids | 955 |
<p>A sweeping victory in Tuesday’s New York primary has Donald Trump closer to winning the Republican nomination, but his campaign has been a substance-free zone since he announced he was running in June 2015. A crowded GOP field, poor follow-up questioning by the media, and a general circus atmosphere have allowed him to make broad and implausible statements about many matters — and to not be held fully accountable for what he says. This includes his disjointed and incoherent statements on health care.</p>
<p>Trump has said he wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act and yet still “take care of everybody.” He has said repeatedly that he is different from other Republicans in this regard, implying that other GOP politicians don’t want Americans to get needed health services. Of course, Trump has never bothered to back up this slander with any evidence (and the media haven’t bothered to ask him for it).</p>
<p>Trump is apparently unaware of the plans to replace Obamacare sponsored by <a href="http://tomprice.house.gov/sites/tomprice.house.gov/files/Section%20by%20Section%20of%20HR%202300%20Empowering%20Patients%20First%20Act%202015.pdf" type="external">Rep. Tom Price</a>&#160;and by <a href="https://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/files/114/20150205-PCARE-Act-Plan.pdf" type="external">Sen. Richard Burr, Sen. Orrin Hatch, and Rep. Fred Upton</a>. These plans would insure as many Americans as are enrolled today under the ACA at a fraction of the cost.</p>
<p>So does Trump have a better idea for “taking care of everybody” than these elected officials? His campaign released <a href="https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform" type="external">an outline</a> of sorts last month that listed seven points. It is clear from this outline and other Trump statements that he has no idea how to improve health care in the United States, much less how to make it “great again.”</p>
<p>The first point of the outline is repeal of the ACA, including the law’s individual mandate. But Trump has also said in televised debates that he wants to keep the ACA’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions. His outline says nothing about how he would do this.</p>
<p>Combining the ACA’s insurance regulations (which forbid factoring in health status of individual consumers when setting premiums) with complete freedom to enter and exit the market at will is a recipe for an insurance market implosion. Consumers would wait until they needed insurance to buy it, driving up premiums and making coverage unaffordable for many people with chronic conditions. It would never work.</p>
<p>Trump has said he wants to get rid of the entirety of the ACA, including subsidies for health insurance and its expansion of Medicaid. What does he propose instead to boost enrollment in health insurance by lower-income households? Essentially nothing. Trump proposes allowing Americans who buy health insurance on their own to deduct the premiums from their taxable income. But a deduction of this kind provides very little assistance to low-income households because most of them owe no federal income tax. Moreover, even those who do pay income taxes would gain very little from a new deduction because they are in the lowest income tax brackets. The ability to deduct a $5,000 premium would be worth only $500 to a family in the 10 percent tax bracket.</p>
<p>The campaign’s outline also endorses converting Medicaid into a block grant to the states. The plan does not indicate that this switch is intended to cut federal costs, but most block grant proposals have come with large federal savings. Either way, however, states would not be required to cover the same populations covered under today’s program.</p>
<p>Before any plan proposed by a Trump administration could be considered in the House or Senate, Congress would need to see estimates of its effects on federal spending and taxes as well as insurance enrollment. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and other independent analysts will conclude that Trump’s plan to eliminate the ACA’s subsidies, to roll back the Medicaid expansion and convert the program into a block grant, and to allow taxpayers to deduct the cost of health insurance they purchase on their own would increase the number of uninsured Americans by many millions of people.</p>
<p>Trump also says he wants to allow health insurance to be sold nationwide, without regard to state insurance regulations. Insurers approved in one state would be allowed to sell their products in other states as well. He seems to think this will revolutionize the insurance marketplace. It won’t. Many in the GOP favor this idea because it would put pressure on state regulators to eliminate unnecessary and costly coverage requirements in order to keep their insurance regulations in line with nationwide norms. This may cut costs a small amount. But most health care spending is driven by local practice patterns and local prices, not regulatory mandates. An insurance plan sold to someone in New York City will necessary reflect the cost of caring for patients there, even if the insurance was approved for sale in Kansas.</p>
<p>Trump also mentions that people should be allowed to enroll in Health Savings Accounts. His campaign seems unaware that there are many millions of people enrolled already in HSAs, which have been sold in their current form since 2004. There’s nothing in Trump’s outline that would suggest enrollment would accelerate under his plan.</p>
<p>The last item in Trump’s outline is support for the importation of drugs regulated and sold at prices set by other countries, particularly Canada. In interviews, Trump has often said he supports allowing the Medicare program to negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies to reduce the costs of prescription drugs for seniors. At various points, he has claimed he could save $300 billion annually from such negotiations, even though Medicare only spends about $80 billion on drugs each year. But for some reason, that idea did not appear in the campaign’s health care outline. The irony of protectionist Trump proposing to open the border to the importation of cheap drugs from abroad seems to have been lost on the candidate and the campaign. Regardless, CBO has said this idea would have only a marginal effect on total health care costs.</p>
<p>The gap between what Trump is promising voters and his plans for actually delivering on those promises is immense. Voters have heard him say repeatedly that, if he is elected, there will be plentiful jobs, tax cuts, no federal debt, and no cuts in benefits. On health care, he said he will get rid of the ACA and take care of everybody with a better plan that will cost them nothing.</p>
<p>But what little Trump has actually proposed on health care would leave voters terribly disappointed. There would be more people without health insurance, and the insurance markets would be even more unstable than they are under the ACA.</p>
<p>Not that pointing this out will matter. Trump’s supporters seem determined to believe that he has a secret plan to fix everything, including health care, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a <a href="" type="internal">senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center</a> and a <a href="http://www.aei.org/scholar/james-c-capretta/" type="external">visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute</a>.</p> | false | 1 | sweeping victory tuesdays new york primary donald trump closer winning republican nomination campaign substancefree zone since announced running june 2015 crowded gop field poor followup questioning media general circus atmosphere allowed make broad implausible statements many matters held fully accountable says includes disjointed incoherent statements health care trump said wants repeal affordable care act yet still take care everybody said repeatedly different republicans regard implying gop politicians dont want americans get needed health services course trump never bothered back slander evidence media havent bothered ask trump apparently unaware plans replace obamacare sponsored rep tom price160and sen richard burr sen orrin hatch rep fred upton plans would insure many americans enrolled today aca fraction cost trump better idea taking care everybody elected officials campaign released outline sorts last month listed seven points clear outline trump statements idea improve health care united states much less make great first point outline repeal aca including laws individual mandate trump also said televised debates wants keep acas protections people preexisting conditions outline says nothing would combining acas insurance regulations forbid factoring health status individual consumers setting premiums complete freedom enter exit market recipe insurance market implosion consumers would wait needed insurance buy driving premiums making coverage unaffordable many people chronic conditions would never work trump said wants get rid entirety aca including subsidies health insurance expansion medicaid propose instead boost enrollment health insurance lowerincome households essentially nothing trump proposes allowing americans buy health insurance deduct premiums taxable income deduction kind provides little assistance lowincome households owe federal income tax moreover even pay income taxes would gain little new deduction lowest income tax brackets ability deduct 5000 premium would worth 500 family 10 percent tax bracket campaigns outline also endorses converting medicaid block grant states plan indicate switch intended cut federal costs block grant proposals come large federal savings either way however states would required cover populations covered todays program plan proposed trump administration could considered house senate congress would need see estimates effects federal spending taxes well insurance enrollment congressional budget office cbo independent analysts conclude trumps plan eliminate acas subsidies roll back medicaid expansion convert program block grant allow taxpayers deduct cost health insurance purchase would increase number uninsured americans many millions people trump also says wants allow health insurance sold nationwide without regard state insurance regulations insurers approved one state would allowed sell products states well seems think revolutionize insurance marketplace wont many gop favor idea would put pressure state regulators eliminate unnecessary costly coverage requirements order keep insurance regulations line nationwide norms may cut costs small amount health care spending driven local practice patterns local prices regulatory mandates insurance plan sold someone new york city necessary reflect cost caring patients even insurance approved sale kansas trump also mentions people allowed enroll health savings accounts campaign seems unaware many millions people enrolled already hsas sold current form since 2004 theres nothing trumps outline would suggest enrollment would accelerate plan last item trumps outline support importation drugs regulated sold prices set countries particularly canada interviews trump often said supports allowing medicare program negotiate directly pharmaceutical companies reduce costs prescription drugs seniors various points claimed could save 300 billion annually negotiations even though medicare spends 80 billion drugs year reason idea appear campaigns health care outline irony protectionist trump proposing open border importation cheap drugs abroad seems lost candidate campaign regardless cbo said idea would marginal effect total health care costs gap trump promising voters plans actually delivering promises immense voters heard say repeatedly elected plentiful jobs tax cuts federal debt cuts benefits health care said get rid aca take care everybody better plan cost nothing little trump actually proposed health care would leave voters terribly disappointed would people without health insurance insurance markets would even unstable aca pointing matter trumps supporters seem determined believe secret plan fix everything including health care despite mountain evidence contrary james c capretta senior fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow american enterprise institute | 655 |
<p />
<p>The US Energy Information Agency (EIA) expects natural gas to be the <a href="https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/nat_gas.cfm" type="external">fastest growing fossil fuel between 2010-2040</a>, thereby increasing its importance in global energy relations. In tandem with its growing role in the world, there has also been a growth in unconventional natural gas extraction (i.e. shale gas “fracking”), thereby allowing the US to unseat Russia as the <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/us-surpasses-russia-become-largest-oil-natural-gas-producer-energy-dependent-countries-india-are" type="external">largest gas producer in 2013</a>. Although this economically and environmentally costly procedure does have some revolutionary market potential, the real future of global natural gas relations will be decided between Russia, Iran, and their allies. Moscow and Tehran are the two pillars of the global market, and they have the potential to monopolize the resource through the creation of a ‘gas OPEC’. This organization will likely be countered by the West, which will seek to create an alternative grouping centered around its geopolitical partners, therefore presenting the scenario of two competing gas cartels that would further polarize international relations.</p>
<p>The International Energy Agency (IEA) released a report in 2011 speculating upon a future <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-06/natural-gas-use-may-increase-50-percent-by-2035-in-golden-age-iea-says.html" type="external">“golden age of gas”.</a> It believes that a confluence of factors (fracking, Chinese and Indian consumption, nuclear energy aversion, etc.) will account for a significant rise in natural gas use, eventually overtaking coal as the second-most used fossil fuel. Additionally, the US’s introduction of fracking onto the global market has made it so that previously energy-dependent states (i.e. <a href="http://rt.com/business/poland-shale-taxes-russia-346/" type="external">Poland</a>) could now have the potential to become regional production leaders, should their reserves pan out to be <a href="http://routemag.com/2013/10/29/shale-projects-lagging-in-eastern-europe/" type="external">as large as expected</a>. Slowly but surely, gas titan Iran has been shedding its crippling <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/iran-says-it-has-halted-most-sensitive-uranium-enrichment-program/2014/01/20/6c078bd6-81d7-11e3-a273-6ffd9cf9f4ba_story.html" type="external">Western sanctions</a> and may one day realize its potential as a significant global gas actor. The proliferation of liquefied natural gas (LNG) export technology is expected to have the long-term potential of reshaping the entire market, as it could bring together distant suppliers and consumers from all across the world.</p>
<p>The following statistics gathered from the CIA World Factbook will highlight the top-ten players in each category, after which the rankings will be analyzed and geopolitical forecasting will be conducted:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2253rank.html" type="external">Top Reserves:</a></p>
<p>(1) Russia; (2) Iran; (3) Qatar; (4) US; (5) Saudi Arabia; (6) Turkmenistan; (7) United Arab Emirates; (8) Venezuela; (9) Nigeria; and (10) Algeria.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2249rank.html" type="external">Top Producers:</a></p>
<p>(1) US; (2) Russia; (3) EU; (4) Iran; (5) Canada; (6) Qatar; (7) Norway; (8) China; (9) Saudi Arabia; and (10) Algeria.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2251rank.html" type="external">Top Exporters:</a></p>
<p>(1) Russia; (2) Qatar; (3) Norway; (4) EU; (5) Canada; (6) Netherlands; (7) Algeria; (8) Turkmenistan; (9) US; and (10) Slovakia.</p>
<p>The data allows one to draw important conclusions about the future role of certain regional gas players.</p>
<p>The US is clearly a rising gas superpower, although its rapid ascendance may come at a hefty environmental price. The full environmental extent of fracking has yet to be properly studied, so it is possible that it may impart <a href="http://www.dangersoffracking.com/" type="external">long-term negative consequences</a> on the region where the activity takes place. Particularly, these include the groundwater supply and the fracked area’s susceptibility to earthquakes. Canada’s production, on the other hand, is bolstered by its copious amount of o <a href="https://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=ca" type="external">il sands</a>. Because of the close historic (and NATO) relationship between the US and Canada, it can be inferred that both of them may coordinate their global energy policies to geopolitically influence the future gas market. LNG technology will help Washington and Ottawa bring their product to the energy-hungry Eastern Hemisphere.</p>
<p>For the ease of the report, it is simplest to approach the EU, Norway, and the Netherlands as a unified whole. Considering this, it then appears as though Europe’s energy honeymoon is soon to end. <a href="http://www.dutchnews.nl/columns/2014/02/the_netherlands_needs_to_kick.php" type="external">The Netherlands</a> and <a href="" type="internal">Norway</a> are expected to experience significant drops in their natural gas production, thereby affecting their export to the continent. This will altogether make Europe even more dependent on out-of-region imports, especially seeing how no European country is in the top ten of proven reserves. The only way to stop or reverse this trend would be for the EU’s ambitious energy policy, the <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/" type="external">2020 Climate and Energy Package</a>, to succeed, although it is doubtful that it will reach the stated goal.</p>
<p>Russia dominates the gas market through its staggering reserves (with possibly 2.5 times as much available via <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-24/russia-may-hold-680-trillion-cubic-meters-of-unconventional-gas.html" type="external">fracking</a>) and enormous production and export volume. Turkmenistan, on the other hand, is an up-and-coming gas player, as it has the 6th largest reserves and the 8th largest export volume. If it can increase its production from the 16th spot to somewhere in the top ten, then its exports would inevitably increase as well. It is also necessary to note that the US has had far-reaching plans for Turkmenistan’s gas potential <a href="http://www.ensec.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;id=233:afghanistan-the-tapi-pipeline-and-energy-geopolitics&amp;catid=103:energysecurityissuecontent&amp;Itemid=358" type="external">since before the turn of the millennium</a>. It wanted to connect the country’s gas reserves to India as a way of diverting resources away from Russia’s energy nexus. The fact that American geostrategic planners had their sights set on Turkmenistan testifies to the country’s future energy significance. All of this will be important to keep in mind when discussing the potential for a Gas OPEC later on.</p>
<p>The combined gas reserves of all four Mideast parties is 1.5 times as much as Russia’s total amount, thereby demonstrating the crucial importance of this region to the gas industry’s future. So important are the three Gulf Kingdom’s gas reserves to strategic market planning that it is suspected that the Syrian Crisis was initiated because of Damascus’ refusal to allow those countries to build a gas pipeline through its territory to Turkey and the EU (Syria instead chose to go with <a href="http://rt.com/op-edge/syria-russia-war-oil-528/" type="external">Iran’s proposed pipeline through Iraq</a>).</p>
<p>Saudi Arabia and the UAE have not begun tapping most of their reserves yet, as highlighted by the Saudi’s 9th place ranking on the production list (the UAE is 18th) and the fact that neither of them is yet a top-ten exporter (they are 174th and 36th, respectively). The Saudis are also the <a href="https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2250rank.html" type="external">7th largest consumers of natural gas</a>, so it is inferred that they produce mostly for domestic consumption. In the future, these two Kingdoms can increase their market space and become stronger players.</p>
<p>There are two splits evident in the Mideast gas game and one recent wild card: Iran is a rival to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, while Qatar has recently had a <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/05/world/meast/gulf-qatar-ambassadors/" type="external">falling out</a> with both Gulf Kingdoms (although it has yet to ‘flip’ to Iran’s side). This means that Russia and Iran could potentially ‘poach’ Qatar from the Gulf Kingdoms’ grasp and integrate it into the proposed Gas OPEC. Such a possibility and its implications will be discussed further on.</p>
<p>China is listed as the 8th largest gas producer in the world, yet it is not in the top ten for reserves or export. This signifies that the country largely consumes what it produces and imports to make up the difference. As a result of rising consumption, China is expected to import even more gas, making it a prime potential partner for Iran, Turkmenistan, and Russia (the proposed founders of the future Gas OPEC).</p>
<p>Africa holds immense promise in the future gas industry, seeing as how Algeria is already an active player and Nigeria has the potential to service the growing (anti-Russian) demand in Europe. Algeria consistently ranks in the lower level of the top ten for reserves, production, and export, lessening the possibility that it will ever ‘shock’ the system. Its reserves, however, are in decline. Nonetheless, it is the fourth largest supplier of gas to the EU, having <a href="https://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=ag" type="external">two pipelines to Italy and one to Spain</a>. It also sells gas via the LNG method. Nigeria has huge reserves but they haven’t been fully explored yet. Should this come to pass, there is a strong possibility of a <a href="http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/nigeria-mulls-20bn-trans-saharan-natural-gas-project/170556/" type="external">Trans-Saharan Pipeline</a> being built to Algeria, where it will then connect to Europe to assist with anti-Russian energy diversification. Where things get interesting is that Algeria is a Soviet-era ally of Russia’s (they still interact heavily in the <a href="http://en.ria.ru/analysis/20100315/158200374.html" type="external">arms trade</a> and then-President Medvedev <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/algeria-signs-6-russia-deals-during-medvedev-visit.html" type="external">visited</a> in 2010) but Nigeria is firmly entrenched in the Western camp. Algeria’s domestic instabilities and proximity to the EU make it a prime candidate for Western blackmail if it ‘missteps’, thus meaning that it has to closely toe the line between advancing its national interests and being coerced into Western cooperation.</p>
<p>Venezuela stands alone from the rest of Latin America for its 8th largest reserves of gas worldwide (and the <a href="https://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=ve" type="external">2nd largest</a> in the Western hemisphere). The regional state behind it is Mexico, which trails far behind at 32nd place (Canada is 19th). Although rhetorically being against American hegemony, the country still heavily engages in the natural resources trade (primarily oil) with the US in order to build up its budget. This means that both countries are experiencing a complex economic interdependence, but unlike oil, it is doubtful that the US will need Venezuela for its domestic gas needs. What it would need it for, however, would be to support it as a counter-Gas OPEC member. Washington has been trying to overthrow the Venezuelan government for some time now, and if it manages to succeed, it could easily return Caracas into the orbit it escaped from nearly 15 years ago and influence its natural resource policy in the same manner as it wants to do Canada’s.</p>
<p>There are two possible dark horses that can upset the energy equilibrium to varying extents, besides the overall uncertainty of actual shale gas reserves and the serious environmental concerns over their extraction. The first one is if the fracking revolution turns Poland and Canada into major gas producers. Having Poland as a strong supplier for the EU would lessen the bloc’s import needs and quickly rehabilitate it from its Russian gas ‘addiction’. Concerning Canada, if it happens to have some large undiscovered reserves accessible via fracking (and it actually fracks them), then it could continue to combine its gas potential with the US to make North America a prime energy superpower to rival Russia. The second dark horse relates to the last comment, and it deals with reserves under the Arctic. Although still not delineated and very expensive to extract, in the future this situation could be resolved and Canada and the US may dramatically increase their reserves and challenge the Gas OPEC.</p>
<p>Asia is expected to increase its consumption of all energy resources, with its appetite growing so fast in the coming years that it may even <a href="http://www.offshoreenergytoday.com/asian-natural-gas-demand-may-continue-to-outpace-supply/" type="external">outpace supply</a>. This means that many suppliers will be competing for this burgeoning market. Principally, China, India, and Japan will be the main engines of energy consumption on the continent, although South Korea will also experience an increase in demand. With their strong economies, these customers may also be able to pay higher prices for gas, making them an <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/26/asia-lng-demand-idUSL3N0MH21F20140326" type="external">even more attractive partner</a> than Europe, for example. Therefore, Asia is forecasted to emerge as the main market which the Gas OPEC will compete for against its rivals.</p>
<p>Now that the foundations of the gas trade and its market description have been expostulated upon, it is now appropriate to segue into the topic of the Gas OPEC. Such an organization would inevitably be oriented around geopolitical interests and feature a ‘West versus the Rest’ approach, with ‘the Rest’ representing the core of the Gas OPEC.</p>
<p>Russia, Iran, and Turkmenistan are envisioned as the founders of this organization. Turkmenistan’s inclusion is justified by its intimate gas relationship with China, which imports over <a href="http://www.eurasianet.org/node/67356" type="external">half of its gas</a> from the country. India, another vociferous consumer of gas, is planning to build either an <a href="http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/02/28/352649/iran-india-oman-mull-undersea-gas-line/" type="external">underwater</a> or <a href="http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/indiapakistaniran-pipeline-remains-the-most-viable-option/article5754288.ece" type="external">overland</a> gas pipeline to Iran. By tying China and India into the Gas OPEC web via Turkmenistan and Iran, its geopolitical potential power could possibly have kinetic results. Adding in Russia’s plans to build a <a href="http://valdaiclub.com/russia_in_foreign_media/66921.html" type="external">gas pipeline</a> to China, the Gas OPEC would result in a form of energy interdependence emerging between the Eurasian BRICS members. This would make it a type of ‘Energy Eurasian Union’.</p>
<p>The fact that the US and Canada, already huge (or in the case of Canada, potentially huge) players on the international gas market, have large gas reserves and the political will to export them to advance their global NATO goals, brings about the idea of a counter-gas OPEC to Russia and Iran’s Gas OPEC. The face-off between the two would resemble an Energy NATO (ENATO) versus an Energy Eurasian Union (EEU). North America (the US and Canada) and its allies (Saudi Arabia &amp; the UAE, potentially a fracking Poland and a ‘flipped’ Algeria and Venezuela) could have a monopoly of supply to the Western world while competing with the EEU for the Eastern one through LNG exports. In the Cold War of the 21st century, each bloc may not have competing ideologues, but rather competing gas organizations.</p>
<p>For the most part, the geopolitical fault lines between the EEU and the ENATO have been drawn. Qatar, however, remains the most important outlier, as it has recently experienced a severe disruption of ties with its Gulf allies. This raises the prospect that it may drift closer to Iran, and by extension, the future EEU. After all, with Qatar and Saudi Arabia politically, militarily, and ideologically competing in the Mideast, it is only natural for this competition to elevate to the economic level. Accordingly, gas geopolitics may give Qatar the long-term edge over its Saudi rival, bequeathing it the added advantage it needs to triumph in this new Mideast ‘Cold War’. The EEU would overwhelmingly dominate the world’s gas market in this case.</p>
<p>If it sides with the ENATO, Qatar would be the member with the greatest potential and would allow that bloc to closely trail the EEU’s total gas reserves. Referencing the CIA World Factbook, Qatar has 2.5 times as many proven reserves as the US, and more than the US, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE (the three largest proposed ENATO members) combined. The EIA also states that it has been the <a href="https://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=qa" type="external">world’s largest LNG exporter</a> since 2006, which would in effect give the ENATO a strategic technological advantage over the EEU. Without Qatar’s incorporation, the ENATO is doomed to fail. In turn, this makes Qatar a make-or-break partner that calls the shots over whether the ENATO lives or dies.</p>
<p>Both of these countries would be a welcome inclusion into the EEU, but their long-term commitment is uncertain. Due to political manipulations (Algeria’s proximity to NATO, America’s antagonism to Venezuela), either or may experience a Color Revolution and be ‘flipped’ to the ENATO. Even if this does not occur overtly, they may, through various mechanisms, eventually become de-facto seats of ENATO’s interests in the EEU, halting and/or sabotaging its progress. This threat must always be kept in mind, as both states are relatively weaker than Russia and Iran and may not be able to effectively resist such post-modern Western covert offensives.</p>
<p>Thus, although it would mark a positive geopolitical extension of the EEU into Africa and Latin America, Algeria and Venezuela’s inclusion is not necessary for the EEU to function. On the other hand, given its significantly smaller gas reserves (with the exception of possible member Qatar), the ENATO would definitely need these players in its organization in order to increase its collective strength. Both of them combined would be equal to one United States (the largest member of ENATO if Qatar does not participate), a hefty addition to the ENATO’s gas capabilities. Geopolitically, Algeria and Venezuela would entrench the ENATO into Latin America and Africa and provide it with extra reserves for export to Asia.</p>
<p>Algeria and Venezuela are thus not important to the EEU from a reserve standpoint, but instead as a method of preventing the ENATO from actualizing its full potential and becoming a competitor. Since the ENATO would desperately need Algerian and Venezuelan participation in its project, it would be compelled to do whatever it could to bring them onto its side. This sets the EEU and ENATO up for their first proxy contest, making those two current Resistant and Defiant (R&amp;D) states pressing targets of Western regime change efforts the moment the EEU and ENATO projects are launched.</p>
<p>This section will briefly describe the possible ENATO configurations that would allow the organization to come into existence. This means that it will not address scenarios such as Qatar in the EEU or Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s lack of participation in ENATO, both of which would certainly prevent the creation of the counter-Gas OPEC.</p>
<p>This would occur if ENATO integrates Qatar, the US, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Venezuela, Nigeria (a de-facto shoe-in), and Algeria, but the configuration would not surpass the EEU’s total reserves. Rather, it would be nearly 75% of the total. This is still a sizeable amount and would allow the ENATO to compete with the EE all across the world.</p>
<p>Under this scenario, Algeria and Venezuela enter into the EEU. Regardless of whether or not Nigeria develops its LNG and is able to export it under ENATO or if it falls under the EEU’s influence via the Trans-Saharan Pipeline, the EEU will have nearly double the amount of reserves than the ENATO. This would relegate ENATO largely to supplying the Western world, although some partners (like Qatar) may have some success in the Asian market.</p>
<p>A comparison of the above two scenarios demonstrates the importance of ENATO integrating Algeria and Venezuela. This supports the claim that ENATO will desperately seek to ‘flip’ these R&amp;D states in order to give it the competitive lifeblood needed to counter the EEU. Algeria and Venezuela are also located further away from the EEU than other members, therefore meaning that they are more exposed and harder for the alliance to defend. As they are the ‘weakest links’, they will likely be attacked first, and the ENATO offensive has strong odds of success.</p>
<p>The EEU is anticipated to have very specific technical aspects dictating its distribution network. Russia would continue to supply gas to Europe, although this amount is expected to decrease as the Europeans move away from Russian supplies and towards source diversification. Therefore, Russia will also have to diversify itself away from its old partners and towards newer ones, in this case, in Asia. Russia, as a result of its expertise in pipeline construction, will likely approach a more conventional method of distribution, building connections to China, Japan, and South Korea. In the case of Japan, it must first reach a negotiated settlement over the Kuril Islands, otherwise the US will have preferential access to that market out of geopolitical reasons. Any pipeline to South Korea could either pass through North Korea or go under the Sea of Japan. Since South Korea is a more pragmatic (and politically independent, as a result of its strong trade connections with China) country, Russia may build pipelines there before it enters the Japanese market.</p>
<p>The Chinese present something of an obstacle to the EEU, despite the Russian-Chinese strategic partnership. China wants to ensure that it receives gas at the lowest possible price, and it will likely try to exploit Europe’s recent rift with Russia to achieve this. The thought of a gas monopoly scares China, since it does not want to be dependent on a large price-controlling bloc for its imports. The inclusion of Qatar in the organization would mean that over 66% of its gas imports would be controlled by the EEU (Turkmenistan by itself already supplies <a href="http://www.eurasianet.org/node/67356" type="external">over 50%</a>), a situation which Beijing would likely find unacceptable but unable to tangible change. Thus, it will be forced to deal with the new reality it finds itself in, although it may attempt unexpected methods to stop or slow down the EEU’s formation.</p>
<p>Should the EEU be created, Iran and Turkmenistan will certainly increase their gas cooperation. Turkmenistan could build a gas pipeline through Iran to the Persian Gulf in order to sell its LNG on the global market. Iran would thus need to acquire LNG technology, ships, and terminals in order to sell both it and Turkmenistan’s reserves to East and Southeast Asian clients. If Qatar enters into the EEU, it could provide Iran with much-needed support in this field, but barring Qatar’s participation, then Russian or East Asian investment and expertise could possibly fulfill this urgent need. Selling Iranian and Turkmen gas via LNG is the only way for the EEU’s Middle Eastern members to penetrate the Asian market, which is a prerequisite for the organization to have a global impact.</p>
<p>There also is the possibility that Iran could sell those resources to Europe, but this is largely dependent on a successful (pro-government) resolution of the Syrian Crisis. If the Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline comes into being, then Syria would be the LNG export terminal for Iranian and Turkmen gas to the West. Although part of the same gas trading organization as Russia, the EU may buy Iranian and Turkmen supplies simply because they are ‘not from Russia’. This would on paper accomplish the EU’s political goal of diversifying away from Russian resources while still satisfying its ever growing demand. At the same time, the ENATO may pressure Europe to not purchase the gas, but if the market conditions are right (i.e. the price is lower than ENATO’s or Qatar joints the EEU), it may be helpless to prevent this. These calculations underscore the importance for Russia and Iran in assisting their Syrian ally against the Western-led terrorist onslaught it as facing. It was already mentioned earlier that Damascus’ destabilization may have been brought about as punishment for its refusal to kowtow to NATO’s pipeline policies. Therefore, Syria’s successful resistance would strike at the energy vulnerability which so scared the West that it was willing to support a three-year terrorist insurgency to prevent it.</p>
<p>Finally, Iran can complete its plans to build a pipeline to India either undersea or through Pakistan, which is already an <a href="https://en.trend.az/capital/energy/2257193.html" type="external">Iranian client</a>. This would solidify the EEU’s ability to influence the Asian members of BRICS and achieve a deeper level of (energy) infrastructural integration among them. All of this may serve as a step closer towards multipolarity, which is the long-term grand strategic goal of Russia, China, and Iran.</p>
<p>The world is on the brink of fundamental changes in the gas market. As the West continues to polarize the Rest, gas leaders Russia and Iran are embracing each other like never before. The EU’s robust rhetoric about turning its back on Russian energy resources has fortified Moscow’s political will to diversify its partnerships and move further East. Iran is breaking free from its Western sanctions and isolation, and Assad’s successful repelling of the Western-managed terrorist brigades (with Russian and Iranian support) can provide Tehran with an energy window to Europe. The time is coming for Russia and Iran’s energy interests to intersect, and if Qatar, which recently has found itself on the West and Saudi Arabia’s “bad boys’ list”, can be enticed to join, then the EEU’s global gas dominance is guaranteed. Even without Qatar, the successful implementation of the EEU would be an historical landmark for multipolarity, although the gas bipolarity that would then develop between the EEU and ENATO may harken back to the days of the Cold War.</p> | false | 1 | us energy information agency eia expects natural gas fastest growing fossil fuel 20102040 thereby increasing importance global energy relations tandem growing role world also growth unconventional natural gas extraction ie shale gas fracking thereby allowing us unseat russia largest gas producer 2013 although economically environmentally costly procedure revolutionary market potential real future global natural gas relations decided russia iran allies moscow tehran two pillars global market potential monopolize resource creation gas opec organization likely countered west seek create alternative grouping centered around geopolitical partners therefore presenting scenario two competing gas cartels would polarize international relations international energy agency iea released report 2011 speculating upon future golden age gas believes confluence factors fracking chinese indian consumption nuclear energy aversion etc account significant rise natural gas use eventually overtaking coal secondmost used fossil fuel additionally uss introduction fracking onto global market made previously energydependent states ie poland could potential become regional production leaders reserves pan large expected slowly surely gas titan iran shedding crippling western sanctions may one day realize potential significant global gas actor proliferation liquefied natural gas lng export technology expected longterm potential reshaping entire market could bring together distant suppliers consumers across world following statistics gathered cia world factbook highlight topten players category rankings analyzed geopolitical forecasting conducted top reserves 1 russia 2 iran 3 qatar 4 us 5 saudi arabia 6 turkmenistan 7 united arab emirates 8 venezuela 9 nigeria 10 algeria top producers 1 us 2 russia 3 eu 4 iran 5 canada 6 qatar 7 norway 8 china 9 saudi arabia 10 algeria top exporters 1 russia 2 qatar 3 norway 4 eu 5 canada 6 netherlands 7 algeria 8 turkmenistan 9 us 10 slovakia data allows one draw important conclusions future role certain regional gas players us clearly rising gas superpower although rapid ascendance may come hefty environmental price full environmental extent fracking yet properly studied possible may impart longterm negative consequences region activity takes place particularly include groundwater supply fracked areas susceptibility earthquakes canadas production hand bolstered copious amount il sands close historic nato relationship us canada inferred may coordinate global energy policies geopolitically influence future gas market lng technology help washington ottawa bring product energyhungry eastern hemisphere ease report simplest approach eu norway netherlands unified whole considering appears though europes energy honeymoon soon end netherlands norway expected experience significant drops natural gas production thereby affecting export continent altogether make europe even dependent outofregion imports especially seeing european country top ten proven reserves way stop reverse trend would eus ambitious energy policy 2020 climate energy package succeed although doubtful reach stated goal russia dominates gas market staggering reserves possibly 25 times much available via fracking enormous production export volume turkmenistan hand upandcoming gas player 6th largest reserves 8th largest export volume increase production 16th spot somewhere top ten exports would inevitably increase well also necessary note us farreaching plans turkmenistans gas potential since turn millennium wanted connect countrys gas reserves india way diverting resources away russias energy nexus fact american geostrategic planners sights set turkmenistan testifies countrys future energy significance important keep mind discussing potential gas opec later combined gas reserves four mideast parties 15 times much russias total amount thereby demonstrating crucial importance region gas industrys future important three gulf kingdoms gas reserves strategic market planning suspected syrian crisis initiated damascus refusal allow countries build gas pipeline territory turkey eu syria instead chose go irans proposed pipeline iraq saudi arabia uae begun tapping reserves yet highlighted saudis 9th place ranking production list uae 18th fact neither yet topten exporter 174th 36th respectively saudis also 7th largest consumers natural gas inferred produce mostly domestic consumption future two kingdoms increase market space become stronger players two splits evident mideast gas game one recent wild card iran rival saudi arabia uae qatar recently falling gulf kingdoms although yet flip irans side means russia iran could potentially poach qatar gulf kingdoms grasp integrate proposed gas opec possibility implications discussed china listed 8th largest gas producer world yet top ten reserves export signifies country largely consumes produces imports make difference result rising consumption china expected import even gas making prime potential partner iran turkmenistan russia proposed founders future gas opec africa holds immense promise future gas industry seeing algeria already active player nigeria potential service growing antirussian demand europe algeria consistently ranks lower level top ten reserves production export lessening possibility ever shock system reserves however decline nonetheless fourth largest supplier gas eu two pipelines italy one spain also sells gas via lng method nigeria huge reserves havent fully explored yet come pass strong possibility transsaharan pipeline built algeria connect europe assist antirussian energy diversification things get interesting algeria sovietera ally russias still interact heavily arms trade thenpresident medvedev visited 2010 nigeria firmly entrenched western camp algerias domestic instabilities proximity eu make prime candidate western blackmail missteps thus meaning closely toe line advancing national interests coerced western cooperation venezuela stands alone rest latin america 8th largest reserves gas worldwide 2nd largest western hemisphere regional state behind mexico trails far behind 32nd place canada 19th although rhetorically american hegemony country still heavily engages natural resources trade primarily oil us order build budget means countries experiencing complex economic interdependence unlike oil doubtful us need venezuela domestic gas needs would need however would support countergas opec member washington trying overthrow venezuelan government time manages succeed could easily return caracas orbit escaped nearly 15 years ago influence natural resource policy manner wants canadas two possible dark horses upset energy equilibrium varying extents besides overall uncertainty actual shale gas reserves serious environmental concerns extraction first one fracking revolution turns poland canada major gas producers poland strong supplier eu would lessen blocs import needs quickly rehabilitate russian gas addiction concerning canada happens large undiscovered reserves accessible via fracking actually fracks could continue combine gas potential us make north america prime energy superpower rival russia second dark horse relates last comment deals reserves arctic although still delineated expensive extract future situation could resolved canada us may dramatically increase reserves challenge gas opec asia expected increase consumption energy resources appetite growing fast coming years may even outpace supply means many suppliers competing burgeoning market principally china india japan main engines energy consumption continent although south korea also experience increase demand strong economies customers may also able pay higher prices gas making even attractive partner europe example therefore asia forecasted emerge main market gas opec compete rivals foundations gas trade market description expostulated upon appropriate segue topic gas opec organization would inevitably oriented around geopolitical interests feature west versus rest approach rest representing core gas opec russia iran turkmenistan envisioned founders organization turkmenistans inclusion justified intimate gas relationship china imports half gas country india another vociferous consumer gas planning build either underwater overland gas pipeline iran tying china india gas opec web via turkmenistan iran geopolitical potential power could possibly kinetic results adding russias plans build gas pipeline china gas opec would result form energy interdependence emerging eurasian brics members would make type energy eurasian union fact us canada already huge case canada potentially huge players international gas market large gas reserves political export advance global nato goals brings idea countergas opec russia irans gas opec faceoff two would resemble energy nato enato versus energy eurasian union eeu north america us canada allies saudi arabia amp uae potentially fracking poland flipped algeria venezuela could monopoly supply western world competing eeu eastern one lng exports cold war 21st century bloc may competing ideologues rather competing gas organizations part geopolitical fault lines eeu enato drawn qatar however remains important outlier recently experienced severe disruption ties gulf allies raises prospect may drift closer iran extension future eeu qatar saudi arabia politically militarily ideologically competing mideast natural competition elevate economic level accordingly gas geopolitics may give qatar longterm edge saudi rival bequeathing added advantage needs triumph new mideast cold war eeu would overwhelmingly dominate worlds gas market case sides enato qatar would member greatest potential would allow bloc closely trail eeus total gas reserves referencing cia world factbook qatar 25 times many proven reserves us us saudi arabia uae three largest proposed enato members combined eia also states worlds largest lng exporter since 2006 would effect give enato strategic technological advantage eeu without qatars incorporation enato doomed fail turn makes qatar makeorbreak partner calls shots whether enato lives dies countries would welcome inclusion eeu longterm commitment uncertain due political manipulations algerias proximity nato americas antagonism venezuela either may experience color revolution flipped enato even occur overtly may various mechanisms eventually become defacto seats enatos interests eeu halting andor sabotaging progress threat must always kept mind states relatively weaker russia iran may able effectively resist postmodern western covert offensives thus although would mark positive geopolitical extension eeu africa latin america algeria venezuelas inclusion necessary eeu function hand given significantly smaller gas reserves exception possible member qatar enato would definitely need players organization order increase collective strength combined would equal one united states largest member enato qatar participate hefty addition enatos gas capabilities geopolitically algeria venezuela would entrench enato latin america africa provide extra reserves export asia algeria venezuela thus important eeu reserve standpoint instead method preventing enato actualizing full potential becoming competitor since enato would desperately need algerian venezuelan participation project would compelled whatever could bring onto side sets eeu enato first proxy contest making two current resistant defiant rampd states pressing targets western regime change efforts moment eeu enato projects launched section briefly describe possible enato configurations would allow organization come existence means address scenarios qatar eeu saudi arabia uaes lack participation enato would certainly prevent creation countergas opec would occur enato integrates qatar us saudi arabia uae venezuela nigeria defacto shoein algeria configuration would surpass eeus total reserves rather would nearly 75 total still sizeable amount would allow enato compete ee across world scenario algeria venezuela enter eeu regardless whether nigeria develops lng able export enato falls eeus influence via transsaharan pipeline eeu nearly double amount reserves enato would relegate enato largely supplying western world although partners like qatar may success asian market comparison two scenarios demonstrates importance enato integrating algeria venezuela supports claim enato desperately seek flip rampd states order give competitive lifeblood needed counter eeu algeria venezuela also located away eeu members therefore meaning exposed harder alliance defend weakest links likely attacked first enato offensive strong odds success eeu anticipated specific technical aspects dictating distribution network russia would continue supply gas europe although amount expected decrease europeans move away russian supplies towards source diversification therefore russia also diversify away old partners towards newer ones case asia russia result expertise pipeline construction likely approach conventional method distribution building connections china japan south korea case japan must first reach negotiated settlement kuril islands otherwise us preferential access market geopolitical reasons pipeline south korea could either pass north korea go sea japan since south korea pragmatic politically independent result strong trade connections china country russia may build pipelines enters japanese market chinese present something obstacle eeu despite russianchinese strategic partnership china wants ensure receives gas lowest possible price likely try exploit europes recent rift russia achieve thought gas monopoly scares china since want dependent large pricecontrolling bloc imports inclusion qatar organization would mean 66 gas imports would controlled eeu turkmenistan already supplies 50 situation beijing would likely find unacceptable unable tangible change thus forced deal new reality finds although may attempt unexpected methods stop slow eeus formation eeu created iran turkmenistan certainly increase gas cooperation turkmenistan could build gas pipeline iran persian gulf order sell lng global market iran would thus need acquire lng technology ships terminals order sell turkmenistans reserves east southeast asian clients qatar enters eeu could provide iran muchneeded support field barring qatars participation russian east asian investment expertise could possibly fulfill urgent need selling iranian turkmen gas via lng way eeus middle eastern members penetrate asian market prerequisite organization global impact also possibility iran could sell resources europe largely dependent successful progovernment resolution syrian crisis iraniraqsyria gas pipeline comes syria would lng export terminal iranian turkmen gas west although part gas trading organization russia eu may buy iranian turkmen supplies simply russia would paper accomplish eus political goal diversifying away russian resources still satisfying ever growing demand time enato may pressure europe purchase gas market conditions right ie price lower enatos qatar joints eeu may helpless prevent calculations underscore importance russia iran assisting syrian ally westernled terrorist onslaught facing already mentioned earlier damascus destabilization may brought punishment refusal kowtow natos pipeline policies therefore syrias successful resistance would strike energy vulnerability scared west willing support threeyear terrorist insurgency prevent finally iran complete plans build pipeline india either undersea pakistan already iranian client would solidify eeus ability influence asian members brics achieve deeper level energy infrastructural integration among may serve step closer towards multipolarity longterm grand strategic goal russia china iran world brink fundamental changes gas market west continues polarize rest gas leaders russia iran embracing like never eus robust rhetoric turning back russian energy resources fortified moscows political diversify partnerships move east iran breaking free western sanctions isolation assads successful repelling westernmanaged terrorist brigades russian iranian support provide tehran energy window europe time coming russia irans energy interests intersect qatar recently found west saudi arabias bad boys list enticed join eeus global gas dominance guaranteed even without qatar successful implementation eeu would historical landmark multipolarity although gas bipolarity would develop eeu enato may harken back days cold war | 2,220 |
<p>Harry Connick Jr. begins the second season for his syndicated talk show “Harry” in September. The jazzman released his first album when he was 10 years old, and broke into the mainstream after recording the soundtrack to “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/when-harry-met-sally/" type="external">When Harry Met Sally</a>…” at 22. The album hit No. 1 on Billboard’s jazz chart, won Connick his first Grammy (for jazz male vocal performance), and was certified double platinum. The New Orleans native has also acted in numerous roles; wrote the Broadway musical “Thou Shalt Not,” was Tony-nominated as an actor for “The Pajama Game,” and mentored on “American Idol.” Variety first mentioned him on April 8, 1981, as part of the announced lineup for the New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival, where at 14, he joined such legends as Cab Calloway and James Brown.</p>
<p>SEE MORE: <a href="https://variety.com/access-digital/" type="external">From the August 29, 2017, issue of Variety</a></p>
<p>Do you remember the 1981 jazz festival performance?</p>
<p>The only thing I remember from that performance was there was a guy named <a href="http://variety.com/t/james-booker/" type="external">James Booker</a>, who was a really incredible musician from New Orleans and was a very good friend of mine. I don’t remember my performance, but I remember him performing and asking me to come up and play a song with him. That was incredible because I idolized this guy. Even though I knew him really well, for him to invite me up there and play and share the stage was something I’ll never forget.</p>
<p>Were you nervous?</p>
<p>I never got nervous. It’s like a “put me in, coach; I’m ready to play” kind of thing. I welcomed any kind of opportunity to play. I wasn’t nervous, but I was very excited.</p>
<p>Was having a mentor like him important?</p>
<p>Jazz is the kind of music that has a very broad and deep history. To have someone pass on information in such a direct way was priceless. In this kind of music, you can listen to all the records you want, but when somebody actually shows you the physicality of it, it’s unbelievable; it’s also incredibly inspiring because somebody who you admire so much is taking the time to give information to you, and that resonates with me now. When I see young musicians, I’m always inclined to tell them anything I can, because that’s how our music grows and evolves.</p>
<p>What was the best thing you learned from James Booker?</p>
<p>There were two. On a purely musical level, when I was 7 or 8 years old, I had small hands, like young people do, so I couldn’t reach these vast spans of notes that James could. I would say, “How do you do this, how do you do that?” so he would sort of amend the way he played to accommodate my little hands. I’d watch him play and he would give me specific musical stuff. The other thing was, this man was deeply troubled psychologically; he was a terrible drug addict and alcoholic and had a very, very sad life but was always, always kind to me. He made me feel unique and like I was the only person in the world. I never forgot the impact that he had on me, even given all his troubles. As a young man, I didn’t know all of this stuff, and as I got older I started to realize how incredibly troubled he actually was. I think all he wanted to do was make me better — and those are the types of things that stick with you.</p>
<p>How did you meet him?</p>
<p>It’s kind of fuzzy, but my mother and father were big music fans and they knew that I loved music, so they would always take me around to hear great musicians. My parents were both well-known politicians in New Orleans, so they would meet celebrities and presidents and governors, and I didn’t know who half of these people were. One day I’d be meeting somebody of enormous social significance, like a singer or an actor, and the next day I’d be meeting somebody who I thought was just as significant in that way and turned out to be the guy who changed my dad’s oil at a shop, so they presented people to me equally. My relationship with James was always one of deep respect and admiration, and he really loved my mom and dad. When my mother died — that was about a year before James died — he really was saddened. I would go hear him play or sometimes people came to the house. It was a very informal relationship, but it was very powerful.</p>
<p>When did you first know you wanted to be an entertainer?</p>
<p>It was way, way back. My dad was the district attorney for New Orleans and when he opened up his campaign headquarters in 1972 or so, I was 5 years old. I played “The Star Spangled Banner” in front of a couple hundred people and I remember looking over the piano, and hearing them applaud when I finished the song, and I said “I need to get some more of that,” because I love that feeling. All I did was play something that made me happy and it made other people happy. But that was probably the first time I understood that if I press down on these little white and black things on this box, people might like it. So I wanted to keep that.</p>
<p>Your career has expanded so much since you started, with acting, producing and the talk show. Were those all part of your early goals?</p>
<p>All I wanted to do when I was 5, 6, 7 years old was be a piano player and a singer. When I got into high school, I started doing plays and I started realizing how much I loved being on stage as an actor; then when I was about 18 or 19, I got cast in a film, and it was all using the same part of my brain — just in different ways. I loved being in movies, so I started doing more of that and then television. So for me, the kind of personality I have, everything kind of felt similar and very comfortable.</p>
<p>Do you consider yourself primarily a musician?</p>
<p>First and foremost, that’s what I do. But you know, people ask what do you want your epitaph to say, and I would just say an entertainer.</p>
<p>What was it like witnessing the success of the “When Harry Met Sally…” soundtrack?</p>
<p>That was crazy. This was back when there were no cellphones, internet, any of that stuff, so people had [different] ways of finding out about your music, whether it was on a TV show or the radio or a newspaper or magazine article. I went from selling 10,000 records, which is a lot for an unknown jazz piano player, to millions of records in a matter of months. I’d walk through an airport and people would say, “I know who you are,” or I’d hear my music in a shopping mall. You start getting invited to be on “The Tonight Show With <a href="http://variety.com/t/johnny-carson/" type="external">Johnny Carson</a>” and it was just a really, really fun time.</p>
<p>Is there a message you want your audience to take away from your talk show?</p>
<p>The whole idea is for them to feel better at the end than they did at the beginning. Our country is filled with such amazing people; there’s so much goodness out there. There’s a lot of division too, but I think the vast majority are decent people who love their families. I want to do a show that’s entertaining that celebrates those people. We don’t argue about politics; there are a lot of shows that do politics very well, but we don’t. It’s hard to make an entertainment show that is funny, uplifting and that makes people feel better.</p>
<p>Was there something about the show that you love but didn’t expect?</p>
<p>I knew I’d love it, but I didn’t know I’d love it this much. When people come up to me and say, “Thank you, we didn’t have anything to watch before this; this is something I can watch with my kids or my parents or grandparents” — it’s a really nice feeling.</p>
<p>What advice would you give to someone starting out in the industry?</p>
<p>I’d say lazy people work the hardest — in other words, do your work, learn your craft. If you cut corners, it’s going to come back and bite you, and you’re gonna wish that you had done the best that you could when you were focused on that. And that goes for anything, whether you’re going to be a journalist, an actor, a doctor. Work as hard as you can to understand your craft as best you can, so that when the opportunity does, in fact, arrive, you’ll be prepared for it.</p> | false | 1 | harry connick jr begins second season syndicated talk show harry september jazzman released first album 10 years old broke mainstream recording soundtrack harry met sally 22 album hit 1 billboards jazz chart connick first grammy jazz male vocal performance certified double platinum new orleans native also acted numerous roles wrote broadway musical thou shalt tonynominated actor pajama game mentored american idol variety first mentioned april 8 1981 part announced lineup new orleans jazz heritage festival 14 joined legends cab calloway james brown see august 29 2017 issue variety remember 1981 jazz festival performance thing remember performance guy named james booker really incredible musician new orleans good friend mine dont remember performance remember performing asking come play song incredible idolized guy even though knew really well invite play share stage something ill never forget nervous never got nervous like put coach im ready play kind thing welcomed kind opportunity play wasnt nervous excited mentor like important jazz kind music broad deep history someone pass information direct way priceless kind music listen records want somebody actually shows physicality unbelievable also incredibly inspiring somebody admire much taking time give information resonates see young musicians im always inclined tell anything thats music grows evolves best thing learned james booker two purely musical level 7 8 years old small hands like young people couldnt reach vast spans notes james could would say would sort amend way played accommodate little hands id watch play would give specific musical stuff thing man deeply troubled psychologically terrible drug addict alcoholic sad life always always kind made feel unique like person world never forgot impact even given troubles young man didnt know stuff got older started realize incredibly troubled actually think wanted make better types things stick meet kind fuzzy mother father big music fans knew loved music would always take around hear great musicians parents wellknown politicians new orleans would meet celebrities presidents governors didnt know half people one day id meeting somebody enormous social significance like singer actor next day id meeting somebody thought significant way turned guy changed dads oil shop presented people equally relationship james always one deep respect admiration really loved mom dad mother died year james died really saddened would go hear play sometimes people came house informal relationship powerful first know wanted entertainer way way back dad district attorney new orleans opened campaign headquarters 1972 5 years old played star spangled banner front couple hundred people remember looking piano hearing applaud finished song said need get love feeling play something made happy made people happy probably first time understood press little white black things box people might like wanted keep career expanded much since started acting producing talk show part early goals wanted 5 6 7 years old piano player singer got high school started plays started realizing much loved stage actor 18 19 got cast film using part brain different ways loved movies started television kind personality everything kind felt similar comfortable consider primarily musician first foremost thats know people ask want epitaph say would say entertainer like witnessing success harry met sally soundtrack crazy back cellphones internet stuff people different ways finding music whether tv show radio newspaper magazine article went selling 10000 records lot unknown jazz piano player millions records matter months id walk airport people would say know id hear music shopping mall start getting invited tonight show johnny carson really really fun time message want audience take away talk show whole idea feel better end beginning country filled amazing people theres much goodness theres lot division think vast majority decent people love families want show thats entertaining celebrates people dont argue politics lot shows politics well dont hard make entertainment show funny uplifting makes people feel better something show love didnt expect knew id love didnt know id love much people come say thank didnt anything watch something watch kids parents grandparents really nice feeling advice would give someone starting industry id say lazy people work hardest words work learn craft cut corners going come back bite youre gon na wish done best could focused goes anything whether youre going journalist actor doctor work hard understand craft best opportunity fact arrive youll prepared | 696 |
<p />
<p>In a little noted initiative, the General Assembly on November 26, 2013 voted to proclaim 2014 the International Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. The UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People was requested to organize relevant activities in cooperation with governments, the UN system, intergovernmental organizations, and significantly, civil society. The vote was 110-7, with 56 abstentions, which is more or less reflective of the sentiments now present in international society. Among the seven opponents of the initiative, in addition to Israel, were unsurprisingly its three staunchest supporters, each once a British colony: the United States, Canada, and Australia, with the addition of such international heavyweight states as Micronesia, Palau, and the Marshall Islands. Europe and assorted states around the world were among the 56 abstentions, with virtually the entire non-West solidly behind the idea of highlighting solidarity with the Palestinian people in their struggle for peace with justice based on rights under international law.</p>
<p>Three initial observations: those governments that are willing to stand unabashedly with Israel in opposition to the tide of world public opinion are increasingly isolated, and these governments are under mounting public pressure from their own civil societies that seeks a balanced approach that is rights based rather than power dominated; the West, in general, is dominated by the abstaining governments that seek the lowest possible profile of being seen as neither for or against, and in those countries where civil society should now be capable of mobilizing more support for the Palestinian struggle; and the non-West that is, as has long been the case, rhetorically in solidarity with the Palestinian people, but have yet to match their words with deeds, and seem ready to be pushed.</p>
<p>What is also revealing is the argumentation of UN Watch and others that denounce this latest UN initiative because it unfairly singles out Israel and ignores those countries that have worse human rights records.&#160; Always forgotten here are two elements of the Israel/Palestine conflict that justify singling it out among others: Israel owes its existence, to a significant degree, to the organized international community, starting with the League of Nations, continuing throughout the British Mandate, and culminating with the Partition Plan of 1947, as set forth in GA Res. 181. The latter overrode the decolonizing principle of self-determination with a solution devised and imposed from without; such antecedents to the current Israel/Palestine situation also expose the colonialist foundations of the current struggle as well as call attention to the settler colonial elements that are associated with Israel’s continuous expansion of territorial, resource, and ethnocratic claims far beyond what the Western dominated international community had proposed, and then approved of, &#160;after the end of World War II.</p>
<p>To be sure, there were delicate and complex issues all along that make this problematic role of the international community somewhat more understandable. Up to 1945 there was a generalized acceptance of European colonial administration, although in the Middle East, colonial legitimacy was balanced for the first time against an obligation by the colonial powers to prepare a dependent people to stand eventually on its own, an ambivalent acknowledgement of the ethos of self-determination if not yet in the form of a legal norm. This affirmation of self-determination, as an alternative to colonial rule, was the special project of the American president, Woodrow Wilson, who insisted that such an approach was a moral imperative, especially in dealing with the regional aftermath of the Ottoman Empire that had long ruled over many diverse ethnicities.</p>
<p>Beyond this, the Jewish experience during the reign of fascist regimes throughout Europe, culminating in the Holocaust, created a strong empathetic urge in Europe to endorse the Zionist project for a Jewish Homeland in Palestine.&#160; As is known, this empathy although genuine in many quarters, &#160;also exhibited a deferred sense of guilt on the part of the Western liberal democracies that had done so little to challenge the genocidal policies of Hitler and the Nazis, refusing to act at all until their national interests were directly engaged by German aggression. European support was also forthcoming because the Zionist-proposed solution for the Jewish Problem, which has long been present in Europe, could be enacted elsewhere, that is, at the expense of non-Europeans. This elsewhere was far from empty and was coveted by others for various reasons. Palestine was a land long lived in mainly by Arabs, but also by some Jews and Christians, and associated centrally with the sacred traditions of all three monotheistic religions. Normally in the modern world, the demographics of residence trump biblical or other claims based on claims of national tradition, ethnic identity, and ancient historical presence. Yet despite these factors, there were ethical reasons in the aftermath of such extreme victimization of the Jewish people to lend support to a reasonable version of the Zionist project as it had evolved in the years since the Balfour Declaration, even if from a variety of other perspectives it was deeply unfair to others and disruptive of peaceful relations, and throughout its implementation, produced an unfolding catastrophe for most non-Jewish Palestinians.</p>
<p>Taking account of this historical and moral complexity what seems evident is the failure of the UN to carry out its responsibility in a manner that was effective and responsive to the human circumstances prevailing in Palestine. The UN overall record is quite disappointing if considered from the perspective of accommodating these contradictory clusters of consideration in a manner that was reflective of international law and global justice. The military prowess of Zionist forces in Israel inflicted a major defeat on the Palestinian people and neighboring Arab governments, and in the process expanded the territorial dominion of Israel from the 55% decreed by the UN in its partition plan to 78% where the green line established an armistice arrangement in 1948. Such an outcome was gradually endorsed by a geopolitical consensus, exhibited through the admission of Israel to the UN without any solution to the underlying conflict, leaving the Palestinians out in the cold and allowing Israel to constitute itself within borders much larger than what the UN had a mere year earlier decreed as fair.</p>
<p>This situation was further aggravated by the 1967 War in which Israel occupied all of the remaining territory of historic Palestine, purporting even to annex East Jerusalem while greatly enlarging the area of municipal Jerusalem by incorporating land belonging to the West Bank. Since 1967, this Palestinian territorial remnant has been further decreased by the massive settlement phenomenon, including its network of settler only roads, carried out in flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, by the separation wall constructed and maintained in defiance of the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, and by a variety of moves to change the demography of East Jerusalem. In other words, Israeli forces on the ground in what had been Palestine have undermined the vision set forth in the partition plan which was itself a controversial UN solution to the conflict that was rejected by Palestinians and by neighboring countries.</p>
<p>Despite much propaganda to the contrary, the Palestinian leadership has over most of the period of their struggle shown an unusual readiness to abandon maximal goals, and put forward forthcoming proposals in recognition of the realities of a situation that had become unfavorable for the realization of their earlier hopes. Palestinian willingness, expressed formally since 1988, to accept Israel as a legitimate state within the green line borders of 1967 remains more than twenty-five years after its articulation an unacknowledged and unreciprocated major initiative for peace. That such a proposal has been ignored and continuously undermined by Israel with de facto Western acquiescence, and in the face of feeble UN rhetorical objections, displays the inability of the UN to fulfill its responsibilities to the people of Palestine.</p>
<p>As might be expected, Palestinians have long become disillusioned about the benefits of having UN authority and international law on their side. Over the years the backing of international authority has failed to bring about an improvement in the life circumstances and political position of the Palestinian people. The UN is helpless, and designed to be helpless, whenever a UN position is effectively resisted by a combination of military force and geopolitical alignment. Israel’s military capabilities and American geopolitical leverage have completely nullified the expressed will of the United Nations, but have not overcome the sense of frustration or excused the Organization from its failure to act responsibly toward the Palestinian people.</p>
<p>In light of this background, the wonder is that the UN has done so little to repair the damage, not that it has done so much, or more than it should in relation to Israel/Palestine. Arguably, yes, there are a variety of other situations in which the abuse of human rights has been worse than what is being attributed to Israel, but the rationale for focusing on Palestine is not only a question of the denial of rights, it is also an issue of fundamental justice, of the seemingly permanent subjugation of a people, partly due to arrangements that were devised and endorsed over a long period of time by the organized international community.&#160; Yet, witnessing the dire current emergency plight of the people of Gaza, makes it perverse to contend that the human rights challenges facing this large and vulnerable Palestinian community is not among the worst human rights abuses in the entire world, and makes us wonder anew why the UN seems unwilling and unable to do more!</p>
<p>We can hope at the dawn of 2014 that the UN will be vigorous in giving the International Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People a political meaning that goes beyond words of empathy and support. There is an opportunity to do more. The UN resolution calls for working with civil society. Recent moves in America to join boycotts of Israeli academic institutions and in Europe to hold corporations responsible under international law for dealing commercially with Israeli settlements are major successes of civil society activism, being led by the BDS Campaign that has the important legitimating virtue of Palestinian leadership and backing. The UN can help build a momentum in the global solidarity movement that encourages nonviolent militant forms of coercive action that alone will give ‘solidarity’ a good name.</p>
<p>Palestinians are starting to win the Legitimacy War that is being waged against unlawful Israeli policies and on behalf of the attainment of Palestinian rights. The turning point in world public opinion can probably be traced back to the way Israel waged the Lebanon War of 1982, especially the avowed reliance on disproportionate force directed at residential neighborhoods, especially in south Beirut, a tactic that became known as the Dahiya Doctrine. The tipping point in shifting the Israeli collective identity from that of victims and heroic underdogs to that lawless perpetrators of oppressive warfare against a totally vulnerable people came in Operation Cast Lead, the sustained assault with high technology weaponry on the people of Gaza for three weeks at the end of 2008. After these developments, the Palestinians were understood more widely to be a victimized people, engaged in a just struggle to gain their rights under international law, and needing and deserving an international movement of support to offset the Israeli hard power and geopolitical dominance.</p>
<p>Israeli leaders and think tanks try their hardest to discredit this Palestinian Legitimacy War by falsely claiming that it is directed against the legitimacy of Israel as a state rather than is the case, against the unlawful policies of the Israeli state. This is a crucial difference, and the distinction seems deliberately obscured by Israeli propaganda that inflated what Palestinians are seeking so as to make their activism appear hyperbolic, with unreasonable and unacceptable demands, which makes it easier to dismiss than by addressing critically the Palestinian grievances in their actual form. It is to be hoped that the International Year of Solidarity in its work clarifies this distinction between Israel as a state and Israeli policies. Within such a framework the UN will deserve credit for contributing to victories throughout the world that advance the agenda of the Legitimacy War being waged by and on behalf of the Palestinian people, and by so doing, move the debate somewhat closer to the realization of a just and sustainable peace for both peoples.</p> | false | 1 | little noted initiative general assembly november 26 2013 voted proclaim 2014 international year solidarity palestinian people un committee exercise inalienable rights palestinian people requested organize relevant activities cooperation governments un system intergovernmental organizations significantly civil society vote 1107 56 abstentions less reflective sentiments present international society among seven opponents initiative addition israel unsurprisingly three staunchest supporters british colony united states canada australia addition international heavyweight states micronesia palau marshall islands europe assorted states around world among 56 abstentions virtually entire nonwest solidly behind idea highlighting solidarity palestinian people struggle peace justice based rights international law three initial observations governments willing stand unabashedly israel opposition tide world public opinion increasingly isolated governments mounting public pressure civil societies seeks balanced approach rights based rather power dominated west general dominated abstaining governments seek lowest possible profile seen neither countries civil society capable mobilizing support palestinian struggle nonwest long case rhetorically solidarity palestinian people yet match words deeds seem ready pushed also revealing argumentation un watch others denounce latest un initiative unfairly singles israel ignores countries worse human rights records160 always forgotten two elements israelpalestine conflict justify singling among others israel owes existence significant degree organized international community starting league nations continuing throughout british mandate culminating partition plan 1947 set forth ga res 181 latter overrode decolonizing principle selfdetermination solution devised imposed without antecedents current israelpalestine situation also expose colonialist foundations current struggle well call attention settler colonial elements associated israels continuous expansion territorial resource ethnocratic claims far beyond western dominated international community proposed approved 160after end world war ii sure delicate complex issues along make problematic role international community somewhat understandable 1945 generalized acceptance european colonial administration although middle east colonial legitimacy balanced first time obligation colonial powers prepare dependent people stand eventually ambivalent acknowledgement ethos selfdetermination yet form legal norm affirmation selfdetermination alternative colonial rule special project american president woodrow wilson insisted approach moral imperative especially dealing regional aftermath ottoman empire long ruled many diverse ethnicities beyond jewish experience reign fascist regimes throughout europe culminating holocaust created strong empathetic urge europe endorse zionist project jewish homeland palestine160 known empathy although genuine many quarters 160also exhibited deferred sense guilt part western liberal democracies done little challenge genocidal policies hitler nazis refusing act national interests directly engaged german aggression european support also forthcoming zionistproposed solution jewish problem long present europe could enacted elsewhere expense noneuropeans elsewhere far empty coveted others various reasons palestine land long lived mainly arabs also jews christians associated centrally sacred traditions three monotheistic religions normally modern world demographics residence trump biblical claims based claims national tradition ethnic identity ancient historical presence yet despite factors ethical reasons aftermath extreme victimization jewish people lend support reasonable version zionist project evolved years since balfour declaration even variety perspectives deeply unfair others disruptive peaceful relations throughout implementation produced unfolding catastrophe nonjewish palestinians taking account historical moral complexity seems evident failure un carry responsibility manner effective responsive human circumstances prevailing palestine un overall record quite disappointing considered perspective accommodating contradictory clusters consideration manner reflective international law global justice military prowess zionist forces israel inflicted major defeat palestinian people neighboring arab governments process expanded territorial dominion israel 55 decreed un partition plan 78 green line established armistice arrangement 1948 outcome gradually endorsed geopolitical consensus exhibited admission israel un without solution underlying conflict leaving palestinians cold allowing israel constitute within borders much larger un mere year earlier decreed fair situation aggravated 1967 war israel occupied remaining territory historic palestine purporting even annex east jerusalem greatly enlarging area municipal jerusalem incorporating land belonging west bank since 1967 palestinian territorial remnant decreased massive settlement phenomenon including network settler roads carried flagrant violation international humanitarian law separation wall constructed maintained defiance advisory opinion international court justice variety moves change demography east jerusalem words israeli forces ground palestine undermined vision set forth partition plan controversial un solution conflict rejected palestinians neighboring countries despite much propaganda contrary palestinian leadership period struggle shown unusual readiness abandon maximal goals put forward forthcoming proposals recognition realities situation become unfavorable realization earlier hopes palestinian willingness expressed formally since 1988 accept israel legitimate state within green line borders 1967 remains twentyfive years articulation unacknowledged unreciprocated major initiative peace proposal ignored continuously undermined israel de facto western acquiescence face feeble un rhetorical objections displays inability un fulfill responsibilities people palestine might expected palestinians long become disillusioned benefits un authority international law side years backing international authority failed bring improvement life circumstances political position palestinian people un helpless designed helpless whenever un position effectively resisted combination military force geopolitical alignment israels military capabilities american geopolitical leverage completely nullified expressed united nations overcome sense frustration excused organization failure act responsibly toward palestinian people light background wonder un done little repair damage done much relation israelpalestine arguably yes variety situations abuse human rights worse attributed israel rationale focusing palestine question denial rights also issue fundamental justice seemingly permanent subjugation people partly due arrangements devised endorsed long period time organized international community160 yet witnessing dire current emergency plight people gaza makes perverse contend human rights challenges facing large vulnerable palestinian community among worst human rights abuses entire world makes us wonder anew un seems unwilling unable hope dawn 2014 un vigorous giving international year solidarity palestinian people political meaning goes beyond words empathy support opportunity un resolution calls working civil society recent moves america join boycotts israeli academic institutions europe hold corporations responsible international law dealing commercially israeli settlements major successes civil society activism led bds campaign important legitimating virtue palestinian leadership backing un help build momentum global solidarity movement encourages nonviolent militant forms coercive action alone give solidarity good name palestinians starting win legitimacy war waged unlawful israeli policies behalf attainment palestinian rights turning point world public opinion probably traced back way israel waged lebanon war 1982 especially avowed reliance disproportionate force directed residential neighborhoods especially south beirut tactic became known dahiya doctrine tipping point shifting israeli collective identity victims heroic underdogs lawless perpetrators oppressive warfare totally vulnerable people came operation cast lead sustained assault high technology weaponry people gaza three weeks end 2008 developments palestinians understood widely victimized people engaged struggle gain rights international law needing deserving international movement support offset israeli hard power geopolitical dominance israeli leaders think tanks try hardest discredit palestinian legitimacy war falsely claiming directed legitimacy israel state rather case unlawful policies israeli state crucial difference distinction seems deliberately obscured israeli propaganda inflated palestinians seeking make activism appear hyperbolic unreasonable unacceptable demands makes easier dismiss addressing critically palestinian grievances actual form hoped international year solidarity work clarifies distinction israel state israeli policies within framework un deserve credit contributing victories throughout world advance agenda legitimacy war waged behalf palestinian people move debate somewhat closer realization sustainable peace peoples | 1,111 |
<p>The following is a transcript of Yuval Levin's remarks at a November 15, 2007&#160; <a href="/conferences/eventid.127/conf_detail.asp" type="external">EPPC discussion</a> of Michael Gerson's book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/006134950X/103-2765544-1008632?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=wwweppcorg-20&amp;linkCode=xm2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creativeASIN=006134950X" type="external">Heroic Conservatism</a>. The event, hosted by EPPC's <a href="/scholars/scholarid.93/scholar.asp" type="external">Peter Wehner</a>, included comments from the Gerson himself, from New York Times columnist David Brooks, and from Levin. Complete audio of the event is available <a href="" type="internal">here</a>. This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.</p>
<p>Speaking after David Brooks and Michael Gerson, I suppose I'm here to represent the narrow sliver of the population that doesn't have a twice weekly newspaper column.</p>
<p>It's really an honor to be here and especially to be here to talk about Mike's book. Mike is one of my heroes — not just in Washington but in general. And working with him and seeing him in action was really one of the great highlights of the time I spent in the White House. He is a model of idealism in action, and one of the things he's trying to persuade us of in this book is that politics is in some respects always idealism in action. I think he is right about that, and he makes that case tremendously well in this book. It's a wonderfully interesting book that highlights a moral tradition in America that, in ebbs and flows, has always been an essential part of what American politics has been about.</p>
<p>There is though, I think, some serious room for debate about the particular kind of ideal that Mike lays out. And so, rather than bore you with everything that I agree with in this book, and a lot of it is what David Brooks has said tonight, let me talk a little bit about what I think is missing, and the way in which I think its missing and the reason I think its missing.</p>
<p>First of all, I think it has to be said that the book is terribly unfair to fiscal conservatives. It treats them as essentially devoid of principle and idealism and lacking concern for the poor. Mike calls them at one point “small minded, cold, and uninspired.” I think that's unfair. I think it's untrue.</p>
<p>But I think that this dismissive attitude is really a consequence of something more general that's missing in the vision that's laid out in Heroic Conservatism.</p>
<p>So what is that? What's missing?</p>
<p>For me, this was crystallized most fully in the last chapter of Mike's book which is really an extraordinary fascinating mix of politics and philosophy and history and theology. It's tremendously well done and it's the place where Mike really lays out, more than anywhere else, what he really means by “heroic conservatism.” He begins the chapter…the first sentence of the chapter is, “At various stages in my life, like many idealists of a serious turn of mind, I have dabbled in despair.” And Mike lays out the ways that he's seen the partial appeal of a kind of conservatism of deep pessimism — of beauty in the twilight. And I think we all have an idea of what he means and of the kind of appeal that it sometimes does have. But he writes that in the end, “My skepticism and pessimism have been confounded by my heroes.” And he describes the heroic deeds and the struggles against slavery and tyranny and on behalf of the weak and the needy that make up so much of the rest of this book.</p>
<p>But here I think is the choice that's presented to us by Mike most clearly: it's despair of nobility, it's the lowest or the highest. And this arrangement of the options lays out a profoundly tragic view of life, that even where it's hopeful, it's an other-worldly kind of hope, a hope for the suffering and wretched to be redeemed by dramatic acts of heroism. It's noble and it's very inspiring, and I think it has to have a place in our politics, but it can't be the foundation of our politics.</p>
<p>What's missing here is the middle. I don't mean the ideological middle, but the middle way between despair and sainthood; the middle time between disaster and triumph; and the middle class between the suffering and their saviors. Overlooking the middle creates a vocabulary of tragedy and deliverance, a politics that speaks to the lowest and the most needy and the downtrodden, but that says nothing to the democratic middle, to the democratic mass. And I think that that's a terribly large oversight.</p>
<p>Speaking to the middle, it seems to me, is the crucial task of any serious American political program, conservative or not. And speaking to the middle is not a necessary evil in the politics of a democracy. It's crucial not just because that's where voters are, and not just because that's where political pressure comes from, it's crucial because that's where our great strength is — in the great and stable and usually pretty sensible middle — again, not ideologically in the center, but experientially in the center. That's where the culture lives, it's where economic strength is grounded, it's where our families are, it's where idealism comes from, too, and what it depends on. It's where we're strong and why we're strong. And Conservatives know that first and foremost, our politics have to sustain the sources of our strength, and to grow from there.</p>
<p>This means, I think, that our politics has to be fundamentally oriented to the middle class; to its needs and to its aims and to its hopes and to its ideals — to its aspirations. That's not where the goals of politics end — they have to include the kind of goals Mike lists here — but it is where the work of politics has to start. Humanitarianism is, I think, not an adequate foundation for political life. It's a worthy and a necessary end, but it can't do in itself. And it relies on other foundations — on a society that values freedom and family, that encourages self-reliance and entrepreneurial energy and industrious virtues and civic virtues — and all of these depend on a politics that speaks to the middle class in a constructive way about their present and future concerns; that approaches the task of governing in a responsible way, including a fiscally responsible way.</p>
<p>These are the foundations of a successful democratic politics, the only way to also build room for humanitarianism and for idealism. To disparage the people most concerned for these foundations, I think, is to disparage the need to focus on these foundations, and to focus on the middle.</p>
<p>Mike offers reasons for this, he offers a couple of pretty strong reasons for focusing on what I would describe as the extremes of life, or the extremes or the margins of society and not just to care about them and address them (as we should) but to orient our politics by them. He argues, first of all, in several places, and quite powerfully, that he is oriented by the basic democratic fact and human fact, that all men are created equal — an American fact, too. And I think that's a good place to start, but I think that it leads to much more than what Mike suggests. Jefferson's assertion of equality has its most challenging and most demanding implications at the edges of life and at the edges of society; with regard to the youngest and the oldest, and the neediest and the weakest, and that's where Mike wants to orient us most fundamentally, where he says we're most lacking. But Jefferson's assertion of equality has I think, its politically most powerful and transformative implications in the middle, by empowering the great democratic core of the country – and elevating it to a position of power. That's how equality creates democracy. And I think that that's actually what Jefferson, though probably not Lincoln, had in mind by saying that all men are created equal.</p>
<p>It's an important source of America's unique strengths and advantages and it's one important reason why our politics have to be grounded in the middle if they're going to be capable of caring for those at the edges.</p>
<p>Mike then also argues that we should orient ourselves by the most challenging examples because our ideals and principles are most clear and most stark in times of crisis, and those are times we can learn from. I think that's right, too. And we can learn a lot from calamity and crisis, but we have to learn also – and this is actually harder to do — from the everyday, from slow progress, from what works and what almost works. Not every challenge is going to be analogous to the Civil War. And I think that a politics of Civil War analogies is going to be not only incomplete, but also terribly exhausting. And this is actually an important point, it has a lot to do with our political predicament at the moment: to ignore the middle class of our society in our political rhetoric, to suggest that all there is is the very high and the very low, that every challenge is an historical calling, and that our options are despair of heroism, is to risk not only losing the trust of the middle class, but exhausting its political will, which is essential for any real exertion.</p>
<p>I think it's hard to deny that to some extent conservatives have done this, and the administration has done this. The American public today is exhausted. It's tired and cranky and in no mood for any great exertions. Obviously a lot of this has to do with the terribly eventful past decade we've had, which has not been entirely the fault of our politicians. But I think that it's hard to deny that the basic failure to speak to the concerns and interests of the middle class has had to do with this, too.</p>
<p>The rhetoric of compassionate conservatism has offered the middle class, and the aspiring, upwardly mobile poor, I think too little. Now, that doesn't mean that the Bush administration policies have not done a lot for the middle class. I think they have. But rhetoric matters. And we've failed somewhat to tend rhetorically to the needs of the middle class. We've walked the walk more than we've talked the talk, and that comes with costs.</p>
<p>So I think conservatives should seek to build space for American idealism, for Mike's kind of idealism exactly. But the task of building has to be itself oriented to the whole which means, in a democracy, oriented to the middle. It has to speak to a society of equals. It has to strengthen it, to keep its spirits up, and it has to offer something to middle class families and to the upwardly mobile who know that they're only temporarily poor.</p>
<p>I think finally that it also has to find ways to interest social conservatives — the moral core of America — in these more mundane tasks of governing: in politics, and not just in heroism; in healthcare and entitlement reform, as well as in humanitarian ventures. In a way, it's not hard to be moved by the work of caring for the sick and the suffering. It's a lot harder to be moved by the need to care about a more boring, more everyday politics. If we're going to be strong enough to carry off heroic conservatism, I think we have to be firm and prudent enough to carry off an everyday conservatism, of which limited government and freedom and even fiscal discipline are absolutely crucial parts.</p>
<p>What I take to be the great conservative wisdom is that we have to use what we have that works, to build up what we lack and what doesn't work. We have to begin from our strengths and build on them. Idealism is surely one of America's great strengths. Our great and grounded middle, though, is another. And Mike calls upon the former in a book that I think is a powerfully compelling call to heroism. But he doesn't call so much on the latter, which I think is an essential prerequisite for America's greatness and for American idealism. So I certainly don't think the book is wrong, but I do think it's incomplete.</p> | false | 1 | following transcript yuval levins remarks november 15 2007160 eppc discussion michael gersons book heroic conservatism event hosted eppcs peter wehner included comments gerson new york times columnist david brooks levin complete audio event available transcript lightly edited clarity speaking david brooks michael gerson suppose im represent narrow sliver population doesnt twice weekly newspaper column really honor especially talk mikes book mike one heroes washington general working seeing action really one great highlights time spent white house model idealism action one things hes trying persuade us book politics respects always idealism action think right makes case tremendously well book wonderfully interesting book highlights moral tradition america ebbs flows always essential part american politics though think serious room debate particular kind ideal mike lays rather bore everything agree book lot david brooks said tonight let talk little bit think missing way think missing reason think missing first think said book terribly unfair fiscal conservatives treats essentially devoid principle idealism lacking concern poor mike calls one point small minded cold uninspired think thats unfair think untrue think dismissive attitude really consequence something general thats missing vision thats laid heroic conservatism whats missing crystallized fully last chapter mikes book really extraordinary fascinating mix politics philosophy history theology tremendously well done place mike really lays anywhere else really means heroic conservatism begins chapterthe first sentence chapter various stages life like many idealists serious turn mind dabbled despair mike lays ways hes seen partial appeal kind conservatism deep pessimism beauty twilight think idea means kind appeal sometimes writes end skepticism pessimism confounded heroes describes heroic deeds struggles slavery tyranny behalf weak needy make much rest book think choice thats presented us mike clearly despair nobility lowest highest arrangement options lays profoundly tragic view life even hopeful otherworldly kind hope hope suffering wretched redeemed dramatic acts heroism noble inspiring think place politics cant foundation politics whats missing middle dont mean ideological middle middle way despair sainthood middle time disaster triumph middle class suffering saviors overlooking middle creates vocabulary tragedy deliverance politics speaks lowest needy downtrodden says nothing democratic middle democratic mass think thats terribly large oversight speaking middle seems crucial task serious american political program conservative speaking middle necessary evil politics democracy crucial thats voters thats political pressure comes crucial thats great strength great stable usually pretty sensible middle ideologically center experientially center thats culture lives economic strength grounded families idealism comes depends strong strong conservatives know first foremost politics sustain sources strength grow means think politics fundamentally oriented middle class needs aims hopes ideals aspirations thats goals politics end include kind goals mike lists work politics start humanitarianism think adequate foundation political life worthy necessary end cant relies foundations society values freedom family encourages selfreliance entrepreneurial energy industrious virtues civic virtues depend politics speaks middle class constructive way present future concerns approaches task governing responsible way including fiscally responsible way foundations successful democratic politics way also build room humanitarianism idealism disparage people concerned foundations think disparage need focus foundations focus middle mike offers reasons offers couple pretty strong reasons focusing would describe extremes life extremes margins society care address orient politics argues first several places quite powerfully oriented basic democratic fact human fact men created equal american fact think thats good place start think leads much mike suggests jeffersons assertion equality challenging demanding implications edges life edges society regard youngest oldest neediest weakest thats mike wants orient us fundamentally says lacking jeffersons assertion equality think politically powerful transformative implications middle empowering great democratic core country elevating position power thats equality creates democracy think thats actually jefferson though probably lincoln mind saying men created equal important source americas unique strengths advantages one important reason politics grounded middle theyre going capable caring edges mike also argues orient challenging examples ideals principles clear stark times crisis times learn think thats right learn lot calamity crisis learn also actually harder everyday slow progress works almost works every challenge going analogous civil war think politics civil war analogies going incomplete also terribly exhausting actually important point lot political predicament moment ignore middle class society political rhetoric suggest high low every challenge historical calling options despair heroism risk losing trust middle class exhausting political essential real exertion think hard deny extent conservatives done administration done american public today exhausted tired cranky mood great exertions obviously lot terribly eventful past decade weve entirely fault politicians think hard deny basic failure speak concerns interests middle class rhetoric compassionate conservatism offered middle class aspiring upwardly mobile poor think little doesnt mean bush administration policies done lot middle class think rhetoric matters weve failed somewhat tend rhetorically needs middle class weve walked walk weve talked talk comes costs think conservatives seek build space american idealism mikes kind idealism exactly task building oriented whole means democracy oriented middle speak society equals strengthen keep spirits offer something middle class families upwardly mobile know theyre temporarily poor think finally also find ways interest social conservatives moral core america mundane tasks governing politics heroism healthcare entitlement reform well humanitarian ventures way hard moved work caring sick suffering lot harder moved need care boring everyday politics going strong enough carry heroic conservatism think firm prudent enough carry everyday conservatism limited government freedom even fiscal discipline absolutely crucial parts take great conservative wisdom use works build lack doesnt work begin strengths build idealism surely one americas great strengths great grounded middle though another mike calls upon former book think powerfully compelling call heroism doesnt call much latter think essential prerequisite americas greatness american idealism certainly dont think book wrong think incomplete | 919 |
<p>Investing.com – In the week ahead, market players will turn their attention to fresh comments from Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen as expectations start to grow for a December rate hike.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, investors will be focusing on a pair of speeches from European Central Bank President Mario Draghi for fresh clues on when the central bank will shift away from its ultra-easy policy.</p>
<p>Market participants will also focus on remarks from Bank of England Governor Mark Carney amid recent calls from policymakers for higher interest rates in the months ahead.</p>
<p>In addition, comments from Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz will be on the agenda after the central bank surprised many with a rate increase earlier in September.</p>
<p>Finally, remarks by Bank of Japan Governor Haruhiko Kuroda will be eyed amid growing expectations the Japanese central bank will lag its global peers in tightening monetary policy.</p>
<p>Ahead of the coming week, Investing.com has compiled a list of the five biggest events on the economic calendar that are most likely to affect the markets.</p>
<p>1. Fed Chair Yellen Speaks</p>
<p>After signaling that it still intends to raise rates in December last week, the Fed is keeping itself in the market’s sights, with Chair due to deliver a speech titled “Inflation, Uncertainty, and Monetary Policy” at the National Association for Business Economics’ Annual Meeting in Cleveland at 4:45PM ET (2045GMT) Tuesday.</p>
<p>Her comments will be monitored closely for any new insight on policy. Last week, the U.S. central bank kept interest rates unchanged but hinted that an increase could still come in December.</p>
<p>Staying on the central bank front, this week will also see comments from a handful of Fed speakers including influential New York Fed President , Vice Chair , Governor , Minneapolis Fed chief , Chicago Fed President and Philadelphia President .</p>
<p>On the data front, are due on Thursday, followed by reports on and on Friday, which includes the , the Fed’s preferred metric for inflation.</p>
<p>This week’s calendar also features data on , , and .</p>
<p>Investors are also likely to continue to monitor the latest headlines coming out of Washington in regard to tax reform. Ongoing tension between the U.S. and North Korea will also be in focus.</p>
<p>2. ECB President Draghi Delivers Comments</p>
<p>ECB President is due to testify about the economy and monetary developments before the European Parliament Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee in Brussels on Monday at 1300GMT (9:00AM ET).</p>
<p>On Friday, Draghi is scheduled to speak about central bank independence at a conference hosted by the Bank of England in London at around 1415GMT (10:15AM ET).</p>
<p>Draghi indicated last month that the ECB could start tapering its massive stimulus program as early as October.</p>
<p>Besides Draghi, the euro zone will publish for September on Friday. Germany, France, Italy and Spain will produce their own CPI reports throughout the week.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Germans are scheduled to vote in a that is likely to see Chancellor Angela Merkel win a historic fourth term and a far-right party enter parliament for the first time in more than half a century.</p>
<p>3. BoE Governor Carney in Focus</p>
<p>Governor is due to deliver opening remarks at the Bank of England’s conference celebrating 20 years of independence in London at 0815GMT (4:15AM ET) Thursday. He is then scheduled to make closing statements at around 1445GMT (10:45AM ET) Friday.</p>
<p>The BoE said earlier this month that it was likely to raise borrowing costs in the months ahead if the economy and price pressures kept growing, flagging Britain’s first rate hike in a decade.</p>
<p>Besides the BOE, traders will focus on a due on Friday for further indications on the continued effect that the Brexit decision is having on the economy.</p>
<p>4. BoC’s Poloz on the Agenda</p>
<p>BoC Governor is due to speak about recent development in the Canadian economy and implications for monetary policy at the St. John’s Board of Trade luncheon in Newfoundland at about 11:45AM ET (1545GMT) Wednesday.</p>
<p>The Canadian central bank surprised many with a rate increase earlier this month, its second this year, and left the door open to further hikes amid strong economic growth.</p>
<p>According to a recent poll of primary dealers, the BoC is likely done raising interest rates this year, though the central bank is seen charting a more aggressive tightening path for 2018 than had been anticipated.</p>
<p>5. BoJ Governor Kuroda Speaks</p>
<p>BoJ Governor is due to speak at a meeting with business leaders in Osaka at 0535GMT (1:35AM ET) Monday. Audience questions are expected.</p>
<p>Kuroda is scheduled to speak again at 0635GMT (2:35AM ET) Thursday, this time at the National Securities Industry Convention in Tokyo.</p>
<p>The Japanese central bank kept monetary policy steady last week, as a new board member dissented in favor of further monetary easing, saying current monetary policy was insufficient to push inflation up to the bank’s 2% target.</p>
<p>Stay up-to-date on all of this week’s economic events by visiting: <a href="http://www.investing.com/economic-calendar/" type="external">http://www.investing.com/economic-calendar/</a></p> | false | 1 | investingcom week ahead market players turn attention fresh comments federal reserve chair janet yellen expectations start grow december rate hike meanwhile investors focusing pair speeches european central bank president mario draghi fresh clues central bank shift away ultraeasy policy market participants also focus remarks bank england governor mark carney amid recent calls policymakers higher interest rates months ahead addition comments bank canada governor stephen poloz agenda central bank surprised many rate increase earlier september finally remarks bank japan governor haruhiko kuroda eyed amid growing expectations japanese central bank lag global peers tightening monetary policy ahead coming week investingcom compiled list five biggest events economic calendar likely affect markets 1 fed chair yellen speaks signaling still intends raise rates december last week fed keeping markets sights chair due deliver speech titled inflation uncertainty monetary policy national association business economics annual meeting cleveland 445pm et 2045gmt tuesday comments monitored closely new insight policy last week us central bank kept interest rates unchanged hinted increase could still come december staying central bank front week also see comments handful fed speakers including influential new york fed president vice chair governor minneapolis fed chief chicago fed president philadelphia president data front due thursday followed reports friday includes feds preferred metric inflation weeks calendar also features data investors also likely continue monitor latest headlines coming washington regard tax reform ongoing tension us north korea also focus 2 ecb president draghi delivers comments ecb president due testify economy monetary developments european parliament economic monetary affairs committee brussels monday 1300gmt 900am et friday draghi scheduled speak central bank independence conference hosted bank england london around 1415gmt 1015am et draghi indicated last month ecb could start tapering massive stimulus program early october besides draghi euro zone publish september friday germany france italy spain produce cpi reports throughout week meanwhile germans scheduled vote likely see chancellor angela merkel win historic fourth term farright party enter parliament first time half century 3 boe governor carney focus governor due deliver opening remarks bank englands conference celebrating 20 years independence london 0815gmt 415am et thursday scheduled make closing statements around 1445gmt 1045am et friday boe said earlier month likely raise borrowing costs months ahead economy price pressures kept growing flagging britains first rate hike decade besides boe traders focus due friday indications continued effect brexit decision economy 4 bocs poloz agenda boc governor due speak recent development canadian economy implications monetary policy st johns board trade luncheon newfoundland 1145am et 1545gmt wednesday canadian central bank surprised many rate increase earlier month second year left door open hikes amid strong economic growth according recent poll primary dealers boc likely done raising interest rates year though central bank seen charting aggressive tightening path 2018 anticipated 5 boj governor kuroda speaks boj governor due speak meeting business leaders osaka 0535gmt 135am et monday audience questions expected kuroda scheduled speak 0635gmt 235am et thursday time national securities industry convention tokyo japanese central bank kept monetary policy steady last week new board member dissented favor monetary easing saying current monetary policy insufficient push inflation banks 2 target stay uptodate weeks economic events visiting httpwwwinvestingcomeconomiccalendar | 516 |
<p>PHOENIX — In baseball’s season of abundance, one thing became abundantly clear.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cleveland-Indians/" type="external">Cleveland Indians</a> are the team to beat this postseason.</p>
<p>A year after coming up short in extra innings against the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago-Cubs/" type="external">Chicago Cubs</a> in Game 7 of the World Series, the Indians have the two-way strength to break their own less-celebrated title drought, which stands at 69 years since the 1948 team beat the Boston Braves in six games.</p>
<p>Cleveland’s rotation is strong and deep, led by top American League <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cy_Young/" type="external">Cy Young</a> Award candidate <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Corey-Kluber/" type="external">Corey Kluber</a>. Infielder <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jose-Ramirez/" type="external">Jose Ramirez</a> is having such a breakout year that second baseman <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jason-Kipnis/" type="external">Jason Kipnis</a> has been tried in center field. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Edwin_Encarnacion/" type="external">Edwin Encarnacion</a> hit his stride in the second half, as usual, and there is always <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Andrew_Miller/" type="external">Andrew Miller</a> and a deep bullpen.</p>
<p>The Indians may not have the best record coming in — the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Los-Angeles-Dodgers/" type="external">Los Angeles Dodgers</a> do — but that means little. Since 1990, only five teams with the best regular-season record have won the Series, although it has happened four times in the past 10 years — the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Boston-Red-Sox/" type="external">Boston Red Sox</a> (twice), the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-York-Yankees/" type="external">New York Yankees</a> and last year’s Cubs.</p>
<p>The playoffs will be something special if the games can build on a regular season of plenty.</p>
<p>Major league teams hit a season-record 6,105 homers — pitchers would like you to remember that the seams on the ball were lowered this year, leading to less wind resistance. Forty-one players hit 30 homers, and each playoff team save Boston has at least one. The <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Arizona-Diamondbacks/" type="external">Arizona Diamondbacks</a> and the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Colorado-Rockies/" type="external">Colorado Rockies</a> have three apiece.</p>
<p>Three teams won at least 100 games in the regular season, only the sixth time that has happened.</p>
<p>While Cleveland appears stacked, there are plenty of contenders. And do not discount wild-card entrants Arizona, Colorado, the Yankees and the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Minnesota-Twins/" type="external">Minnesota Twins</a>. The winner will have momentum moving forward.</p>
<p>Two wild-card teams, the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/San-Francisco-Giants/" type="external">San Francisco Giants</a> and the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kansas-City-Royals/" type="external">Kansas City Royals</a>, met in the 2014 World Series. The Cubs made the National League Championship Series after winning the wild-card game in 2015, and Toronto played in the AL Championship Series after winning the no- <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Zach_Britton/" type="external">Zach Britton</a> wild-card game against the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Baltimore-Orioles/" type="external">Baltimore Orioles</a> a year ago.</p>
<p>Here are the playoff teams ranked from No. 1 to No. 10 in terms of their chances of winning the World Series:</p>
<p>No. 1 Cleveland Indians (102-60)</p>
<p>No one is hotter than Cleveland, which won 33 of its last 37, a stretch that began with an AL-record 22-game winning streak. Kluber, last year’s postseason star, is likely to claim his second Cy Young Award. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carlos_Carrasco/" type="external">Carlos Carrasco</a> is a strong No. 2 starter after missing last year’s playoffs because of injury, and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Trevor-Bauer/" type="external">Trevor Bauer</a> is 9-1 with a 2.42 ERA in his past 13 appearances. The Indians got plenty of offensive production from Encarnacion (38 homers), <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Francisco-Lindor/" type="external">Francisco Lindor</a> (44 doubles, 33 homers) and Ramirez (56 doubles, 29 homers, 17 stolen bases).</p>
<p>No. 2 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Washington-Nationals/" type="external">Washington Nationals</a> (97-64)</p>
<p>The Nationals are stacked. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Daniel_Murphy/" type="external">Daniel Murphy</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Anthony-Rendon/" type="external">Anthony Rendon</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ryan_Zimmerman/" type="external">Ryan Zimmerman</a> rank in the NL’s top 15 in on-base-plus-slugging percentage, and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bryce-Harper/" type="external">Bryce Harper</a> would be second had he not missed six weeks with a knee injury. Leadoff man <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Trea-Turner/" type="external">Trea Turner</a> steals bases. Defending NL Cy Young Award winner <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Max_Scherzer/" type="external">Max Scherzer</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Stephen_Strasburg/" type="external">Stephen Strasburg</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Gio_Gonzalez/" type="external">Gio Gonzalez</a> ranked Nos. 2, 3 and 5 among the league’s ERA qualifiers, and general manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Rizzo/" type="external">Mike Rizzo</a>‘s retooled bullpen led by Sean Doolittle seems just fine. Scherzer was pulled from his Saturday start because of a hamstring cramp, a concern. Harper has not played a full game since his Aug. 12 injury.</p>
<p>No. 3 Los Angeles Dodgers (104-58)</p>
<p>The Dodgers were on pace to win 116 games during mid-August before careening into a course correction in which they lost 16 of 17. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Clayton_Kershaw/" type="external">Clayton Kershaw</a> tops a staff that led the NL in ERA, and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cody-Bellinger/" type="external">Cody Bellinger</a> will be NL Rookie of the Year despite spending the first three weeks in the minors. Yu Darvish, Alex Wood and Rich Hill, when right, make for a rotation that is capable of winning any game, and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kenley-Jansen/" type="external">Kenley Jansen</a> (41 saves) has been the most reliable closer in baseball.</p>
<p>No. 4 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Houston-Astros/" type="external">Houston Astros</a> (101-61)</p>
<p>The Astros had a torrid start, winning 67 of their first 100 games, and they can hit. Houston led the majors in runs, and it comes at opponents fast with George Springer, Alex Bregman, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jose-Altuve/" type="external">Jose Altuve</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carlos-Correa/" type="external">Carlos Correa</a> in the first four spots in the lineup. Top MVP candidate Altuve had his fourth consecutive 200-hit season, and Springer belted 34 homers. Houston’s key is getting enough starting pitching, and newcomer <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin_Verlander/" type="external">Justin Verlander</a> has been a big help in that regard. He won all five of his starts since being acquired from the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Detroit-Tigers/" type="external">Detroit Tigers</a> on Aug. 31, giving up four earned runs in 34 innings (1.06 ERA).</p>
<p>No. 5 Arizona Diamondbacks (93-69)</p>
<p>No one made a better trade-deadline acquisition than D-backs general manager Mike Hazen, who acquired J.D. Martinez from Detroit in mid-July. Martinez produced 29 homers and 65 RBIs in 62 games with Arizona, another big bat to complement 30-homer guys <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Paul-Goldschmidt/" type="external">Paul Goldschmidt</a> and Jake Lamb. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Zack_Greinke/" type="external">Zack Greinke</a> and Robbie Ray pitched well all season, and Patrick Corbin showed flashes of the form that made him a 2013 All-Star. Bullpen pieces Archie Bradley and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Fernando_Rodney/" type="external">Fernando Rodney</a> helped rookie manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Torey-Lovullo/" type="external">Torey Lovullo</a> shorten games to seven innings.</p>
<p>No. 6 Chicago Cubs (92-70)</p>
<p>The Cubs are peaking. They won 15 of their last 19 and went 24 games over .500 since the All-Star break. Only Cleveland has been hotter. Defending NL MVP <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kris-Bryant/" type="external">Kris Bryant</a> had 14 RBIs in his last 16 games, and after a slow start, Kyle Schwarber hit 13 homers since Aug. 6 in a lineup that includes six 20-homer guys. The starting pitchers have a 3.36 ERA since the All-Star break, also second only to Cleveland in the majors, but rotation questions remain.</p>
<p>No. 7 Boston Red Sox (93-69)</p>
<p>The Red Sox do not have a cavalcade of great individual numbers — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mookie-Betts/" type="external">Mookie Betts</a> leads the team with 24 homers, 102 RBIs and 26 stolen bases, and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chris-Sale/" type="external">Chris Sale</a> is the only starter with an ERA under 3.30 — but consider this: Boston has won 20 games in which it trailed after five innings, and it has a major-league-high 17 victories when tied or trailing after eight innings. That sort of resolve, along with a bullpen now featuring erstwhile starter <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/David_Price/" type="external">David Price</a> as well as closer <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Craig_Kimbrel/" type="external">Craig Kimbrel</a>, can go a long way in a postseason setting.</p>
<p>No. 8 New York Yankees (91-71)</p>
<p>Behind rookie masher <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Aaron-Judge/" type="external">Aaron Judge</a> and a stacked bullpen, the Yankees won 20 of their last 28. Judge, the certain AL Rookie of the Year, set a rookie record with 52 homers. He leads an offense that also features <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Gary-Sanchez/" type="external">Gary Sanchez</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Didi-Gregorius/" type="external">Didi Gregorius</a>. After trading away closers <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Aroldis-Chapman/" type="external">Aroldis Chapman</a> and Andrew Miller and watching them thrive in the World Series a year ago, general manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brian_Cashman/" type="external">Brian Cashman</a> restocked his ‘pen — Chapman, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/David_Robertson/" type="external">David Robertson</a>, Dellin Betances, Chad Green and Tommy Kahnle — and manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Girardi/" type="external">Joe Girardi</a> is not afraid to use it.</p>
<p>No. 9 Colorado Rockies (87-75)</p>
<p>Nolan Arenado, Charlie Blackmon and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mark_Reynolds/" type="external">Mark Reynolds</a> put the bombs back on Blake Street this season, combining for 104 homers and 331 RBIs. Each had at least 30 homers, and Arenado recorded his third straight 130-RBI season while flashing Gold Glove hand/eye skills. First-year manager Bud Black worked wonders with his young rotation — four rookies made at least 16 starts, and youngsters Jon Gray and Tyler Anderson combined for 35 more. Closer Greg Holland had a monster first half before scuffling in August. He was better lately.</p>
<p>No. 10 Minnesota Twins (85-77)</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Paul-Molitor/" type="external">Paul Molitor</a> will win the AL Manager of the Year award by acclamation as the Twins became first team since Tampa Bay in 2008 to reach the playoffs after having the worst record in baseball the previous year. The Rays made the World Series that year. It is a good thing the Twins hung onto Brian Dozier (34 homers) last winter. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Miguel-Sano/" type="external">Miguel Sano</a> (28 homers) returned Friday after missing six weeks due to a left shin stress reaction, and rising star <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Byron-Buxton/" type="external">Byron Buxton</a> came into his own the last two months. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ervin_Santana/" type="external">Ervin Santana</a> won 16 games and tied Kluber for the major league lead with five complete games and three shutouts.</p> | false | 1 | phoenix baseballs season abundance one thing became abundantly clear cleveland indians team beat postseason year coming short extra innings chicago cubs game 7 world series indians twoway strength break lesscelebrated title drought stands 69 years since 1948 team beat boston braves six games clevelands rotation strong deep led top american league cy young award candidate corey kluber infielder jose ramirez breakout year second baseman jason kipnis tried center field edwin encarnacion hit stride second half usual always andrew miller deep bullpen indians may best record coming los angeles dodgers means little since 1990 five teams best regularseason record series although happened four times past 10 years boston red sox twice new york yankees last years cubs playoffs something special games build regular season plenty major league teams hit seasonrecord 6105 homers pitchers would like remember seams ball lowered year leading less wind resistance fortyone players hit 30 homers playoff team save boston least one arizona diamondbacks colorado rockies three apiece three teams least 100 games regular season sixth time happened cleveland appears stacked plenty contenders discount wildcard entrants arizona colorado yankees minnesota twins winner momentum moving forward two wildcard teams san francisco giants kansas city royals met 2014 world series cubs made national league championship series winning wildcard game 2015 toronto played al championship series winning zach britton wildcard game baltimore orioles year ago playoff teams ranked 1 10 terms chances winning world series 1 cleveland indians 10260 one hotter cleveland 33 last 37 stretch began alrecord 22game winning streak kluber last years postseason star likely claim second cy young award carlos carrasco strong 2 starter missing last years playoffs injury trevor bauer 91 242 era past 13 appearances indians got plenty offensive production encarnacion 38 homers francisco lindor 44 doubles 33 homers ramirez 56 doubles 29 homers 17 stolen bases 2 washington nationals 9764 nationals stacked daniel murphy anthony rendon ryan zimmerman rank nls top 15 onbaseplusslugging percentage bryce harper would second missed six weeks knee injury leadoff man trea turner steals bases defending nl cy young award winner max scherzer stephen strasburg gio gonzalez ranked nos 2 3 5 among leagues era qualifiers general manager mike rizzos retooled bullpen led sean doolittle seems fine scherzer pulled saturday start hamstring cramp concern harper played full game since aug 12 injury 3 los angeles dodgers 10458 dodgers pace win 116 games midaugust careening course correction lost 16 17 clayton kershaw tops staff led nl era cody bellinger nl rookie year despite spending first three weeks minors yu darvish alex wood rich hill right make rotation capable winning game kenley jansen 41 saves reliable closer baseball 4 houston astros 10161 astros torrid start winning 67 first 100 games hit houston led majors runs comes opponents fast george springer alex bregman jose altuve carlos correa first four spots lineup top mvp candidate altuve fourth consecutive 200hit season springer belted 34 homers houstons key getting enough starting pitching newcomer justin verlander big help regard five starts since acquired detroit tigers aug 31 giving four earned runs 34 innings 106 era 5 arizona diamondbacks 9369 one made better tradedeadline acquisition dbacks general manager mike hazen acquired jd martinez detroit midjuly martinez produced 29 homers 65 rbis 62 games arizona another big bat complement 30homer guys paul goldschmidt jake lamb zack greinke robbie ray pitched well season patrick corbin showed flashes form made 2013 allstar bullpen pieces archie bradley fernando rodney helped rookie manager torey lovullo shorten games seven innings 6 chicago cubs 9270 cubs peaking 15 last 19 went 24 games 500 since allstar break cleveland hotter defending nl mvp kris bryant 14 rbis last 16 games slow start kyle schwarber hit 13 homers since aug 6 lineup includes six 20homer guys starting pitchers 336 era since allstar break also second cleveland majors rotation questions remain 7 boston red sox 9369 red sox cavalcade great individual numbers mookie betts leads team 24 homers 102 rbis 26 stolen bases chris sale starter era 330 consider boston 20 games trailed five innings majorleaguehigh 17 victories tied trailing eight innings sort resolve along bullpen featuring erstwhile starter david price well closer craig kimbrel go long way postseason setting 8 new york yankees 9171 behind rookie masher aaron judge stacked bullpen yankees 20 last 28 judge certain al rookie year set rookie record 52 homers leads offense also features gary sanchez didi gregorius trading away closers aroldis chapman andrew miller watching thrive world series year ago general manager brian cashman restocked pen chapman david robertson dellin betances chad green tommy kahnle manager joe girardi afraid use 9 colorado rockies 8775 nolan arenado charlie blackmon mark reynolds put bombs back blake street season combining 104 homers 331 rbis least 30 homers arenado recorded third straight 130rbi season flashing gold glove handeye skills firstyear manager bud black worked wonders young rotation four rookies made least 16 starts youngsters jon gray tyler anderson combined 35 closer greg holland monster first half scuffling august better lately 10 minnesota twins 8577 paul molitor win al manager year award acclamation twins became first team since tampa bay 2008 reach playoffs worst record baseball previous year rays made world series year good thing twins hung onto brian dozier 34 homers last winter miguel sano 28 homers returned friday missing six weeks due left shin stress reaction rising star byron buxton came last two months ervin santana 16 games tied kluber major league lead five complete games three shutouts | 903 |
<p>A dangerous new trend is the successful manipulation of the financial markets by the Federal Reserve, other central banks, private banks, and the US Treasury.</p>
<p>A dangerous new trend is the successful manipulation of the financial markets by the Federal Reserve, other central banks, private banks, and the US Treasury. The Federal Reserve reduced real interest rates on US government debt obligations first to zero and then pushed real interest rates into negative territory. Today, the government charges you for the privilege of purchasing its bonds.</p>
<p>People pay to park their money in Treasury debt obligations, because they do not trust the banks and they know that the government can print the money to pay off the bonds. Today Treasury bond investors pay a fee in order to guarantee that they will receive the nominal face value (minus the fee) of their investment in government debt instruments.</p>
<p>The fee is paid in a premium, which raises the cost of the debt instrument above its face value and is paid again in accepting a negative rate of return, as the interest rate is less than the inflation rate.</p>
<p>Think about this for a minute. Allegedly, the US is experiencing economic recovery. Normally, with rising economic activity, interest rates rise as consumers and investors bid for credit. But not in this "recovery."</p>
<p>Normally, an economic recovery produces rising consumer spending, rising profits, and more investment. But what we experience is flat and declining consumer spending as jobs are offshored and retail stores close. Profits result from labor cost savings from employee layoffs.</p>
<p>The stock market is high because corporations are the biggest purchases of stock. Buying back their own stock supports or raises the share price, enabling executives and boards to sell their shares or cash in their options at a profitable price. The cash that Quantitative Easing has given to the mega-banks leaves ample room for speculating in stocks, thus pushing up the price despite the absence of fundamentals that would support a rising stock market.</p>
<p>In other words, in America today, there are no free financial markets. The markets are rigged by the Federal Reserve's Quantitative Easing, by gold price manipulation, by the Treasury's Plunge Protection Team and Exchange Stabilization Fund, and by the big private banks.</p>
<p>Allegedly, QE is over, but it is not. The Fed intends to roll over the interest and principle from its bloated $4.5 trillion bond portfolio into purchases of more bonds, and the banks intend to fill in the gaps by using the $2.6 trillion in their cash on deposit with the Fed to purchase bonds. QE has morphed, not ended. The money the Fed paid the banks for bonds will now be used by the banks to support the bond price by purchasing bonds.</p>
<p>Normally when massive amounts of debt and money are created the currency collapses, but the dollar has been strengthening. The dollar gains strength from the rigging of the gold price in the futures market. The Federal Reserve's agents, the bullion banks, print paper futures contracts representing many tonnes of gold and dump them them into the market during periods of light or nonexistent trading. This drives down the gold price despite rising demand for the physical metal. This manipulation is done in order to counteract the effect of the expansion of money and debt on the dollar's exchange value. A declining dollar price of gold makes the dollar look strong.</p>
<p>The dollar also gains the appearance of strength from debt monetization by the Bank of Japan and the European Central Bank. The Bank of Japan's Quantitative Easing program is even larger than the Fed's. Even Switzerland is rigging the price of the Swiss franc. Since all currencies are inflating, the dollar does not decline in exchange value.</p>
<p>As Japan is Washington's vassal, it is conceivable that some of the money being printed by the Bank of Japan will be used to purchase US Treasuries, thus taking the place along with purchases by the large US banks of the Fed's QE.</p>
<p>The large private US and UK banks are also manipulating markets hand over fist. Remember the scandal over the banks fixing the LIBOR rate (the London Interbank Borrowing Rate) and the opening gold price on the London exchange. Now the banks have been caught rigging currency markets with algorithms developed to manipulate foreign exchange markets.</p>
<p>When the banks get caught in felonies, they avoid prosecution by paying a fine. You try doing that.</p>
<p>The government even manipulates economic statistics in order to paint a rosy economic picture that sustains economic confidence. GDP growth is exaggerated by understating inflation. High unemployment is swept under the table by not counting discouraged workers as unemployed. We are told we are enjoying economic recovery and have an improving housing market. Yet the facts are that almost half of 25 year old Americans have been forced to return to live with their parents, and 30% of 30 year olds are back with their parents. Since 2006 the home ownership rate of 30 year old Americans has collapsed.</p>
<p>The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act during the Clinton regime allowed the big banks to gamble with their depositors' money. The Dodd-Frank Act tried to stop some of this by requiring the banks-turned-gambling-casinos to carry on their gambling in subsidiaries with no access to deposits in the depository institution. If the banks gamble with depositors money, the banks' losses are covered by FDIC, and in the case of bank failure, bail-in provisions could give the banks access to depositors' funds. With the banks still protected by being "too big to fail," whether Dodd-Frank would succeed in protecting depositors when a subsidiary's failure pulls down the entire bank is unclear.</p>
<p>The sharp practices in which banks engage today are risky. Why gamble with their own money if they can gamble with depositors' money. The banks led by Citigroup have lobbied hard to overturn the provision in Dodd-Frank that puts depositors' money out of their reach as backup for certain types of troubled financial instruments, with apparently only Senator Elizabeth Warren and a few others opposing them. Senator Warren is outgunned as Citigroup controls the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve.</p>
<p>The falling oil price has brought concern that oil derivatives are in jeopardy. Citigroup has a provision in the omnibus appropriations bill that shifts the liability for Citigroup's credit default swaps to depositors and taxpayers. It was only six years ago that Citigroup was bailed out to the tune of a half trillion dollars. Already Citigroup is back for more while nothing whatsoever is done to bail the American people out of their hardships caused by Citigroup and the other financial gangsters.</p>
<p>What we are experiencing is not a repeat of the past. The ability or, rather, the audacity of the US government itself to manipulate the major financial markets is new. Can this new trend continue? The government is supposed to be the enforcer of laws against market manipulation but is itself manipulating the markets.</p>
<p>Governments and economists take their hats off to free markets. Yet, the markets are rigged, not free. How long can stocks stay up in a lackluster or declining economy? How long can bonds pay negative real interest rates when debt and money are rising. How long can bullion prices be manipulated down when the world's demand for gold exceeds the annual production?</p>
<p>For as long as governments and banks can rig the markets.</p>
<p>The manipulations are dangerous. Manipulations blow a bigger bubble economy, and manipulations are now being used by Washington as an act of war by driving down the exchange value of the Russian ruble.</p>
<p>If every time the stock market tries to correct and adjust to the real economic situation, the plunge protection team or some government "stabilization" entity stops the correction by purchasing S&amp;P futures, unrealistic values are perpetuated.</p>
<p>The price of gold is not determined in the physical market but in the futures market where contracts are settled in cash. If every time the demand for gold pushes up the price, the Federal Reserve or its bullion bank agents dump massive amounts of uncovered futures contracts in the futures market and drive down the price of gold, the result is to subsidize the gold purchases of Russia, China, and India. The artificially low gold price also artificially inflates the value of the US dollar.</p>
<p>The Federal Reserve's manipulation of the bond market has driven bond prices so high that purchasers receive a zero or negative return on their investment. At the present time, fear of the safety of bank deposits makes people willing to pay a fee in order to have the protection of the government's ability to print money in order to redeem its bonds. A number of events could end the tolerance of zero or negative real interest rates. The Federal Reserve's policy has the bond market positioned for collapse.</p>
<p>The US government, perhaps surprised at the ease at which all financial markets can be rigged, is now rigging, or permitting large hedge funds and perhaps George Soros, to drive down the exchange value of the Russian ruble by massive short-selling in the currency market. On December 15 the ruble was driven down 19%.</p>
<p>Just as there is no economic reason for the price of gold to decline in the futures market when the demand for physical gold is rising, there is no economic reason for the ruble to suddenly loose much of its exchange value. Unlike the US, which has a massive trade deficit, Russia has a trade surplus. Unlike the US economy, the Russian economy has not been offshored. Russia has just completed large energy and trade deals with China, Turkey, and India.</p>
<p>If economic forces were determining outcomes, it would be the dollar that is losing exchange value, not the ruble.</p>
<p>The illegal economic sanctions that Washington has decreed on Russia appear to be doing more harm to Europe and US energy companies than to Russia. The impact on&#160;Russia of the American attack on the ruble is unclear, as the suppression of the ruble's value is artificial.</p>
<p>There is a difference between economic factors causing foreign investors to withdraw their capital from a country, thereby causing the currency to lose value, and manipulation of a currency's value by heavy short-selling in the currency market. The latter can cause the former also to occur. But the outcome for Russia can be positive.</p>
<p>No country dependent on foreign capital is sovereign. A country dependent on foreign capital, especially from enemies seeking to subvert the economy, is subject to destabilizing currency and economic swings. Russia should self-finance. If Russia needs foreign capital, Russia should turn to its ally China. China has a stake in Russia's strength as part of China's protection from US aggression, whether economic or military.</p>
<p>The American attack on the ruble is also teaching sovereign governments that are not US vassals the extreme cost of allowing their currencies to trade in currency markets dominated by the US. China should think twice before it allows full convertibility of its currency. Of course, the Chinese have a lot of dollar assets with which to defend their currency from attack, and the sale of the assets and use of the dollar proceeds to support the yuan could knock down the dollar's exchange value and US bond prices and cause US interest rates and inflation to rise. Still, considering the gangster nature of financial markets in which the US is the heavy player, a country that permits free trading of its currency sets itself up for trouble.</p>
<p>The greatest harm that is being done to the Russian economy is not due to sanctions and the US attack on the ruble. The greatest harm is being done by Russia's neoliberal economists.</p>
<p>Neoliberal economics is not merely incorrect. It is an ideology that fosters US economic imperialism. By following neoliberal prescriptions, Russian economists are helping Washington's attack on the Russian economy.</p>
<p>Apparently, Putin has been sold, along with his internal enemies, the Atlanticist integrationists, on "free trade globalism." Globalism destroys the sovereignty of every country except the world reserve currency country that controls the system.</p>
<p>As Michael Hudson has shown, neoliberal economics is "junk economics." But it is also a tool of American financial imperialism, and this makes neoliberal Russian economists tools of American imperialism.</p>
<p>The remaining sovereign countries, which excludes all of Europe, are slowly learning that Western economic institutions are deceptive and that placing trust in them is a threat to national sovereignty.</p>
<p>Washington intends to subvert Russia and to turn Russia into a vassal state like Germany, France, Japan, Canada, Australia, the UK and Ukraine. If Russia is to survive, Putin must protect Russia from Western economic institutions and Western trained economists.</p>
<p>It is too risky for the US to take on Russia militarily. Instead, Washington is using its unique symbiotic relationship with Western financial institutions to attack an incautious Russia that foolishly opened herself to Western financial predation.</p>
<p>Note: The winter issue of Gerald Celente's Trends Journal identifies financial market manipulation as a Top Trend for 2015.</p> | false | 1 | dangerous new trend successful manipulation financial markets federal reserve central banks private banks us treasury dangerous new trend successful manipulation financial markets federal reserve central banks private banks us treasury federal reserve reduced real interest rates us government debt obligations first zero pushed real interest rates negative territory today government charges privilege purchasing bonds people pay park money treasury debt obligations trust banks know government print money pay bonds today treasury bond investors pay fee order guarantee receive nominal face value minus fee investment government debt instruments fee paid premium raises cost debt instrument face value paid accepting negative rate return interest rate less inflation rate think minute allegedly us experiencing economic recovery normally rising economic activity interest rates rise consumers investors bid credit recovery normally economic recovery produces rising consumer spending rising profits investment experience flat declining consumer spending jobs offshored retail stores close profits result labor cost savings employee layoffs stock market high corporations biggest purchases stock buying back stock supports raises share price enabling executives boards sell shares cash options profitable price cash quantitative easing given megabanks leaves ample room speculating stocks thus pushing price despite absence fundamentals would support rising stock market words america today free financial markets markets rigged federal reserves quantitative easing gold price manipulation treasurys plunge protection team exchange stabilization fund big private banks allegedly qe fed intends roll interest principle bloated 45 trillion bond portfolio purchases bonds banks intend fill gaps using 26 trillion cash deposit fed purchase bonds qe morphed ended money fed paid banks bonds used banks support bond price purchasing bonds normally massive amounts debt money created currency collapses dollar strengthening dollar gains strength rigging gold price futures market federal reserves agents bullion banks print paper futures contracts representing many tonnes gold dump market periods light nonexistent trading drives gold price despite rising demand physical metal manipulation done order counteract effect expansion money debt dollars exchange value declining dollar price gold makes dollar look strong dollar also gains appearance strength debt monetization bank japan european central bank bank japans quantitative easing program even larger feds even switzerland rigging price swiss franc since currencies inflating dollar decline exchange value japan washingtons vassal conceivable money printed bank japan used purchase us treasuries thus taking place along purchases large us banks feds qe large private us uk banks also manipulating markets hand fist remember scandal banks fixing libor rate london interbank borrowing rate opening gold price london exchange banks caught rigging currency markets algorithms developed manipulate foreign exchange markets banks get caught felonies avoid prosecution paying fine try government even manipulates economic statistics order paint rosy economic picture sustains economic confidence gdp growth exaggerated understating inflation high unemployment swept table counting discouraged workers unemployed told enjoying economic recovery improving housing market yet facts almost half 25 year old americans forced return live parents 30 30 year olds back parents since 2006 home ownership rate 30 year old americans collapsed repeal glasssteagall act clinton regime allowed big banks gamble depositors money doddfrank act tried stop requiring banksturnedgamblingcasinos carry gambling subsidiaries access deposits depository institution banks gamble depositors money banks losses covered fdic case bank failure bailin provisions could give banks access depositors funds banks still protected big fail whether doddfrank would succeed protecting depositors subsidiarys failure pulls entire bank unclear sharp practices banks engage today risky gamble money gamble depositors money banks led citigroup lobbied hard overturn provision doddfrank puts depositors money reach backup certain types troubled financial instruments apparently senator elizabeth warren others opposing senator warren outgunned citigroup controls us treasury federal reserve falling oil price brought concern oil derivatives jeopardy citigroup provision omnibus appropriations bill shifts liability citigroups credit default swaps depositors taxpayers six years ago citigroup bailed tune half trillion dollars already citigroup back nothing whatsoever done bail american people hardships caused citigroup financial gangsters experiencing repeat past ability rather audacity us government manipulate major financial markets new new trend continue government supposed enforcer laws market manipulation manipulating markets governments economists take hats free markets yet markets rigged free long stocks stay lackluster declining economy long bonds pay negative real interest rates debt money rising long bullion prices manipulated worlds demand gold exceeds annual production long governments banks rig markets manipulations dangerous manipulations blow bigger bubble economy manipulations used washington act war driving exchange value russian ruble every time stock market tries correct adjust real economic situation plunge protection team government stabilization entity stops correction purchasing sampp futures unrealistic values perpetuated price gold determined physical market futures market contracts settled cash every time demand gold pushes price federal reserve bullion bank agents dump massive amounts uncovered futures contracts futures market drive price gold result subsidize gold purchases russia china india artificially low gold price also artificially inflates value us dollar federal reserves manipulation bond market driven bond prices high purchasers receive zero negative return investment present time fear safety bank deposits makes people willing pay fee order protection governments ability print money order redeem bonds number events could end tolerance zero negative real interest rates federal reserves policy bond market positioned collapse us government perhaps surprised ease financial markets rigged rigging permitting large hedge funds perhaps george soros drive exchange value russian ruble massive shortselling currency market december 15 ruble driven 19 economic reason price gold decline futures market demand physical gold rising economic reason ruble suddenly loose much exchange value unlike us massive trade deficit russia trade surplus unlike us economy russian economy offshored russia completed large energy trade deals china turkey india economic forces determining outcomes would dollar losing exchange value ruble illegal economic sanctions washington decreed russia appear harm europe us energy companies russia impact on160russia american attack ruble unclear suppression rubles value artificial difference economic factors causing foreign investors withdraw capital country thereby causing currency lose value manipulation currencys value heavy shortselling currency market latter cause former also occur outcome russia positive country dependent foreign capital sovereign country dependent foreign capital especially enemies seeking subvert economy subject destabilizing currency economic swings russia selffinance russia needs foreign capital russia turn ally china china stake russias strength part chinas protection us aggression whether economic military american attack ruble also teaching sovereign governments us vassals extreme cost allowing currencies trade currency markets dominated us china think twice allows full convertibility currency course chinese lot dollar assets defend currency attack sale assets use dollar proceeds support yuan could knock dollars exchange value us bond prices cause us interest rates inflation rise still considering gangster nature financial markets us heavy player country permits free trading currency sets trouble greatest harm done russian economy due sanctions us attack ruble greatest harm done russias neoliberal economists neoliberal economics merely incorrect ideology fosters us economic imperialism following neoliberal prescriptions russian economists helping washingtons attack russian economy apparently putin sold along internal enemies atlanticist integrationists free trade globalism globalism destroys sovereignty every country except world reserve currency country controls system michael hudson shown neoliberal economics junk economics also tool american financial imperialism makes neoliberal russian economists tools american imperialism remaining sovereign countries excludes europe slowly learning western economic institutions deceptive placing trust threat national sovereignty washington intends subvert russia turn russia vassal state like germany france japan canada australia uk ukraine russia survive putin must protect russia western economic institutions western trained economists risky us take russia militarily instead washington using unique symbiotic relationship western financial institutions attack incautious russia foolishly opened western financial predation note winter issue gerald celentes trends journal identifies financial market manipulation top trend 2015 | 1,244 |
<p>NEW YORK — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chase_Headley/" type="external">Chase Headley</a> is a relative novice at first base, and as the non-waiver trade deadline approached, it seemed possible the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-York-Yankees/" type="external">New York Yankees</a> might acquire someone else to play the position.</p>
<p>The Yankees made two trades for starting pitching after Headley moved from third base to first, and the veteran’s bat seems to justify their decision not to add someone for first base.</p>
<p>Headley continued to be productive Monday night with a three-hit game, including a two-run double in a four-run fourth inning, and the Yankees beat the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Detroit-Tigers/" type="external">Detroit Tigers</a> 7-3.</p>
<p>“It’s been different,” Headley said of playing his new position. “I try not to overthink things for the most part. Just catch the ball like I’ve always done, but I think it’s gone pretty well so far. I’m sure there are some things that are going to come up that I’m going to have to adjust to.”</p>
<p>Headley made his ninth start at first base since the Yankees obtained <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Todd-Frazier/" type="external">Todd Frazier</a> from the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago-White-Sox/" type="external">Chicago White Sox</a> on July 19. Since the trade, Headley is batting .416 (15-for-36), and in 26 games during July batted .333 (30-for-90), his highest batting average in a month since he hit .390 in July 2015.</p>
<p>Headley also improved to 4-for-8 with 12 RBIs with the bases loaded when he ripped a double to right-center field off Michael Fulmer (10-9).</p>
<p>“Bases loaded, nobody out, you got to come through,” Headley said. “He threw me a pitch in the middle of the plate, and I hit it.”</p>
<p>Headley’s sixth three hit game occurred two days after he had a pinch-hit, two-run homer off <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tampa_Bay_Rays/" type="external">Tampa Bay Rays</a> reliever <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sergio_Romo/" type="external">Sergio Romo</a>.</p>
<p>“I think he’s having a lot of fun,” Yankees manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Girardi/" type="external">Joe Girardi</a> said. “It’s what every player wants to feel that they’re making contributions on both sides of the ball, and I think he’s doing it.”</p>
<p>Headley’s latest productive showing helped the Yankees win for the 12th time in 18 games since the All-Star break and the seventh time in eight games. It also occurred after New York acquired starting pitcher Sonny Gray from the Oakland A’s for three prospects.</p>
<p>“We’re very appreciative,” Headley said. “Guys were fired up when they heard the news.”</p>
<p>Besides Headley’s double, Todd Frazier delivered a two-run single and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Aaron-Judge/" type="external">Aaron Judge</a> hit his major-league-leading 34th home run in the fifth.</p>
<p>Clint Frazier added an RBI triple after Fulmer hit <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jacoby_Ellsbury/" type="external">Jacoby Ellsbury</a> with his first pitch of the seventh. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Gary-Sanchez/" type="external">Gary Sanchez</a>‘s sacrifice fly produced New York’s final run for a 7-2 lead in the seventh.</p>
<p>James McCann hit an RBI double, Jim Adduci had an RBI single and Mikie Mahtook had a run-scoring groundout for Detroit. The Tigers stranded 14 runners and lost for the eighth time in 12 games.</p>
<p>New York’s Luis Severino (8-4) won his third consecutive start, allowing one run and four hits in five innings. Severino threw a career-high 116 pitches and matched his second-shortest start of the season. He struck out eight and walked three.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Aroldis-Chapman/" type="external">Aroldis Chapman</a> got the final two outs of the game and collected his 13th save after entering with the bases loaded.</p>
<p>Fulmer, who allowed two hits in six scoreless innings during his Yankee Stadium debut on June 11, 2016, gave up seven runs (six earned) and seven hits in six-plus innings for his third straight defeat.</p>
<p>“Felt great,” Fulmer said. “I thought my stuff was there. First three innings I could throw the ball wherever I wanted to and then just kind of lost command, and obviously that’s what happens when you lose command, you give up runs.”</p>
<p>Detroit took a 1-0 lead with two outs in the fourth when Mahtook singled and took second on Clint Frazier’s error in left. McCann followed with an RBI double that eluded a dive by Judge in right field.</p>
<p>In the bottom of the fourth, the Yankees loaded the bases on two walks and an error by second baseman <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ian_Kinsler/" type="external">Ian Kinsler</a> on Sanchez’s grounder. Headley hit a two-run double to the warning track in center field.</p>
<p>Three pitches after Headley doubled, the Yankees took a 4-1 lead on a two-run bloop single by Todd Frazier.</p>
<p>Judge made it 5-1 by sending a 2-0 changeup well over the left field wall, ending an 0-for-10 skid.</p>
<p>“That’s where the game changed,” Detroit manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brad_Ausmus/" type="external">Brad Ausmus</a> said. “We had a 1-0 lead, top of the fourth, and then they scored four in the bottom, and really we never, we gave a little chase, but we never really got close again.”</p>
<p>NOTES: Detroit GM Al Avila said he was in contact with the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago-Cubs/" type="external">Chicago Cubs</a> for about six to eight weeks before trading LHP <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin_Wilson/" type="external">Justin Wilson</a> and C <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Alex_Avila/" type="external">Alex Avila</a> to Chicago. … The Yankees said RHP Sonny Gray and LHP <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jaime_Garcia/" type="external">Jaime Garcia</a> are expected to arrive in New York on Tuesday after being acquired in separate trades. Yankees GM <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brian_Cashman/" type="external">Brian Cashman</a> said he tried to get Garcia from the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Atlanta-Braves/" type="external">Atlanta Braves</a> before the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Minnesota-Twins/" type="external">Minnesota Twins</a> acquired him earlier this month. … Avila said despite speculation about trades of RHP <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin_Verlander/" type="external">Justin Verlander</a> and 2B Ian Kinsler, ownership did not give him a mandate to cut payroll. … The Tigers recalled C John Hicks and RHP Joe Jimenez from Triple-A Toledo. The Yankees recalled RHP Jonathan Holder from Triple-A Scranton/Wilkes-Barre after optioning RHP Luis Cessa there. Following the game, Holder and 1B Garrett Cooper were sent down to Scranton/Wilkes-Barre.</p> | false | 1 | new york chase headley relative novice first base nonwaiver trade deadline approached seemed possible new york yankees might acquire someone else play position yankees made two trades starting pitching headley moved third base first veterans bat seems justify decision add someone first base headley continued productive monday night threehit game including tworun double fourrun fourth inning yankees beat detroit tigers 73 different headley said playing new position try overthink things part catch ball like ive always done think gone pretty well far im sure things going come im going adjust headley made ninth start first base since yankees obtained todd frazier chicago white sox july 19 since trade headley batting 416 15for36 26 games july batted 333 30for90 highest batting average month since hit 390 july 2015 headley also improved 4for8 12 rbis bases loaded ripped double rightcenter field michael fulmer 109 bases loaded nobody got come headley said threw pitch middle plate hit headleys sixth three hit game occurred two days pinchhit tworun homer tampa bay rays reliever sergio romo think hes lot fun yankees manager joe girardi said every player wants feel theyre making contributions sides ball think hes headleys latest productive showing helped yankees win 12th time 18 games since allstar break seventh time eight games also occurred new york acquired starting pitcher sonny gray oakland three prospects appreciative headley said guys fired heard news besides headleys double todd frazier delivered tworun single aaron judge hit majorleagueleading 34th home run fifth clint frazier added rbi triple fulmer hit jacoby ellsbury first pitch seventh gary sanchezs sacrifice fly produced new yorks final run 72 lead seventh james mccann hit rbi double jim adduci rbi single mikie mahtook runscoring groundout detroit tigers stranded 14 runners lost eighth time 12 games new yorks luis severino 84 third consecutive start allowing one run four hits five innings severino threw careerhigh 116 pitches matched secondshortest start season struck eight walked three aroldis chapman got final two outs game collected 13th save entering bases loaded fulmer allowed two hits six scoreless innings yankee stadium debut june 11 2016 gave seven runs six earned seven hits sixplus innings third straight defeat felt great fulmer said thought stuff first three innings could throw ball wherever wanted kind lost command obviously thats happens lose command give runs detroit took 10 lead two outs fourth mahtook singled took second clint fraziers error left mccann followed rbi double eluded dive judge right field bottom fourth yankees loaded bases two walks error second baseman ian kinsler sanchezs grounder headley hit tworun double warning track center field three pitches headley doubled yankees took 41 lead tworun bloop single todd frazier judge made 51 sending 20 changeup well left field wall ending 0for10 skid thats game changed detroit manager brad ausmus said 10 lead top fourth scored four bottom really never gave little chase never really got close notes detroit gm al avila said contact chicago cubs six eight weeks trading lhp justin wilson c alex avila chicago yankees said rhp sonny gray lhp jaime garcia expected arrive new york tuesday acquired separate trades yankees gm brian cashman said tried get garcia atlanta braves minnesota twins acquired earlier month avila said despite speculation trades rhp justin verlander 2b ian kinsler ownership give mandate cut payroll tigers recalled c john hicks rhp joe jimenez triplea toledo yankees recalled rhp jonathan holder triplea scrantonwilkesbarre optioning rhp luis cessa following game holder 1b garrett cooper sent scrantonwilkesbarre | 573 |
<p>The congressional GOP has finally taken a position in its budget struggle with the Obama administration that maximizes its chances for a decent outcome.&#160; Unfortunately, it only got there after going through several other steps first, a process that may have jeopardized the advantage they should be now enjoying.</p>
<p>On Monday, the House passed a GOP-written continuing resolution (CR) to keep the government open, with two Obamacare-related amendments attached to it that the public strongly supports.&#160; The first would delay the individual mandate for a year.&#160; The second would override the Obama administration’s lawless rule giving Congress and its staff special treatment in the Obamacare exchanges.</p>
<p>The Senate promptly rejected the House-passed CR in a strictly party-line vote on Monday evening.</p>
<p>That’s right.&#160; No Senate Democrats supported the latest version of the CR passed by the House — not one.&#160; In the House, nine Democrats supported its passage.&#160; This CR doesn’t defund Obamacare, or even delay it for a year.&#160; All it does is delay the individual mandate for a year and restore the originally-intended treatment of Congress under Obamacare. &#160;In other words, every Senate Democrat – including several from conservative-leaning states who are up for re-election — would rather shut down the government than give working Americans the same one-year break from Obamacare that big businesses have gotten from the administration, or be treated like other Americans under Obamacare’s rules.</p>
<p>These are not popular positions to take, to put it mildly.&#160; In polling, about four out of five Americans support getting rid of the individual mandate.&#160; And there’s even stronger support for making Congress and its staff go into the Obamacare exchanges like other Americans who lose their employer plans.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, for the moment at least, the focus isn’t on the incredibly unpopular positions that the Senate Democrats are taking in this fight but on the fact that much of the federal government is now shut down.</p>
<p>Though regrettable, it’s not surprising that the media is covering the story the way it is.&#160; It was never a good idea to try to use the threat of a break in government funding to pressure for changes in Obamacare, and it was an even worse idea to telegraph to the world that this was your intention.</p>
<p>But here we are.&#160; Because the GOP has now staked out positions that are strongly supported by voters, they have a good chance of regaining the upper hand despite previous missteps.&#160; But they need to make the right tactical moves in the coming days and weeks.</p>
<p>The first step should be to signal reasonableness on re-opening the government.&#160; It is wrong to assume that the GOP must be ready to shut down the government to gain leverage in this struggle.&#160; The GOP has something that the president and his team want, which is some level of budgetary certainty for the executive branch in 2014.&#160; The Obama administration does not want to live indefinitely with short-term CRs.&#160; That would make it nearly impossible to govern effectively, and certainly would disrupt major spending decisions within the agencies.</p>
<p>Consequently, despite assertions to the contrary, it is almost inevitable that the administration will want, at some point, to negotiate with the GOP leaders in Congress – at least on how to settle appropriations for the coming year.&#160; That’s the only way the issue will get resolved.&#160; And in those negotiations, the administration will push for spending levels that exceed the amounts that would be available under the Budget Control Act (after the sequester).</p>
<p>GOP leaders, therefore, should be confident that the Obama administration needs and wants something from them, and that they can agree to short-term, clean CRs (like, for two weeks) to keep the government open without giving up this leverage.</p>
<p>But having negotiating leverage is no guarantee of success.&#160; The GOP also has to win the public argument over who is right on the merits.</p>
<p>The political and substantive case for a delay in the individual mandate is compelling.&#160; On a political level, what politician wants to defend giving a one-year break to corporate America but not to the little guy?&#160; That’s exactly the position Democrats are now in, and the GOP can swing public opinion their way by making this the central theme of their public case.&#160; In the coming days and weeks, there will be no shortage of opportunities for GOP members and Senators to go on TV, and they should use every chance they get to pound the message home with voters that the Democrats are the ones protecting businesses but not workers.</p>
<p>Substantively, the case is just as strong.&#160; The administration has delayed enforcement of the employer mandate for a year, which means some workers will not get an offer of coverage at their place of work.&#160; Because the individual mandate is still in place, they will have to go into the exchanges to get insurance or pay the uninsured tax.&#160; In two states, New Hampshire and West Virginia, there’s only one plan being offered in the exchanges. &#160;In other states, there are very few choices.&#160; Is it really fair to force American to buy insurance from one insurance carrier, or limit their choices to even two or three plans?&#160; The administration says it will start enforcing the employer mandate in 2015, which means many workers who were forced into the exchanges in 2014 will be forced out of them in 2015 when they get offered employer plans.&#160; Does disrupting insurance like this make any sense?&#160; The GOP should make these points to show that a delay of the employer mandate necessitates a commensurate delay of the individual requirement.</p>
<p>Obamacare’s supporters will argue that, if the mandate is delayed, the entire law will fall apart.&#160; But that’s not what the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)&#160; <a href="http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/hr2668_2.pdf" type="external">has said</a>.&#160; Its cost estimate for a delay of the individual mandate shows lower costs and fewer people getting coverage for a few years, but not total collapse of the program.&#160; Moreover, who would want to support a plan that depended so heavily on coercion anyway?</p>
<p>The case for rescinding the Obama’s administration’s rule providing special treatment for Congress is just as compelling.&#160; A&#160;Politico&#160; <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/john-boehner-hill-obamacare-subsidies-97634.html" type="external">story</a>&#160;posted today makes it clear that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) initially concluded that there was no legal authority in Obamacare for the government to continue making contributions for health insurance for Congress and its staff.&#160; It was only after immense political pressure from the White House and Democrats in Congress that OPM reversed course and authorized continued payments of premiums by the government.&#160; The GOP should expose the blatant abuse of power at work here as many times as possible in the coming days and force Democrats in both chambers and in the White House to try to defend the indefensible.</p>
<p>The GOP should also keep in mind that this struggle is unlikely to get settled quickly, and that a negotiation is all but inevitable at some point.&#160; Among other things, in less than a month, Congress and the White House will have to address the debt limit again, which will mean revisiting all of the same arguments and tensions at work in the CR fight.&#160; And before the year is out, several other provisions (like the Medicare “doc fix”) will have to be addressed to avoid implementation of policies that neither party supports.&#160; Both sides, therefore, are likely to have an interest in sitting down to negotiate a short-term truce, but probably only when the calendar is running short of additional days for delay.</p>
<p>When that time comes, the GOP can and should press for the changes in Obamacare they have already passed through the House.&#160; If they do so, and if they use the time available while this debate takes place to explain why the changes are both fair and necessary, they have a decent chance of winning some major concessions from the Democrats.&#160; And that could lay the groundwork for even more significant changes in the years ahead.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | false | 1 | congressional gop finally taken position budget struggle obama administration maximizes chances decent outcome160 unfortunately got going several steps first process may jeopardized advantage enjoying monday house passed gopwritten continuing resolution cr keep government open two obamacarerelated amendments attached public strongly supports160 first would delay individual mandate year160 second would override obama administrations lawless rule giving congress staff special treatment obamacare exchanges senate promptly rejected housepassed cr strictly partyline vote monday evening thats right160 senate democrats supported latest version cr passed house one160 house nine democrats supported passage160 cr doesnt defund obamacare even delay year160 delay individual mandate year restore originallyintended treatment congress obamacare 160in words every senate democrat including several conservativeleaning states reelection would rather shut government give working americans oneyear break obamacare big businesses gotten administration treated like americans obamacares rules popular positions take put mildly160 polling four five americans support getting rid individual mandate160 theres even stronger support making congress staff go obamacare exchanges like americans lose employer plans unfortunately moment least focus isnt incredibly unpopular positions senate democrats taking fight fact much federal government shut though regrettable surprising media covering story way is160 never good idea try use threat break government funding pressure changes obamacare even worse idea telegraph world intention are160 gop staked positions strongly supported voters good chance regaining upper hand despite previous missteps160 need make right tactical moves coming days weeks first step signal reasonableness reopening government160 wrong assume gop must ready shut government gain leverage struggle160 gop something president team want level budgetary certainty executive branch 2014160 obama administration want live indefinitely shortterm crs160 would make nearly impossible govern effectively certainly would disrupt major spending decisions within agencies consequently despite assertions contrary almost inevitable administration want point negotiate gop leaders congress least settle appropriations coming year160 thats way issue get resolved160 negotiations administration push spending levels exceed amounts would available budget control act sequester gop leaders therefore confident obama administration needs wants something agree shortterm clean crs like two weeks keep government open without giving leverage negotiating leverage guarantee success160 gop also win public argument right merits political substantive case delay individual mandate compelling160 political level politician wants defend giving oneyear break corporate america little guy160 thats exactly position democrats gop swing public opinion way making central theme public case160 coming days weeks shortage opportunities gop members senators go tv use every chance get pound message home voters democrats ones protecting businesses workers substantively case strong160 administration delayed enforcement employer mandate year means workers get offer coverage place work160 individual mandate still place go exchanges get insurance pay uninsured tax160 two states new hampshire west virginia theres one plan offered exchanges 160in states choices160 really fair force american buy insurance one insurance carrier limit choices even two three plans160 administration says start enforcing employer mandate 2015 means many workers forced exchanges 2014 forced 2015 get offered employer plans160 disrupting insurance like make sense160 gop make points show delay employer mandate necessitates commensurate delay individual requirement obamacares supporters argue mandate delayed entire law fall apart160 thats congressional budget office cbo160 said160 cost estimate delay individual mandate shows lower costs fewer people getting coverage years total collapse program160 moreover would want support plan depended heavily coercion anyway case rescinding obamas administrations rule providing special treatment congress compelling160 a160politico160 story160posted today makes clear office personnel management opm initially concluded legal authority obamacare government continue making contributions health insurance congress staff160 immense political pressure white house democrats congress opm reversed course authorized continued payments premiums government160 gop expose blatant abuse power work many times possible coming days force democrats chambers white house try defend indefensible gop also keep mind struggle unlikely get settled quickly negotiation inevitable point160 among things less month congress white house address debt limit mean revisiting arguments tensions work cr fight160 year several provisions like medicare doc fix addressed avoid implementation policies neither party supports160 sides therefore likely interest sitting negotiate shortterm truce probably calendar running short additional days delay time comes gop press changes obamacare already passed house160 use time available debate takes place explain changes fair necessary decent chance winning major concessions democrats160 could lay groundwork even significant changes years ahead james c capretta senior fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow american enterprise institute 160 | 704 |
<p>For quite some time now, commentary on world politics by leading Catholic officials, here and at the Vatican, has been marked by a certain softness, occasionally bordering on the surreal, that is a continual amazement to my non-Catholic friends and colleagues in the more Realist sectors of the foreign-policy community. Their puzzlement is both warranted (in that this muddled commentary, which seems to confuse gestures and protestations of good will with real change on-the-ground in world affairs, is at odds with an older Catholic tradition of hard-headedness about political realities) and unwarranted (in that the current patterns of commentary go back at least 50 years, such that no one should be surprised by them any more). Perhaps a look back will shed light on the present and suggest a wiser path forward.</p>
<p>This profound shift in official Catholic foreign-policy commentary can be traced back as far as contemporary memories reach; like everything and everyone else in late modernity, the Catholic Church was deeply shaken by the experience of two world wars and the unprecedented political violence that occurred during, between, and after them. But if one is looking for a proximate turning point in this tale, there’s no need to look back further than 50 years, when, during its fourth and final session in 1965, the Second Vatican Council promulgated its Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, usually referred to by its Latin title, Gaudium et Spes (Joy and Hope). The Council’s very existence, like that of the planet, had been called into question by the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, which coincided with the first weeks of Vatican II. So, in the wake of that jarring experience, which seemed to embody the unique dangers of international public life in the late 20th century, the Council fathers undertook to evaluate war “with an entirely new attitude,” as they put it in Gaudium et Spes.</p>
<p>At least that’s how one of the most widely read English translations of the documents of Vatican II put it. The Latin phrase in question was mente omnino nova, which a later translation rendered, rather more accurately, as calling for “a completely fresh appraisal” of war and, by extension, of world politics. “A completely fresh appraisal” suggests an intellectual exercise, a work of reason; “with an entirely new attitude” suggests that the modern problem of war and the problems of contemporary world politics are, at bottom, psychological — matters of misunderstandings and their attendant grievances. And it was the latter notion that seized the imaginations of Catholic peace activists, who began working their way into the crevices of the newly expanded Catholic justice-and-peace bureaucracies that sprang up, from the banks of the Potomac to the banks of the Tiber and at most points in between, after Vatican II, and of Church leaders eager to put a new face on Catholicism for the late 20th century.</p>
<p>The problem was that mente omnino nova, however translated, either stated the obvious or proposed something that distorted, rather than clarified, the situation.</p>
<p>If the Council fathers were saying, in that ambiguous phrase, that warfare and world politics had changed radically since the days when small professional armies fought set-piece battles on behalf of princes, they were simply underscoring the obvious: that, as Churchill wrote of the effects of the Great War, entire nations were now combatants — and, after the development of long-range bombers and intercontinental ballistic missiles, entire nations were now targets. If, on the other hand, mente omnino nova was suggesting more — that this dramatic shift in military capability had also resulted in a profound change in world politics, so that the old categories of “interest” and “power” no longer counted for much, then Vatican II could seem, in the minds of some, to have been jettisoning a lengthy tradition of Catholic reflection on the relationship between moral norms and world politics that went back to St. Augustine.</p>
<p>Whatever the Council fathers’ intention, the latter seems to have been what was learned from Gaudium et Spes by several generations of Catholic intellectuals and Catholic leaders. The old, Augustinian-realist analysis of world politics — which began with the premise that conflict was in the nature of human affairs and that the real question was the “order” that could be established to manage conflict — was out; a new set of premises, which began with the notions that conflict was an aberration and that cooperation was the “normal” mode of international public life, was in. And it took no great intellectual dexterity to leap from that new set of premises to an approach to world politics that stressed, not balancing competing interests and deterring aggressors, but assuaging misunderstandings thought to be at the root of conflict. If the old Catholic approach to thinking about world politics reached its symbolic high-water mark at the Congress of Vienna, where the papal secretary of state, Cardinal Ercole Consalvi, remade post-Napoleonic Europe alongside Castlereagh, Metternich, and Talleyrand, the new Catholic approach seemed to imagine senior churchmen, including the pope and his diplomats, as global therapists, soothing the grievances of men of power by calling them to attend to the better angels of their nature.</p>
<p>John Paul II was something of an outlier here, both in his bold defense of human rights behind the Iron Curtain and in his frontal challenge to Central European, Latin American, and East Asian dictators. Benedict XVI revived the Augustinian approach to Catholic thinking about politics in his striking address in 2011 to the German Bundestag. Pope Francis has, on occasion, broken with the soothing, post–Vatican II Catholic approach to world politics with his vigorous condemnation of the persecution of Christians throughout the world, and especially in the Middle East. But the general pattern since Vatican II remains one in which both national Catholic justice-and-peace offices and the Holy See seem to approach world politics through therapeutic, rather than political, categories. And that approach, it seems to me, tends to obscure far more than it illuminates.</p>
<p>In the first instance, it obscures the causes of conflict. Whether the issue is the war Russia is waging in Ukraine, or the ongoing conflict in the Holy Land, or the status quo in Cuba, what is happening today, be it low-grade war or continued repression, is happening not because of misunderstandings, but because of clashing interests, or deep ideological conflicts, or both. And those conflicts are not going to be resolved by suggesting to the aggressors or dictators (or aggressive dictators) that the Vatican understands and, to one extent or another, appreciates their point of view, which it is prepared to think has some merit. Therapy is not the answer to Putin’s aggression in the Donbas or to rocket attacks from Palestinian territory against Israel; nor is therapy likely to be of much aid in fostering a post-Castro-brothers future for the island prison that is Cuba.</p>
<p>The second problem with the psychologization of conflict — this attempt to approach world politics “with an entirely new attitude” — is that it tends to obscure the things that actually can be done, now, to move situations of conflict in a better direction. Take, for example, the Middle East. There is very little hope for a stable peace in the Holy Land, or for improving the lot of Christians there, to be found in the present state of Palestinian politics. The Abbas regime’s writ does not run in Gaza, where the anti-Semitic terrorists of Hamas hold sway. West Bank politics, where Abbas is theoretically in control, remain thoroughly corrupt, and no sensible person would count on today’s Palestinian Authority fulfilling any obligations it undertakes in international agreements. What can be done in the West Bank, however, is to slowly and painstakingly build up a Palestinian civil society capable of eventually sustaining a Palestinian state that is not obsessed with the destruction of its neighbor, Israel. That is where the very little leverage the Church has in the Palestinian portions of the Holy Land should be applied: in a long-term effort to both sustain Christian communities and to see them become agents in the building of a genuine civil society on the West Bank.</p>
<p>The same Catholic-realist logic would seem to apply as well to Cuba. Cuba has been shattered by 50 years of the Castro flail. Its economy is a wreck (and not primarily because of the American embargo); its people are dispirited, and often kept pacified by cheap alcohol; brave opposition groups like the Ladies in White are left, essentially, to fend for themselves. In this situation, there will be no rapid transition to democracy and the free economy, as there was in Poland after the Revolution of 1989. Nor is the Catholic Church in Cuba in a situation parallel to the Church in Poland under Communism; it is far weaker, and its present leadership is largely focused on building up the Church’s lost institutional strength. That is important, but building ought to be accompanied by resisting, as the Church allies itself visibly with the democratic opposition, provides a zone of freedom for the opposition to meet and gather strength, and constantly keeps the pressure on the Castro regime on questions of civil liberties.</p>
<p>Then there is the John Kerry–negotiated Iran nuclear “deal,” which was welcomed by both the chairman of the U.S. bishops’ International Justice and Peace Committee and the Holy See as a step toward peace — presumably because it was regarded as a step toward reincorporating Iran into the “international community” (a favorite trope of the post–Vatican II Catholic address to world affairs). By contrast, an older Catholic, Augustinian-realist analysis would have focused on the evil intentions of the Iranian mullahs, publicly stated on innumerable occasions; their amply documented support for international terrorism; and the virtual certainty that a Shia-dominated Iran on the verge of a nuclear-weapons capability guarantees nuclear-weapons proliferation throughout the Sunni Arab world. What it would have avoided was giving a tacit blessing, and thus a form of cover, to another chimerical “peace process,” which is what Kerry’s “deal” is. Such an Augustinian-realist analysis would, I suggest, help identify the baseline from which a serious, long-term strategy of transition for Iran, which cannot successfully re-engage the world until it moves beyond apocalyptic Shia totalitarianism, might be devised.</p>
<p>The hardest of hard-power foreign-policy realists will dismiss all of this as irrelevant to the “real world.” Who cares, they ask, what popes, cardinals, and bishops have to say about matters far outside their remit? A Catholic Church that wants to offer a plausible answer to that question is not a Catholic Church that sounds, in its address to world politics, like the European Union. To answer the hard-power realists’ question persuasively, the Catholic Church’s leaders, intellectuals, and activists ought — if I may borrow two phrases — to make a “completely fresh appraisal” of the Augustinian-realist tradition, approaching it “with an entirely new attitude.”</p>
<p>— George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of Washington’s Ethics and Public policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.</p> | false | 1 | quite time commentary world politics leading catholic officials vatican marked certain softness occasionally bordering surreal continual amazement noncatholic friends colleagues realist sectors foreignpolicy community puzzlement warranted muddled commentary seems confuse gestures protestations good real change ontheground world affairs odds older catholic tradition hardheadedness political realities unwarranted current patterns commentary go back least 50 years one surprised perhaps look back shed light present suggest wiser path forward profound shift official catholic foreignpolicy commentary traced back far contemporary memories reach like everything everyone else late modernity catholic church deeply shaken experience two world wars unprecedented political violence occurred one looking proximate turning point tale theres need look back 50 years fourth final session 1965 second vatican council promulgated pastoral constitution church modern world usually referred latin title gaudium et spes joy hope councils existence like planet called question 1962 cuban missile crisis coincided first weeks vatican ii wake jarring experience seemed embody unique dangers international public life late 20th century council fathers undertook evaluate war entirely new attitude put gaudium et spes least thats one widely read english translations documents vatican ii put latin phrase question mente omnino nova later translation rendered rather accurately calling completely fresh appraisal war extension world politics completely fresh appraisal suggests intellectual exercise work reason entirely new attitude suggests modern problem war problems contemporary world politics bottom psychological matters misunderstandings attendant grievances latter notion seized imaginations catholic peace activists began working way crevices newly expanded catholic justiceandpeace bureaucracies sprang banks potomac banks tiber points vatican ii church leaders eager put new face catholicism late 20th century problem mente omnino nova however translated either stated obvious proposed something distorted rather clarified situation council fathers saying ambiguous phrase warfare world politics changed radically since days small professional armies fought setpiece battles behalf princes simply underscoring obvious churchill wrote effects great war entire nations combatants development longrange bombers intercontinental ballistic missiles entire nations targets hand mente omnino nova suggesting dramatic shift military capability also resulted profound change world politics old categories interest power longer counted much vatican ii could seem minds jettisoning lengthy tradition catholic reflection relationship moral norms world politics went back st augustine whatever council fathers intention latter seems learned gaudium et spes several generations catholic intellectuals catholic leaders old augustinianrealist analysis world politics began premise conflict nature human affairs real question order could established manage conflict new set premises began notions conflict aberration cooperation normal mode international public life took great intellectual dexterity leap new set premises approach world politics stressed balancing competing interests deterring aggressors assuaging misunderstandings thought root conflict old catholic approach thinking world politics reached symbolic highwater mark congress vienna papal secretary state cardinal ercole consalvi remade postnapoleonic europe alongside castlereagh metternich talleyrand new catholic approach seemed imagine senior churchmen including pope diplomats global therapists soothing grievances men power calling attend better angels nature john paul ii something outlier bold defense human rights behind iron curtain frontal challenge central european latin american east asian dictators benedict xvi revived augustinian approach catholic thinking politics striking address 2011 german bundestag pope francis occasion broken soothing postvatican ii catholic approach world politics vigorous condemnation persecution christians throughout world especially middle east general pattern since vatican ii remains one national catholic justiceandpeace offices holy see seem approach world politics therapeutic rather political categories approach seems tends obscure far illuminates first instance obscures causes conflict whether issue war russia waging ukraine ongoing conflict holy land status quo cuba happening today lowgrade war continued repression happening misunderstandings clashing interests deep ideological conflicts conflicts going resolved suggesting aggressors dictators aggressive dictators vatican understands one extent another appreciates point view prepared think merit therapy answer putins aggression donbas rocket attacks palestinian territory israel therapy likely much aid fostering postcastrobrothers future island prison cuba second problem psychologization conflict attempt approach world politics entirely new attitude tends obscure things actually done move situations conflict better direction take example middle east little hope stable peace holy land improving lot christians found present state palestinian politics abbas regimes writ run gaza antisemitic terrorists hamas hold sway west bank politics abbas theoretically control remain thoroughly corrupt sensible person would count todays palestinian authority fulfilling obligations undertakes international agreements done west bank however slowly painstakingly build palestinian civil society capable eventually sustaining palestinian state obsessed destruction neighbor israel little leverage church palestinian portions holy land applied longterm effort sustain christian communities see become agents building genuine civil society west bank catholicrealist logic would seem apply well cuba cuba shattered 50 years castro flail economy wreck primarily american embargo people dispirited often kept pacified cheap alcohol brave opposition groups like ladies white left essentially fend situation rapid transition democracy free economy poland revolution 1989 catholic church cuba situation parallel church poland communism far weaker present leadership largely focused building churchs lost institutional strength important building ought accompanied resisting church allies visibly democratic opposition provides zone freedom opposition meet gather strength constantly keeps pressure castro regime questions civil liberties john kerrynegotiated iran nuclear deal welcomed chairman us bishops international justice peace committee holy see step toward peace presumably regarded step toward reincorporating iran international community favorite trope postvatican ii catholic address world affairs contrast older catholic augustinianrealist analysis would focused evil intentions iranian mullahs publicly stated innumerable occasions amply documented support international terrorism virtual certainty shiadominated iran verge nuclearweapons capability guarantees nuclearweapons proliferation throughout sunni arab world would avoided giving tacit blessing thus form cover another chimerical peace process kerrys deal augustinianrealist analysis would suggest help identify baseline serious longterm strategy transition iran successfully reengage world moves beyond apocalyptic shia totalitarianism might devised hardest hardpower foreignpolicy realists dismiss irrelevant real world cares ask popes cardinals bishops say matters far outside remit catholic church wants offer plausible answer question catholic church sounds address world politics like european union answer hardpower realists question persuasively catholic churchs leaders intellectuals activists ought may borrow two phrases make completely fresh appraisal augustinianrealist tradition approaching entirely new attitude george weigel distinguished senior fellow washingtons ethics public policy center holds william e simon chair catholic studies | 999 |
<p />
<p>An Israeli attack seems “imminent.” Richard Silverstein circulates a leaked <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19271083" type="external">“shock and awe” strategy of Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak</a> to decapitate and paralyze Iran. Alon Ben-Meir, an expert on Middle East politics specializing in peace negotiations between Israel and Arab states, says Israel is not bluffing. Israel may prefer an attack with the USA, but may go alone. Some people believe the nuclear bomb story. Others believe that the purpose is to achieve the vision of Israel as a Jewish state from the Nile to the Euphrates, also promoted by Netanyahu’s late father. The two stories do not exclude each other.</p>
<p>Iran is a Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) observer. An attack will trigger responses from the Russia-China core. What the Israelis may gain in Saudi Sunni support, they may lose in more important parts of the world, in diplomatic and economic relations. The SCO is huge.</p>
<p>There is also the real danger of a world war involving NATO against SCO, with nuclear powers divided 4-4; the USA and Israel are indivisible as they came into being in the same way––by taking somebody else’s land.</p>
<p>Iran’s devastating responses will come before decapitation. However, could those installations be well protected by having alternate systems? Maybe decentralized in 31 separate regions? The Israelis are clever at destructive work, but may be underestimating their enemies. On the other hand, they seem to have no qualms about plunging the region and the world into something far beyond what they suffered themselves.</p>
<p>Israel would be wise to consider an old Jewish proverb: “The best way to get rid of your enemies is to make them your friends.” Bombing Iran would win Israel no true friends, neither in Iran nor in the rest of the world. It would only ignite Iran’s desire to develop nuclear weapons, with full understanding from most of the world.</p>
<p>Of course, the Iranians should prove themselves by opening their nuclear facilities to unimpeded inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. But the Israelis should do the same. The double standard, “We have a right to possess nuclear weapons, you don’t” is untenable.</p>
<p>Uri Avnery, in “ <a href="https://www.transcend.org/tms/2012/05/a-putsch-against-war/" type="external">A Putsch Against War</a>” (May 2012) writes: “In our country we are now seeing a verbal uprising against the elected politicians by a group of current and former army generals, the former foreign intelligence chief (Meir Dagan of Mossad) and the former internal security chief (Yuval Diskin of Shin Beth) who condemn the government’s threat to start a war against Iran, and some of them condemn the government’s failure to negotiate-peace.” Some call anyone who criticizes Israeli policies an “anti-Semite” or a “self-hating Jew.”</p>
<p>Are they all in that category? Who is a better friend when someone walks with a blindfold toward an abyss? He who says, “Go right ahead, you are on the right track,” or he who says, “Stop, turn around, you are in grave danger! Do not turn attention away from Israel’s real crises!! (Peter Binary in “The Crisis of Zionism,” Gershom Gorenberg in “The Unmaking of Israel” 2011).</p>
<p>Rather, the option of a Middle East nuclear-free zone that includes Iran and Israel. Sixty-four percent of Israelis are in favor; as in Iran, provided Israel participates. Negotiate an agreement of that type and there would be a sigh of relief all over. And both countries would be embraced.</p>
<p>The background to the current climate is the 1953 CIA-MI6 coup which ousted Iran’s democratically-elected Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh, and brought in a 25-year dictatorship of Shah Reza Pahlavi. Apologies might go far toward solving the “nuclear crisis,” which will get worse unless something miraculous happens. Such miracles do occur. In the United Kingdom, Margaret Thatcher’s approach was to send more British troops to Northern Ireland, refusing to talk with “terrorists.” Tony Blair did better. He began a dialogue with Sinn Fein, and started withdrawing the British army. Since then, no more IRA bombs in England.</p>
<p>The onus is mainly on the West and on Israel. Or could it be that the whole nuclear issue is only a pretext to pave the way for the dream, an Israel, Zion between those two rivers?</p>
<p>That will never work. Israel can attain a lasting security only through peace with its neighbors, like in a Middle East community of Israel with its five Arab neighbors, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Palestine; recognized according to international law, with the 1967 borders and some exchanges; Israeli cantons on the West Bank and Palestinian cantons in northwest Israel. A community modeled after the six-state European Economic Community of 1958, one of the most successful peace projects in history, ending centuries of war between member-states.</p>
<p>What stands in the way? Key Israeli and Arab contra-arguments: “Surrounded by hostile Arabs we cannot let them in that close. They overpower us numerically, will push us into the sea,” says one; “The Jews penetrate us economically and run our economies,” says the other. But there are answers. Decisions would have to be made by consensus. Start slowly with a free flow of goods, people, services and ideas; settlement and investment later. Build confidence. Change a relationship badly broken by the Naqba into a peaceful, evolving relationship.</p>
<p>Add an open-ended Conference on Security and Cooperation in West Asia, where all parties are at the table and all issues on the table. Modeled after the 1972-75 Helsinki Conference, which prepared for the end of the Cold War, it could lead to an Organization for Security and Cooperation in West Asia, similar to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). It is feasible, with some will.</p>
<p>Better than massive killings only to find no nuclear bomb program in Iran, disproven like the USA in Iraq, and NATO in Afghanistan. With Israel more isolated than ever, licking its considerable wounds. With the West adding a closed Hormuz to its deep economic crisis. &#160;And anti-Semitism rampant.</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | false | 1 | israeli attack seems imminent richard silverstein circulates leaked shock awe strategy benjamin netanyahu ehud barak decapitate paralyze iran alon benmeir expert middle east politics specializing peace negotiations israel arab states says israel bluffing israel may prefer attack usa may go alone people believe nuclear bomb story others believe purpose achieve vision israel jewish state nile euphrates also promoted netanyahus late father two stories exclude iran shanghai cooperation organization sco observer attack trigger responses russiachina core israelis may gain saudi sunni support may lose important parts world diplomatic economic relations sco huge also real danger world war involving nato sco nuclear powers divided 44 usa israel indivisible came wayby taking somebody elses land irans devastating responses come decapitation however could installations well protected alternate systems maybe decentralized 31 separate regions israelis clever destructive work may underestimating enemies hand seem qualms plunging region world something far beyond suffered israel would wise consider old jewish proverb best way get rid enemies make friends bombing iran would win israel true friends neither iran rest world would ignite irans desire develop nuclear weapons full understanding world course iranians prove opening nuclear facilities unimpeded inspections international atomic energy agency israelis double standard right possess nuclear weapons dont untenable uri avnery putsch war may 2012 writes country seeing verbal uprising elected politicians group current former army generals former foreign intelligence chief meir dagan mossad former internal security chief yuval diskin shin beth condemn governments threat start war iran condemn governments failure negotiatepeace call anyone criticizes israeli policies antisemite selfhating jew category better friend someone walks blindfold toward abyss says go right ahead right track says stop turn around grave danger turn attention away israels real crises peter binary crisis zionism gershom gorenberg unmaking israel 2011 rather option middle east nuclearfree zone includes iran israel sixtyfour percent israelis favor iran provided israel participates negotiate agreement type would sigh relief countries would embraced background current climate 1953 ciami6 coup ousted irans democraticallyelected prime minister dr mohammad mossadegh brought 25year dictatorship shah reza pahlavi apologies might go far toward solving nuclear crisis get worse unless something miraculous happens miracles occur united kingdom margaret thatchers approach send british troops northern ireland refusing talk terrorists tony blair better began dialogue sinn fein started withdrawing british army since ira bombs england onus mainly west israel could whole nuclear issue pretext pave way dream israel zion two rivers never work israel attain lasting security peace neighbors like middle east community israel five arab neighbors lebanon syria jordan egypt palestine recognized according international law 1967 borders exchanges israeli cantons west bank palestinian cantons northwest israel community modeled sixstate european economic community 1958 one successful peace projects history ending centuries war memberstates stands way key israeli arab contraarguments surrounded hostile arabs let close overpower us numerically push us sea says one jews penetrate us economically run economies says answers decisions would made consensus start slowly free flow goods people services ideas settlement investment later build confidence change relationship badly broken naqba peaceful evolving relationship add openended conference security cooperation west asia parties table issues table modeled 197275 helsinki conference prepared end cold war could lead organization security cooperation west asia similar organization security cooperation europe osce feasible better massive killings find nuclear bomb program iran disproven like usa iraq nato afghanistan israel isolated ever licking considerable wounds west adding closed hormuz deep economic crisis 160and antisemitism rampant 160 | 562 |
<p><a href="http://variety.com/t/china/" type="external">China</a>’s ambitious <a href="http://variety.com/t/belt-and-road-initiative/" type="external">belt and Road Initiative</a> might appear to be an economic development proposal on the surface, but building a modern-day “Silk Road” connecting 68 countries from Southeast Asia all the way to Europe and Africa could transform what is, by some measures, the world’s largest economy into the center of global culture.</p>
<p>Industry insiders and scholars say despite the fact that President <a href="http://variety.com/t/xi-jinping/" type="external">Xi Jinping</a>’s trademark foreign policy scheme is still at an infant stage, it will have significant cultural impact in the long-run and exports of Chinese culture through films and filmmaking collaborations will play a pivotal role.</p>
<p>“We do not see Belt and Road’s impact on culture and entertainment yet as communication with these countries has only just begun. But once the hardware is ready, the cultural impact will follow,” says Professor Anthony Fung, co-director of the Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.</p>
<p>President Xi unveiled the concept, billed as an economic initiative bringing China together with countries in Asia, Europe and Africa through land and sea routes, in 2013, proposing the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) to finance the construction of infrastructure along the Belt and Road countries. In 2014, China pledged to contribute $40 billion to set up the Silk Road Fund to foster the investment in Belt and Road countries.</p>
<p>Despite Beijing’s recent forceful crackdown on Chinese companies’ foreign investments, particularly on large conglomerates such as Dalian Wanda Group and LeEco, China’s investments and acquisitions in the Belt and Road countries already totals $33 billion this year — $2 billion more than last year’s figure. One of the largest deals: the $11.6 billion buyout of Global Logistics Properties in Singapore by a Chinese consortium in July.</p>
<p>But it isn’t just about the money. At the Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation held in Beijing in May, President Xi gently reminded forum participants of the role of Silk Road back in the days of the Tang dynasty, which was thought to be the cultural center of the world. He said at the forum: “For thousands of years, the Silk Road spirit — peace and cooperation, openness and inclusiveness, mutual learning and mutual benefit — has been passed from generation to generation.”</p>
<p>“From China’s perspective, Belt and Road connects not just the economies but also the people, facilitating cultural exchanges among these countries. It has a global vision that goes beyond the economic level. Among all art forms, film is one of the most important platforms,” says Ma Fung-kwok, chairman of the Hong Kong Film Development Council.</p>
<p>China has been been grappling with how to best export its culture abroad. There have been ongoing rows within academic circles over the perception that the Confucius Institute — the Chinese Ministry of Education’s organization that promotes Chinese culture around the world — engages in propaganda.</p>
<p>This has prompted China to look to its film industry. Yet, despite the dramatic growth of the China’s box office over the past decade, most Chinese films have yet to gain success, suffering from harsh criticisms and box-office letdowns. One example: the lukewarm response outside of China toward Zhang Yimou’s action fantasy epic “The Great Wall.”</p>
<p>But Peking University professor Zhang Yiwu has told mainland media that Belt and Road will spark the next boom in the Chinese film industry. Leaders of the China and Hong Kong film business are already jumping on the bandwagon, initiating contacts and exchanges with countries along the routes.</p>
<p>What’s more, China has signed agreements on film and TV cooperation with 15 countries along the Belt and Road. The China National Film Museum announced in April that it will collaborate with Belt and Road countries to hold annual film events, including screenings, awards and exhibitions.</p>
<p>This year’s Beijing Intl. Film Festival, which opened in April, presented a Belt and Road section for the first time, showcasing 13 films from such countries as Poland, Iran and the Philippines.</p>
<p>In June, the 20th Shanghai Intl. Film Festival also staged a series of campaigns promoting the Belt and Road initiative and signed the Belt and Road Film Culture Exchange Cooperation agreement. Zhang Hongsen, deputy director of the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television, said at the signing ceremony that cinema will take the role of a cultural link connecting the Belt and Road countries.</p>
<p>Hong Kong also joined the game, highlighting Belt and Road at the Hong Kong Filmart in March. Ma of the Hong Kong Film Development Council led a delegation of film professionals to explore collaboration opportunities in Belt and Road countries.</p>
<p>“Last year we invited Iran and other Belt and Road countries to Hong Kong. This year we went to Iran for the film festival. We hope that there will be more co-productions among us,” Ma said.</p>
<p>Professor Fung is leading research under the Hong Kong Institute of Asia Pacific Studies on the values of young people from Hong Kong, mainland China and Belt and Road Countries. Whether this ambitious initiative will succeed in creating a cultural impact will largely depend on whether people in various Belt and Road countries share the same global citizenship value, he says. Avoiding the repetition of the old Western colonial model is a must, he warned.</p>
<p>Fung adds: “At the moment cultural export isn’t high on the Belt and Road agenda, but through this initiative, countries receiving help from China will eventually be more receptive to Chinese culture.”</p> | false | 1 | chinas ambitious belt road initiative might appear economic development proposal surface building modernday silk road connecting 68 countries southeast asia way europe africa could transform measures worlds largest economy center global culture industry insiders scholars say despite fact president xi jinpings trademark foreign policy scheme still infant stage significant cultural impact longrun exports chinese culture films filmmaking collaborations play pivotal role see belt roads impact culture entertainment yet communication countries begun hardware ready cultural impact follow says professor anthony fung codirector hong kong institute asiapacific studies chinese university hong kong president xi unveiled concept billed economic initiative bringing china together countries asia europe africa land sea routes 2013 proposing establishment asian infrastructure investment bank aiib finance construction infrastructure along belt road countries 2014 china pledged contribute 40 billion set silk road fund foster investment belt road countries despite beijings recent forceful crackdown chinese companies foreign investments particularly large conglomerates dalian wanda group leeco chinas investments acquisitions belt road countries already totals 33 billion year 2 billion last years figure one largest deals 116 billion buyout global logistics properties singapore chinese consortium july isnt money belt road forum international cooperation held beijing may president xi gently reminded forum participants role silk road back days tang dynasty thought cultural center world said forum thousands years silk road spirit peace cooperation openness inclusiveness mutual learning mutual benefit passed generation generation chinas perspective belt road connects economies also people facilitating cultural exchanges among countries global vision goes beyond economic level among art forms film one important platforms says fungkwok chairman hong kong film development council china grappling best export culture abroad ongoing rows within academic circles perception confucius institute chinese ministry educations organization promotes chinese culture around world engages propaganda prompted china look film industry yet despite dramatic growth chinas box office past decade chinese films yet gain success suffering harsh criticisms boxoffice letdowns one example lukewarm response outside china toward zhang yimous action fantasy epic great wall peking university professor zhang yiwu told mainland media belt road spark next boom chinese film industry leaders china hong kong film business already jumping bandwagon initiating contacts exchanges countries along routes whats china signed agreements film tv cooperation 15 countries along belt road china national film museum announced april collaborate belt road countries hold annual film events including screenings awards exhibitions years beijing intl film festival opened april presented belt road section first time showcasing 13 films countries poland iran philippines june 20th shanghai intl film festival also staged series campaigns promoting belt road initiative signed belt road film culture exchange cooperation agreement zhang hongsen deputy director state administration press publication radio film television said signing ceremony cinema take role cultural link connecting belt road countries hong kong also joined game highlighting belt road hong kong filmart march hong kong film development council led delegation film professionals explore collaboration opportunities belt road countries last year invited iran belt road countries hong kong year went iran film festival hope coproductions among us said professor fung leading research hong kong institute asia pacific studies values young people hong kong mainland china belt road countries whether ambitious initiative succeed creating cultural impact largely depend whether people various belt road countries share global citizenship value says avoiding repetition old western colonial model must warned fung adds moment cultural export isnt high belt road agenda initiative countries receiving help china eventually receptive chinese culture | 563 |
<p>The last few days have provided both a good laugh and some food for thought on the important question of confirmation bias—people’s tendency to favor information that confirms their pre-existing views and ignore information that contradicts those views. It’s a subject well worth some reflection.</p>
<p>The laugh came from a familiar source. Without (it seems) a hint of irony, Paul Krugman&#160; <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/asymmetric-stupidity/?_php=true&amp;_type=blogs&amp;_r=0" type="external">argued</a>&#160;on Monday that everyone is subject to confirmation bias except for people who agree with him. He was responding to&#160; <a href="http://www.vox.com/2014/4/6/5556462/brain-dead-how-politics-makes-us-stupid" type="external">this essay</a>&#160;Ezra Klein wrote for his newly launched site,&#160; <a href="http://www.vox.com/" type="external">Vox.com</a>, which took up the question of confirmation bias and the challenges it poses to democratic politics. Krugman acknowledged the research that Klein cites but then insisted that his own experience suggests it is actually mostly people he disagrees with who tend to ignore evidence and research that contradicts what they want to believe, while people who share his own views are more open-minded, skeptical, and evidence driven. I don’t know when I’ve seen a neater real-world example of an argument that disproves itself. Good times.</p>
<p>Klein’s actual essay (which Jonah ably&#160; <a href="http://t.co/VbUmlV1OHc" type="external">took up</a>&#160;yesterday, as did the always wise&#160; <a href="http://thefederalist.com/2014/04/08/how-vox-makes-us-stupid/" type="external">David Harsanyi at the&#160;Federalist</a>), is more serious and interesting, though.</p>
<p>To some extent Klein’s piece, too, is an example of confirmation bias in action — as is a great deal of the work of all of us who write about politics for a living, I’m sure. He opens with what he presents as a critique of the assumptions underlying our politics, but is probably better understood as a critique of the assumptions underlying vox.com:</p>
<p>There’s a simple theory underlying much of American politics. It sits hopefully at the base of almost every speech, every op-ed, every article, and every panel discussion. It courses through the Constitution and is a constant in President Obama’s most stirring addresses. It’s what we might call the More Information Hypothesis: the belief that many of our most bitter political battles are mere misunderstandings. The cause of these misunderstandings? Too little information — be it about climate change, or taxes, or Iraq, or the budget deficit. If only the citizenry were more informed, the thinking goes, then there wouldn’t be all this fighting.</p>
<p>I wonder if most people involved in politics in America really have so little respect for people who disagree with them as to imagine that the disagreement is just a misunderstanding. Many people seem, rather, to assume that differences are grounded in different priorities and worldviews that are rooted in moral and philosophical differences. That assumption is surely the source of much of the passion and intensity of our politics, and sometimes also of its depth and seriousness.</p>
<p>Above all, though, I can’t imagine why Klein would think that this idea “courses through the Constitution” in particular. It seems to me the Constitution is built on a far more sophisticated grasp of human limitations and on a sense of the permanence of parties, each of which can only ever hope to be partially right.</p>
<p>Some members of the founding generation believed political differences were rooted in inborn dispositions and temperaments and so were in a sense natural to human societies. Thomas Jefferson often expressed a form of this view (in terms most agreeable to his own disposition, of course), writing for instance in an 1802 letter to Joel Barlow:</p>
<p>The division into Whig and Tory is founded in the nature of man; the weakly and nerveless, the rich and the corrupt, seeing more safety and accessibility in a strong executive; the healthy, firm, and virtuous, feeling confidence in their physical and moral resources, and willing to part with only so much power as is necessary for their good government; and, therefore, to retain the rest in the hands of the many, the division will substantially be into Whig and Tory.</p>
<p>Others suggested such differences had more to do with interests, including material interests. James Madison, for instance, offered a highly materialist version of this idea in&#160;Federalist&#160;10, writing: “From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the society into different interests and parties.” There are other causes of factional differences, Madison acknowledged, “but the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property.”</p>
<p>Whatever we may think of the materialism of Madison’s view of this question (and I think it is excessive), the constitutional system he helped design is surely built on the notion that society would always be riven by some set of profound differences that would not be readily resolved by better information. Instead of assuming a position above society from which different claims can always be objectively adjudicated, the system seeks to counterbalance those differences and to channel them through complicated institutions, to prevent any faction from gaining too much power for too long, and to force any party that seeks to deploy significant public power to construct a coalition broad enough as to most likely restrain its worst excesses.</p>
<p>I personally think the sources of our party differences lie at least as much in different philosophical outlooks as in different material interests or natural dispositions (though those do matter, surely). I think our Left and Right, very broadly understood, are each implicitly attached to a different set of ideas about human perfectibility and human limits, different notions of what the shape and purpose of society are, and different understandings of what kinds of knowledge could be available to us to address social problems. I wrote&#160; <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Great-Debate-Edmund-Burke-Thomas/dp/0465050972/" type="external">a book</a>&#160;on that subject recently, and won’t belabor it here. But I think these different outlooks incline us to emphasize different kinds of questions and prioritize different kinds of goods in the effort to improve our society, and that this means the Left and Right often talk past one another in our political debates. It also means that both are very deeply vulnerable to confirmation bias.</p>
<p>My view of that subject leads me to think that arguments (and facts and figures and other information) do matter a great deal in politics, though maybe not as much as any of us might like. But it also leads me to think that the permanence of the limits of human reason and the fact that every party only sees part of the whole means no one — not even people who agree with me — is ever likely to be entirely right when it comes to big, complicated social questions. In terms of the structure of our governing institutions, it therefore leads me to the same conclusion Madison reached, which is that we need a system that keeps all sides from getting too much power and forces them to confront and compromise with one another in practical terms. However much we might regret it, this is a system that assumes we will never fully persuade one another in politics, and indeed that assumes we are probably all wrong — which we probably are. It is therefore a political system that makes us less stupid, not (as Klein suggests in the title of his piece) more so.</p>
<p>But the fact that among the roots of our political differences is a difference about epistemology — about what we can know in politics and how we can know it—means that this Madisonian conclusion is often itself one of the points of debate between Left and Right.</p>
<p>American progressives have long contended that as social science enables us to overcome some of the limits of what we know, it should also be permitted to overcome the constitutional limits on what government may do. They take themselves to be an exception to the rule that all parties see only parts of the whole, and therefore an exception also to the ubiquity of confirmation bias, and so they demand an exception to the rule that no party should have too much raw power. This is basically what Paul Krugman was getting at.</p>
<p>But the progressives’ understanding of how social science can come to know society and of how such knowledge might be put into effect has itself been a point of great contention with conservatives — who tend to think that a society’s knowledge exists mostly in dispersed forms and therefore that public policy should work largely by enabling the dispersed social institutions of civil society, local community, and the market economy to address problems from the bottom up through incremental trial-and-error learning processes. This is a view of public policy that is generally compatible with the limits the constitutional system places on government, while the progressive preference for consolidated knowledge and centralized action tend to be far less so, and not by coincidence.</p>
<p>Many serious people on the left don’t believe this disagreement about the proper way to obtain and act on social knowledge is a legitimate difference, or rather they treat the technocratic attitude of the modern Left as common sense and therefore as not requiring justification. The Left is concerned with ends, they say — the betterment of the poor, the improvement of living conditions — and is purely pragmatic about means. I’m sure they believe this quite genuinely, but the means of politics and policy can only be separated from the ends (which is to say, the means can only be left unlimited) this way if you take for granted the worldview of the modern Left and its understanding of how people thrive and how societies work. It is also no coincidence, therefore, that people who claim that progressivism is pragmatism strongly incline to centralized technocratic approaches to policy — which leave little room for experimentation, make it difficult to evaluate success and failure, and create programs that are very hard to change or discard when they fail, and therefore aren’t very pragmatic at all.</p>
<p>That progressive preference for centralized expertise and authority ultimately assumes the possibility of a vantage point outside society from which the social scientist and social manager can view the whole and not just parts. Klein quotes Dan Kahan, the Yale professor whose research about confirmation bias he highlights, articulating the ideal of such detachment: “My hypothesis is we can use reason to identify the sources of the threats to our reason and then we can use our reason to devise methods to manage and control those processes.” This has long been the hope of progressives seeking to use social science to overcome the limits of politics, and indeed the hope of rationalist philosophers throughout the history of the West.</p>
<p>But understanding human limitations does not mean we can overcome them. It only means we can’t pretend they don’t exist. It should point us toward humility, not hubris. And in politics and policy, understanding the limitation that Klein highlights should point us away from technocratic overconfidence and toward an idea of a government that enables society to address its problems through incremental, local, trial-and-error learning processes rather than centrally managed wholesale transformations of large systems.</p>
<p>Klein, to his credit, seems genuinely skeptical about whether Kahan’s ambitions are plausible. For one thing, unlike Krugman, he acknowledges the vulnerability of everyone in our politics to confirmation bias. He accepts the proposition that it’s as prevalent on the Left as on the Right, though he does seem to have some trouble finding examples on his own side of the aisle. They are not so hard to come by. He points out, for instance, that confirmation bias can be especially problematic regarding issues “where action is needed quickly to prevent a disaster that will happen slowly.” Madison pointed to the very same problem. And while Klein can only think of conservative attitudes toward climate change when looking for an example of this, he could easily have found&#160; <a href="http://www.vox.com/2014/3/28/5559052/stop-freaking-out-about-the-debt" type="external">another instance much closer to home</a>&#160;if he were not inclined to ignore it.</p>
<p>But in the end, it is not clear if Klein accepts Madison’s notion that these limits on human knowledge and on its effectiveness are permanent and universal, and so accepts the need for a system that limits the damage that hubris might cause while making room for a constructive politics and an effective government. Rather, he suggests that these limits on our knowledge are a function of systems set up to keep our minds closed. “Washington is a bitter war between two well-funded, sharply-defined tribes that have their own machines for generating evidence and their own enforcers of orthodoxy,” Klein writes. “It’s a perfect storm for making smart people very stupid.”</p>
<p>“The silver lining,” Klein continues, “is that politics doesn’t just take place in Washington.” And he suggests that outside the gilded capital, people should be far better able to judge policies by their outcomes and remain free of partisan sentiments and of confirmation bias. Here again is the progressive assumption that, free of the nefarious influence of landed interests, the people can in fact overcome what only seem to be the limits of our reason and knowledge. And so, having come around at last to the peculiar mix of populism and technocracy that has always characterized American progressivism, Klein ends up suggesting that it is after all our system of government that is the problem here. He began his essay by wrongly attributing to the Constitution the view that political differences are just misunderstandings so that he could conclude by stepping up to defend a version of that view himself, and could offer his political vision as a vindication of the constitutional order rather than a rejection of it.</p>
<p>But a rejection of it is what it seems to be. “If American politics is going to improve, it will be better structures, not better arguments, that win the day,” Klein concludes.</p>
<p>My own sense is that if American politics is going to help American society improve, it will be better policies that make that possible, and the constitutional structures we have — precisely because they are built upon a realistic understanding of human limits and a sense that government’s purpose is to sustain the space in which society can function and to enable everyone to benefit from what happens there — are very well suited to allowing for that kind of politics of bottom-up improvement. The liberal welfare state is not. It is the task of conservatives in the coming years to make to the public—concretely, issue by issue, with evidence and argument, as both a political vision and a policy agenda — the case for the former over the latter, secure in the conviction that arguments matter . . . at least up to a point.</p> | false | 1 | last days provided good laugh food thought important question confirmation biaspeoples tendency favor information confirms preexisting views ignore information contradicts views subject well worth reflection laugh came familiar source without seems hint irony paul krugman160 argued160on monday everyone subject confirmation bias except people agree responding to160 essay160ezra klein wrote newly launched site160 voxcom took question confirmation bias challenges poses democratic politics krugman acknowledged research klein cites insisted experience suggests actually mostly people disagrees tend ignore evidence research contradicts want believe people share views openminded skeptical evidence driven dont know ive seen neater realworld example argument disproves good times kleins actual essay jonah ably160 took up160yesterday always wise160 david harsanyi the160federalist serious interesting though extent kleins piece example confirmation bias action great deal work us write politics living im sure opens presents critique assumptions underlying politics probably better understood critique assumptions underlying voxcom theres simple theory underlying much american politics sits hopefully base almost every speech every oped every article every panel discussion courses constitution constant president obamas stirring addresses might call information hypothesis belief many bitter political battles mere misunderstandings cause misunderstandings little information climate change taxes iraq budget deficit citizenry informed thinking goes wouldnt fighting wonder people involved politics america really little respect people disagree imagine disagreement misunderstanding many people seem rather assume differences grounded different priorities worldviews rooted moral philosophical differences assumption surely source much passion intensity politics sometimes also depth seriousness though cant imagine klein would think idea courses constitution particular seems constitution built far sophisticated grasp human limitations sense permanence parties ever hope partially right members founding generation believed political differences rooted inborn dispositions temperaments sense natural human societies thomas jefferson often expressed form view terms agreeable disposition course writing instance 1802 letter joel barlow division whig tory founded nature man weakly nerveless rich corrupt seeing safety accessibility strong executive healthy firm virtuous feeling confidence physical moral resources willing part much power necessary good government therefore retain rest hands many division substantially whig tory others suggested differences interests including material interests james madison instance offered highly materialist version idea in160federalist16010 writing protection different unequal faculties acquiring property possession different degrees kinds property immediately results influence sentiments views respective proprietors ensues division society different interests parties causes factional differences madison acknowledged common durable source factions various unequal distribution property whatever may think materialism madisons view question think excessive constitutional system helped design surely built notion society would always riven set profound differences would readily resolved better information instead assuming position society different claims always objectively adjudicated system seeks counterbalance differences channel complicated institutions prevent faction gaining much power long force party seeks deploy significant public power construct coalition broad enough likely restrain worst excesses personally think sources party differences lie least much different philosophical outlooks different material interests natural dispositions though matter surely think left right broadly understood implicitly attached different set ideas human perfectibility human limits different notions shape purpose society different understandings kinds knowledge could available us address social problems wrote160 book160on subject recently wont belabor think different outlooks incline us emphasize different kinds questions prioritize different kinds goods effort improve society means left right often talk past one another political debates also means deeply vulnerable confirmation bias view subject leads think arguments facts figures information matter great deal politics though maybe much us might like also leads think permanence limits human reason fact every party sees part whole means one even people agree ever likely entirely right comes big complicated social questions terms structure governing institutions therefore leads conclusion madison reached need system keeps sides getting much power forces confront compromise one another practical terms however much might regret system assumes never fully persuade one another politics indeed assumes probably wrong probably therefore political system makes us less stupid klein suggests title piece fact among roots political differences difference epistemology know politics know itmeans madisonian conclusion often one points debate left right american progressives long contended social science enables us overcome limits know also permitted overcome constitutional limits government may take exception rule parties see parts whole therefore exception also ubiquity confirmation bias demand exception rule party much raw power basically paul krugman getting progressives understanding social science come know society knowledge might put effect point great contention conservatives tend think societys knowledge exists mostly dispersed forms therefore public policy work largely enabling dispersed social institutions civil society local community market economy address problems bottom incremental trialanderror learning processes view public policy generally compatible limits constitutional system places government progressive preference consolidated knowledge centralized action tend far less coincidence many serious people left dont believe disagreement proper way obtain act social knowledge legitimate difference rather treat technocratic attitude modern left common sense therefore requiring justification left concerned ends say betterment poor improvement living conditions purely pragmatic means im sure believe quite genuinely means politics policy separated ends say means left unlimited way take granted worldview modern left understanding people thrive societies work also coincidence therefore people claim progressivism pragmatism strongly incline centralized technocratic approaches policy leave little room experimentation make difficult evaluate success failure create programs hard change discard fail therefore arent pragmatic progressive preference centralized expertise authority ultimately assumes possibility vantage point outside society social scientist social manager view whole parts klein quotes dan kahan yale professor whose research confirmation bias highlights articulating ideal detachment hypothesis use reason identify sources threats reason use reason devise methods manage control processes long hope progressives seeking use social science overcome limits politics indeed hope rationalist philosophers throughout history west understanding human limitations mean overcome means cant pretend dont exist point us toward humility hubris politics policy understanding limitation klein highlights point us away technocratic overconfidence toward idea government enables society address problems incremental local trialanderror learning processes rather centrally managed wholesale transformations large systems klein credit seems genuinely skeptical whether kahans ambitions plausible one thing unlike krugman acknowledges vulnerability everyone politics confirmation bias accepts proposition prevalent left right though seem trouble finding examples side aisle hard come points instance confirmation bias especially problematic regarding issues action needed quickly prevent disaster happen slowly madison pointed problem klein think conservative attitudes toward climate change looking example could easily found160 another instance much closer home160if inclined ignore end clear klein accepts madisons notion limits human knowledge effectiveness permanent universal accepts need system limits damage hubris might cause making room constructive politics effective government rather suggests limits knowledge function systems set keep minds closed washington bitter war two wellfunded sharplydefined tribes machines generating evidence enforcers orthodoxy klein writes perfect storm making smart people stupid silver lining klein continues politics doesnt take place washington suggests outside gilded capital people far better able judge policies outcomes remain free partisan sentiments confirmation bias progressive assumption free nefarious influence landed interests people fact overcome seem limits reason knowledge come around last peculiar mix populism technocracy always characterized american progressivism klein ends suggesting system government problem began essay wrongly attributing constitution view political differences misunderstandings could conclude stepping defend version view could offer political vision vindication constitutional order rather rejection rejection seems american politics going improve better structures better arguments win day klein concludes sense american politics going help american society improve better policies make possible constitutional structures precisely built upon realistic understanding human limits sense governments purpose sustain space society function enable everyone benefit happens well suited allowing kind politics bottomup improvement liberal welfare state task conservatives coming years make publicconcretely issue issue evidence argument political vision policy agenda case former latter secure conviction arguments matter least point | 1,244 |
<p />
<p>The latest punishment of Gaza may seem like another familiar plot to humiliate the strip to the satisfaction of Israel, Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority, and the military-controlled Egyptian government. But something far more sinister is brewing.</p>
<p>This time, the collective punishment of Gaza arrives in the form of raw sewage that is flooding many neighborhoods across the impoverished and energy-chocked region of 360 km2 (139 sq mi) and 1.8 million inhabitants. Even before the latest crisis resulting from a severe shortage of electricity and diesel fuel that is usually smuggled through Egypt, Gaza was rendered gradually uninhabitable. A comprehensive UN report last year said that if no urgent action were taken, Gaza would be "unlivable" by 2020. Since the report was issued in August 2012, the situation has grown much worse.</p>
<p>Over the years, especially since the tightening by Israel of the Gaza siege in 2007, the world has become accustomed to two realities: the ongoing multiparty scheme to weaken and defeat Hamas in Gaza, and Gaza's astonishing ability to withstand the inhumane punishment of an ongoing siege, blockade and war.</p>
<p>Two infamous wars illustrate this idea: The first is Israel's 22-day war of 2008-9 (killing over 1,400 Palestinians and wounding over 5,500 more) and the second is its more recent war of Nov 2012 - eight days of fighting that killed 167 Palestinians and six Israelis. In the second war, Egypt's first democratically-elected president Mohammed Morsi was still in power. For the first time in many years, Egypt sided with Palestinians. Because of this and stiff Palestinian resistance in Gaza, the strip miraculously prevailed. Gaza celebrated its victory, and Israel remained somewhat at bay - while of course, mostly failing to honor its side of the Cairo-brokered agreement of easing Gaza's economic hardship.</p>
<p>In relative terms, things seemed to be looking up for Gaza. The Rafah border crossing between Gaza and Egypt was largely opened, and both Egypt and the Hamas governments were in constant discussions regarding finding a sustainable economic solution to Gaza's many woes. But the ousting by General Abdel Fatah al-Sisi of President Morsi on July 3 changed all of that. The Egyptian military cracked down with vengeance by shutting down the border crossing and destroying 90-95 percent of all tunnels, which served as Gaza's main lifeline and allowed it to withstand the Israeli siege.</p>
<p>Hopes were shattered quickly, and Gaza's situation worsened like never before. Naturally, Cairo found in Ramallah a willing ally who never ceased colluding with Israel in order to ensure that their Hamas rivals were punished, along with the population of the strip.</p>
<p>Citing Gaza officials, the New York Times reported on Nov 21 that 13 sewerage stations in the Gaza Strip have either overflowed or are close to overflowing, and 3.5 million cubic feet of raw sewage find their way to the Mediterranean Sea on a daily basis. "The sanitation department may soon no longer be able to pump drinking water to Gaza homes," it reported.</p>
<p>Farid Ashour, the Director of sanitation at the Gaza Coastal Municipalities Water Utilities, told the times that the situation is "disastrous". "We haven't faced a situation as dangerous as this time," he said. But the situation doesn't have to be as dangerous or disastrous as it currently is. It has in fact been engineered to be that way.</p>
<p>Gaza's only power plant has been a top priority target for Israeli warplanes for years. In 2006 it was destroyed in an Israeli airstrike, to be opened a year later, only to be destroyed again. And although it was barely at full capacity when it operated last, it continued to supply Gaza with 30 percent of its electricity needs of 400 megawatts. 120 megawatts came through Israel, and nearly 30 megawatts came through Egypt. The total fell short from Gaza's basic needs, but somehow Gaza subsisted. Following the ousting of Morsi and the Egyptian military crackdown, the shortage now stands at 65 percent of the total.</p>
<p>In an interview with the UN humanitarian news agency, IRIN, James W. Rawley, the humanitarian coordinator for the Occupied Palestinian Territory, depicted a disturbing scene in which the impact of the crisis has reached "all essential services, including hospitals, clinics, sewage and water pumping stations."</p>
<p>Israelis on the other hand, have been doing just fine since the last military encounter with Hamas. "The past year was a great one," The Economist quoted the commander of Israel's division that "watches" Gaza, Brigadier Michael Edelstein. Due to the massive drop in the number of rockets fired from Gaza in retaliation to Israeli attacks and continued siege (50 rockets this year, compared to 1500 last year), "children in Israel's border towns can sleep in their beds, not in shelters, and no longer go to school in armored buses," according to The Economist on Nov 16.</p>
<p>"But Israel's reciprocal promise to help revive Gaza's economy has not been kept," it reported. Israel has done everything it its power to keep Gaza in a crisis mode, from denying the strip solar panels so that they may generate their own electricity to blocking Gaza exports.&#160; "In the meantime, Gaza is rotting away."</p>
<p>Desperate to find immediate remedies, Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh issued new calls to Mahmoud Abbas for a unity government. "Let's have one government, one parliament and one president," Haniyeh said in a recent speech, as quoted by Reuters. A Fatah spokesman, Ahmed Assaf, dismissed the call for it "included nothing new." Meanwhile, the PA decided to end its subsidy on any fuel shipped to Gaza via Israel, increasing the price to $1.62 per liter from 79 cents. According to Ihab Bessisso of the PA, the decision to rescind Gaza's tax exemption on fuel was taken because sending cheap fuel to Gaza "was unfair to West Bank residents," according to the times.</p>
<p>But fairness has little to with it. Reports by The Economist, Al Monitor and other media speak of Egyptian efforts to reintroduce Gaza's former security chief and Fatah leader Mohammed Dahlan to speed-up the anticipated collapse of the Hamas government. Al Monitor reported on Nov 21 that Dahlan, a notorious Fatah commander who was defeated by Hamas in 2007 because of, among other reasons, his close ties with Israeli intelligence, had met with General al-Sisi in Cairo. Evidently, the purpose is to oust Hamas out in the Gaza Strip. But the question is how? Some "suggest that a Palestinian brigade mustered in al-Arish could march on Gaza and, with Egyptian support, defeat the broad array of Hamas forces created in the last decade."</p>
<p>With Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood out of the picture, at least for now, Gaza is more vulnerable than ever. Some of Abbas's supporters and certainly Dahlan's may believe that the moment to defeat their brethren in Gaza is now.</p> | false | 1 | latest punishment gaza may seem like another familiar plot humiliate strip satisfaction israel mahmoud abbass palestinian authority militarycontrolled egyptian government something far sinister brewing time collective punishment gaza arrives form raw sewage flooding many neighborhoods across impoverished energychocked region 360 km2 139 sq mi 18 million inhabitants even latest crisis resulting severe shortage electricity diesel fuel usually smuggled egypt gaza rendered gradually uninhabitable comprehensive un report last year said urgent action taken gaza would unlivable 2020 since report issued august 2012 situation grown much worse years especially since tightening israel gaza siege 2007 world become accustomed two realities ongoing multiparty scheme weaken defeat hamas gaza gazas astonishing ability withstand inhumane punishment ongoing siege blockade war two infamous wars illustrate idea first israels 22day war 20089 killing 1400 palestinians wounding 5500 second recent war nov 2012 eight days fighting killed 167 palestinians six israelis second war egypts first democraticallyelected president mohammed morsi still power first time many years egypt sided palestinians stiff palestinian resistance gaza strip miraculously prevailed gaza celebrated victory israel remained somewhat bay course mostly failing honor side cairobrokered agreement easing gazas economic hardship relative terms things seemed looking gaza rafah border crossing gaza egypt largely opened egypt hamas governments constant discussions regarding finding sustainable economic solution gazas many woes ousting general abdel fatah alsisi president morsi july 3 changed egyptian military cracked vengeance shutting border crossing destroying 9095 percent tunnels served gazas main lifeline allowed withstand israeli siege hopes shattered quickly gazas situation worsened like never naturally cairo found ramallah willing ally never ceased colluding israel order ensure hamas rivals punished along population strip citing gaza officials new york times reported nov 21 13 sewerage stations gaza strip either overflowed close overflowing 35 million cubic feet raw sewage find way mediterranean sea daily basis sanitation department may soon longer able pump drinking water gaza homes reported farid ashour director sanitation gaza coastal municipalities water utilities told times situation disastrous havent faced situation dangerous time said situation doesnt dangerous disastrous currently fact engineered way gazas power plant top priority target israeli warplanes years 2006 destroyed israeli airstrike opened year later destroyed although barely full capacity operated last continued supply gaza 30 percent electricity needs 400 megawatts 120 megawatts came israel nearly 30 megawatts came egypt total fell short gazas basic needs somehow gaza subsisted following ousting morsi egyptian military crackdown shortage stands 65 percent total interview un humanitarian news agency irin james w rawley humanitarian coordinator occupied palestinian territory depicted disturbing scene impact crisis reached essential services including hospitals clinics sewage water pumping stations israelis hand fine since last military encounter hamas past year great one economist quoted commander israels division watches gaza brigadier michael edelstein due massive drop number rockets fired gaza retaliation israeli attacks continued siege 50 rockets year compared 1500 last year children israels border towns sleep beds shelters longer go school armored buses according economist nov 16 israels reciprocal promise help revive gazas economy kept reported israel done everything power keep gaza crisis mode denying strip solar panels may generate electricity blocking gaza exports160 meantime gaza rotting away desperate find immediate remedies gaza prime minister ismail haniyeh issued new calls mahmoud abbas unity government lets one government one parliament one president haniyeh said recent speech quoted reuters fatah spokesman ahmed assaf dismissed call included nothing new meanwhile pa decided end subsidy fuel shipped gaza via israel increasing price 162 per liter 79 cents according ihab bessisso pa decision rescind gazas tax exemption fuel taken sending cheap fuel gaza unfair west bank residents according times fairness little reports economist al monitor media speak egyptian efforts reintroduce gazas former security chief fatah leader mohammed dahlan speedup anticipated collapse hamas government al monitor reported nov 21 dahlan notorious fatah commander defeated hamas 2007 among reasons close ties israeli intelligence met general alsisi cairo evidently purpose oust hamas gaza strip question suggest palestinian brigade mustered alarish could march gaza egyptian support defeat broad array hamas forces created last decade morsis muslim brotherhood picture least gaza vulnerable ever abbass supporters certainly dahlans may believe moment defeat brethren gaza | 678 |
<p />
<p>The Dow Jones stock average closed Friday at 17,137, despite the fact that the payroll jobs report was a measly 125,000 new jobs for August, an insufficient amount to keep up with the growth in the working age population.</p>
<p>The low 125,000 jobs figure is also inconsistent with the Bureau of Economic Analysis’&#160; second estimate of second quarter 2014 US GDP growth of 4.2 percent—a figure beyond the capability of the present-day US economy.</p>
<p>Clearly, the economic numbers are out of sync with one another.&#160; They are also out of sync with reality.</p>
<p>One of the reasons the stock market average is high is the massive liquidity the Federal Reserve has pumped into the banking system since 2008.&#160; Instead of going into consumer inflation, the money went into stock and bond price inflation.</p>
<p>Another reason for the artificial high stock market is the multi-trillion dollar buy-back of their own stock by US corporations.&#160; Many of these corporations have even borrowed from the banks in order to drive up their share prices with heavy purchases, thus maximizing executive bonuses and the values of stock options for board members. In effect, they are looting their own firms by loading the companies with debt in order to drive up executive and board incomes.</p>
<p>The stock market’s rise is not because consumer incomes and real retail sales are growing. Real family median incomes have been falling, and real retail sales, at best, are flat.</p>
<p>Let’s look at the composition of the pathetic 125,000 new jobs, and then we will examine whether these jobs are real or make-believe. (Keep in mind that payroll jobs include part-time jobs and that the number of payroll jobs is not the number of people employed, because many Americans make ends meet by working two and even three jobs.)</p>
<p>As I have reported for many years, the US economy no longer is capable of creating goods producing jobs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics August payroll jobs report shows zero manufacturing jobs.&#160; I read the other day that the US now has four or five times more people on food stamps than in manufacturing jobs.</p>
<p>The jobs of the New Economy are in lowly paid, nontradable domestic services—the jobs that characterize a Third World Economy.</p>
<p>Perhaps reflecting the collapse of retail sales, retail trade lost 8,400 jobs in August.</p>
<p>“Professional and business services” accounted for 47,000&#160; or 38% of August’s new jobs.&#160; Of these 47,000 new jobs, 49% consisted of “administrative and waste services,” largely temporary help services.</p>
<p>“Health care and social assistance” accounted for 42,700 or 34% of the new jobs of which 53% consists of “ambulatory health care services.”</p>
<p>Waitresses and bartenders accounted for 21,100 or 17% of the new jobs.</p>
<p>There were 8,000 new government jobs or 6% of the 125,000 new jobs.</p>
<p>That’s it.&#160; That is the job picture of “the world’s only superpower,” “the world’s largest economy,” “the world’s richest people.”&#160; It is the picture of employment in a Third World country.</p>
<p>And now for the real question:&#160; Are those 125,000 new jobs really there, or are they a statistical mirage?&#160; Statistician John Williams ( <a href="http://shadowstats.com" type="external">shadowstats.com</a>) says the jobs are a mirage produced by “the changing seasonal adjustments within the concurrent-seasonal adjustment process used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics” and by the birth/death model, which assumes that many more unreported new jobs are created each month by new start-up businesses than are lost from unreported business closings. Williams says that without the gimmicks used by BLS to create jobs that are not there, the actual change in August payrolls “was a solid contraction in excess of 125,000 jobs.”&#160; In other words, the economy did not gain 125,000 jobs.&#160; It lost 125,000 jobs.</p>
<p>Beginning with the Clinton regime, the American economy has only worked for the One Percent, and it only works for them because the government makes the 99 percent bail out the One Percent.&#160; The American economy is an Aristocratic Economy that works for the government-privileged few, but not for anyone else. To understand this hard fact, read Nomi Prins book, All The Presidents’ Bankers.</p>
<p>Of course, the real figures are more like the Ten Percent and the 90 percent. The One Percent caught on, because the upper reaches of that one percent are all multi-billionaires with more money than a family could spend in multiple lifetimes.</p>
<p>The time has passed when American corporations had a sense of social responsibility.</p>
<p>Two distinguished Americans writing in Daedalus, one of the few remaining publications not (yet) under corporate control, show that <a href="http://www.amacad.org/pdfs/Sylla_Gomory.pdf" type="external">US corporations have become socially dysfunctional</a> because they only serve shareholders and executives.</p>
<p>Historically in the US, corporations had responsibilities to their customers, employees, communities, and owners. In recent years this has been changed. Today corporations only have responsibilities to their shareholders.&#160; If profits go up, executives receive performance bonuses for serving shareholders.</p>
<p>Reducing executive success to one indicator has enormous negative consequences for everyone else. Americans are suffering in many ways.&#160; Their jobs, both manufacturing and professional tradable services such as software engineering, have been moved offshore and given to foreigners. Americans have been deprived of interest income so that the former bank officials in charge of the US government can save the banks that deregulation permitted to over leverage with debt and risk.</p>
<p>The costs of customer service has been shifted to customers who lose large amounts of time waiting to connect with a live person who can correct the mistake the company has made.&#160; The unleashing of greed as the only business virtue and pressure from Wall Street for greater profits has caused many service providers, such as telephone and Internet, to forego maintenance and upgrade of facilities in order to hold down costs and boost profits.&#160; My telephone ceased to work on September 3, and my service provider lacks sufficient work crews to repair my line prior to the evening of September 8.&#160; Last year my Internet provider could not reestablish my Internet service for 10 days.&#160; If you call about a bill or a service problem, the companies keep you on the line forever awaiting a real person while they try to sell you new services even though the ones you have purchased don’t work.</p>
<p>Sufficient service crews to provide satisfaction for customers means higher costs, less profits, less shareholder earnings and less performance bonuses for managers.&#160; Guess who pays the price for the large rewards to owners and managers—the customers.</p>
<p>I remember the days of AT&amp;T, a regulated monopoly.&#160; Everything worked.&#160; Any problem was fixed within two hours, barring a major catastrophe such as a hurricane or tornado.&#160; The telephone was answered no later than the third ring by a real person, not a voice recording, and the person who answered could fix any problem.&#160; There was no menu of a half dozen or dozen from which to select and to wait another quarter hour while being given sales pitches.</p>
<p>Profits made by imposing costs on customers are not legitimate profits.&#160; Profits made by relocating American jobs offshore are not legitimate profits. Profits achieved by bailouts of managerial mistakes by taxpayers who provide the bailout funds but don’t share in the bonuses are not legitimate profits.</p>
<p>Profits achieved by monopoly concentration, as now exists in the financial “services” industry, are not legitimate profits.</p>
<p>In America, franchises, chains, and big-box stores have destroyed a wide array of independent and family businesses that allowed enterprising Americans an independent existence.</p>
<p>Deregulated free-market America has created an economy that serves only the few, which explains the extraordinary concentration in the 21st century of income and wealth in fewer and fewer hands—another defining characteristic of a Third World country.</p>
<p>American capitalism has failed.&#160; It can no longer produce jobs for the work force, and its profits come from its political ability to impose costs on the American population.</p> | false | 1 | dow jones stock average closed friday 17137 despite fact payroll jobs report measly 125000 new jobs august insufficient amount keep growth working age population low 125000 jobs figure also inconsistent bureau economic analysis160 second estimate second quarter 2014 us gdp growth 42 percenta figure beyond capability presentday us economy clearly economic numbers sync one another160 also sync reality one reasons stock market average high massive liquidity federal reserve pumped banking system since 2008160 instead going consumer inflation money went stock bond price inflation another reason artificial high stock market multitrillion dollar buyback stock us corporations160 many corporations even borrowed banks order drive share prices heavy purchases thus maximizing executive bonuses values stock options board members effect looting firms loading companies debt order drive executive board incomes stock markets rise consumer incomes real retail sales growing real family median incomes falling real retail sales best flat lets look composition pathetic 125000 new jobs examine whether jobs real makebelieve keep mind payroll jobs include parttime jobs number payroll jobs number people employed many americans make ends meet working two even three jobs reported many years us economy longer capable creating goods producing jobs bureau labor statistics august payroll jobs report shows zero manufacturing jobs160 read day us four five times people food stamps manufacturing jobs jobs new economy lowly paid nontradable domestic servicesthe jobs characterize third world economy perhaps reflecting collapse retail sales retail trade lost 8400 jobs august professional business services accounted 47000160 38 augusts new jobs160 47000 new jobs 49 consisted administrative waste services largely temporary help services health care social assistance accounted 42700 34 new jobs 53 consists ambulatory health care services waitresses bartenders accounted 21100 17 new jobs 8000 new government jobs 6 125000 new jobs thats it160 job picture worlds superpower worlds largest economy worlds richest people160 picture employment third world country real question160 125000 new jobs really statistical mirage160 statistician john williams shadowstatscom says jobs mirage produced changing seasonal adjustments within concurrentseasonal adjustment process used bureau labor statistics birthdeath model assumes many unreported new jobs created month new startup businesses lost unreported business closings williams says without gimmicks used bls create jobs actual change august payrolls solid contraction excess 125000 jobs160 words economy gain 125000 jobs160 lost 125000 jobs beginning clinton regime american economy worked one percent works government makes 99 percent bail one percent160 american economy aristocratic economy works governmentprivileged anyone else understand hard fact read nomi prins book presidents bankers course real figures like ten percent 90 percent one percent caught upper reaches one percent multibillionaires money family could spend multiple lifetimes time passed american corporations sense social responsibility two distinguished americans writing daedalus one remaining publications yet corporate control show us corporations become socially dysfunctional serve shareholders executives historically us corporations responsibilities customers employees communities owners recent years changed today corporations responsibilities shareholders160 profits go executives receive performance bonuses serving shareholders reducing executive success one indicator enormous negative consequences everyone else americans suffering many ways160 jobs manufacturing professional tradable services software engineering moved offshore given foreigners americans deprived interest income former bank officials charge us government save banks deregulation permitted leverage debt risk costs customer service shifted customers lose large amounts time waiting connect live person correct mistake company made160 unleashing greed business virtue pressure wall street greater profits caused many service providers telephone internet forego maintenance upgrade facilities order hold costs boost profits160 telephone ceased work september 3 service provider lacks sufficient work crews repair line prior evening september 8160 last year internet provider could reestablish internet service 10 days160 call bill service problem companies keep line forever awaiting real person try sell new services even though ones purchased dont work sufficient service crews provide satisfaction customers means higher costs less profits less shareholder earnings less performance bonuses managers160 guess pays price large rewards owners managersthe customers remember days atampt regulated monopoly160 everything worked160 problem fixed within two hours barring major catastrophe hurricane tornado160 telephone answered later third ring real person voice recording person answered could fix problem160 menu half dozen dozen select wait another quarter hour given sales pitches profits made imposing costs customers legitimate profits160 profits made relocating american jobs offshore legitimate profits profits achieved bailouts managerial mistakes taxpayers provide bailout funds dont share bonuses legitimate profits profits achieved monopoly concentration exists financial services industry legitimate profits america franchises chains bigbox stores destroyed wide array independent family businesses allowed enterprising americans independent existence deregulated freemarket america created economy serves explains extraordinary concentration 21st century income wealth fewer fewer handsanother defining characteristic third world country american capitalism failed160 longer produce jobs work force profits come political ability impose costs american population | 770 |
<p><a href="http://variety.com/tag/debra-messing/" type="external">Debra Messing</a> was 3 years old when her parents first noticed her singing and dancing around their Rhode Island home. She was about 7 years old when she saw her first Broadway play — “Annie” — and explicitly told her parents she wanted to perform, too. (“I remember it just blowing my mind,” Messing says.) And on Oct. 6, she will receive a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.</p>
<p>Messing is arguably best known for her role as designer Grace Adler on NBC’s “Will &amp; Grace,” which is now seeing a revival on the Peacock, but beyond that sitcom, she has starred on stage and screens big and small in a 2½-decade career.</p>
<p>“I always think that everything starts with the writing. I always pick my parts because of the writing,” she says.</p>
<p>After seeing “Annie,” Messing says her childhood, which often included playing by the pond and watching horses being born at the farm next door, became much more “single-minded.” She attended a performing arts camp, took part in all of her high school plays and then went on to Brandeis University and NYU’s Tisch School of the Arts, the latter where she earned her master’s degree in acting.</p>
<p>“We studied all of the classics,” Messing fondly recalls of her early training in Shakespeare, Pinter and Ibsen. “And then we did ‘Angels in America.’ At the time it was a five-hour play, and Tony Kushner wanted to use our class to workshop it before he brought it to Broadway.”</p>
<p>It was 1993, and Messing got the role of Harper in “Perestroika” as an agoraphobe who returns to reality after part one’s drug-fueled fantasies. She caught the eye of a talent agent who saw her performance and signed her before she even graduated from the program.</p>
<p>“At that point, my goal became to work in all of the best regional theaters in the country and play all of the great female roles,” she says.</p>
<p>Messing did set out to fulfill that dream — her first job out of grad school was playing debutante Cecily in “The Importance of Being Earnest” in Seattle — but very quickly realized the lifestyle that came from living out of a suitcase was not truly for her.</p>
<p>[embedded content]</p>
<p>“I told my agents I wasn’t going to audition for anything that’s out of town, and they were kind of shocked because 99% of the work is out of New York,” Messing recalls.</p>
<p>But she ended up not having to wait long before a local acting job came her way. Just two months later she was cast as Polly Draper’s understudy in John Patrick Shanley’s Off Broadway version of “Four Dogs and a Bone.” Opposite Draper in the other female lead role was Mary-Louise Parker, and both women were busy juggling multiple projects, so it wasn’t long before the call came for the understudy. Not only did Messing end up going on for Draper, but also for Parker, whose own understudy abruptly quit. Messing went back and forth playing those very different roles — one was a 30-something woman and one a teenager — for seven months before moving onto Paul Rudnick’s “The Naked Truth,” and simultaneously, her first film role, “A Walk in the Clouds.”</p>
<p>In addition to that performance of “Annie” when Messing was still in elementary school, television comedies and their leading ladies had a big influence on her youth.</p>
<p>“I grew up watching ‘I Love Lucy’ and Carol Burnett and Madeline Kahn and Mary Tyler Moore. These women really shaped me,” Messing says.</p>
<p>So when thinking about committing more time to television in her career that is what Messing gravitated toward.</p>
<p>Sean Hayes, Messing’s long-time co-star on “Will &amp; Grace,” considers her a “tour de force” within any genre and has not been surprised to see her jump effortlessly between them, in multiple media, through the years. “Let’s face it, when you have as much talent as <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/features/debra-messing-global-ambassdor-psi-1202576643/" type="external">Debra Messing</a>, you can pretty much shine in anything you do,” Hayes says.</p>
<p>“When you have as much talent as Debra Messing, you can pretty much shine in anything you do.”Sean Hayes</p>
<p>With Hollywood officially calling, Messing began to expand her resume, nabbing her first primetime television guest spot on “NYPD Blue,” which led to a general meeting at Fox. Execs there had a script for which she felt she was perfect: a relationship sitcom in the vein of “Mad About You.”</p>
<p>The show was “Ned and Stacey,” about a marriage of convenience whose titular couple falls in love after the fact, and Messing had already auditioned, but initially series executive producer Michael J. Weithorn told her she wasn’t right for it.</p>
<p>“He said, ‘I’m looking for a neurotic Jew from New York. I did not see that in your audition,’” Messing remembers. “So I asked him to let me try it again and said, ‘If you don’t like it, I will leave, and you will never see me again, and no one will call you again to make you see me. But just give me one chance to do something different.’”</p>
<p>After Messing did a chemistry read with Thomas Haden Church, there were no questions that she was the one for the role, though, Church says. “We met on a Sunday afternoon, and Debra and I rehearsed for a few hours at least. I just remember that million-watt smile,” he says.</p>
<p>Church was also struck by Messing’s confidence and ability, considering he had never seen her do comedy before. “Debra was so dedicated to creating a unique character. She managed to carve out what her journey was going to be as an actor, and it was never going to be any zany homage to the comedy actresses she was being compared to. What I really loved was she was not at all afraid to challenge traditional four-camera comedy or idea of that character. She knew who she was, and she knew her ideas should at least be heard.”</p>
<p>Although Messing found a comfortable groove in the sitcom schedule — and although she was already telling her agents she wanted to work with James Burrows on such a show for NBC — she didn’t want to give up on her love of theater. “Ned and Stacey” ended after only two years in the mid-1990s and she took another play (Donald Margulies’ “Collected Stories”) and then joined the cast of ABC’s short-lived sci-fi drama, “Prey.”</p>
<p>“Prey” was Messing’s first full-time foray into the single-camera schedule, which proved to be very different from what she had experienced thus far. So when her agent called with the script for “Will &amp; Grace,” the NBC sitcom that was going to be directed by Burrows — exactly what Messing told them she wanted — she initially turned them down. “I told them I was going to sleep for three months and to call me then,” Messing laughs.</p>
<p>Messing credits her agents Lindsay Porter and Leslie Siebert for their insistence that she meet with “Will &amp; Grace” creators Max Mutchnick and David Kohan.</p>
<p>“My first concern at the time was that they’d portray the gay characters in a way that was different, but then the second thing was that I didn’t just want to be the pretty girl who sets up the funny guys,” Messing admits. She told them: “The way I can service this, and what I can bring to the mix, is physical comedy.”</p>
<p>They agreed, and Messing then met with Eric McCormack, who remembers how she laughed at the things he was saying even before they started read ing the scene. “We immediately hit it off, and we all said, ‘That’s what the show is.’ It doesn’t matter what we write, we have to have that ingredient,” McCormack says.</p>
<p>One of McCormack’s favorite memories from working with Messing is still the fifth season premiere of “Will &amp; Grace” in which their characters get in an argument over the fact that they had agreed to have a baby together, but then she backs out.</p>
<p>“I’ll never forget feeling the audience’s hearts tighten as we started to yell at each other. There were no mistakes. It was a perfect, raw scene that ends with us telling each other to go to hell,” McCormack says. “And there was this standing ovation that you don’t often get on a sitcom, and we knew that was the result of honing our relationship.”</p>
<p>“Will &amp; Grace” was eight years of “explosive fun and joy and laughter and yes, a lot of hard physical work,” Messing acknowledges. During those years, though, Messing also dabbled in film roles (like “The Wedding Date”) when on hiatus from the hit sitcom.</p>
<p>“As actors, we’re really not built to play the same role for years on end. The reason why we became actors was because we loved telling different stories and transforming into different characters,” Messing points out.</p>
<p>When “Will &amp; Grace” came to an end, therefore, she was ready to flex a slightly different muscle with the dramedy miniseries “The Starter Wife” in 2007 that then turned into a full television series in 2008, on which she also served as a producer.</p>
<p>“The Starter Wife” only lasted one season as a series, and Messing ended up taking a short break from acting to be a full-time mom and figure out what she wanted to do next for the place she felt she was at creatively in her life.</p>
<p>“I wasn’t reading comedy pilots that were as funny as the pilot I read for ‘Will &amp; Grace,’” she says. “But the next thing that perked me up was ‘Smash.’ That pilot was the best I’d read, and that was the only thing that I felt strongly enough that I would move for.”</p>
<p>Theresa Rebeck’s 2012 dramatic send-up of the theater community that gave Messing her start saw her taking on the role of a Broadway playwright working on a new script about Marilyn Monroe.</p>
<p>“I thought it was great to see her take her Debra-ness and adapt that, for sure,” McCormack says of watching Messing on “Smash.” “I think it’s great because people do see someone like Debra who can be like Lucille Ball and so fun then turn it off to play serious, play wounded, play angry, and it’s exciting because that’s what an actor’s supposed to do. That kind of range is what we’re supposed to bring to the table.”</p>
<p>“Smash” was cancelled after two seasons on NBC, which “saddened” Messing but allowed her to get back to her theater roots again with the Broadway play “Outside Mullingar” in 2014 before going back to NBC with the detective drama “The Mysteries of Laura” later that year.</p>
<p>“And now here we are back at ‘Will &amp; Grace,’” Messing laughs. “I never would have conceived that was possible, but I’m so glad it has been. I grew up out in the woods, and so TV was really the thing that made me happy. I just loved stories and I loved laughing. To be able to do this for so long has been a dream.”</p> | false | 1 | debra messing 3 years old parents first noticed singing dancing around rhode island home 7 years old saw first broadway play annie explicitly told parents wanted perform remember blowing mind messing says oct 6 receive star hollywood walk fame messing arguably best known role designer grace adler nbcs amp grace seeing revival peacock beyond sitcom starred stage screens big small 2½decade career always think everything starts writing always pick parts writing says seeing annie messing says childhood often included playing pond watching horses born farm next door became much singleminded attended performing arts camp took part high school plays went brandeis university nyus tisch school arts latter earned masters degree acting studied classics messing fondly recalls early training shakespeare pinter ibsen angels america time fivehour play tony kushner wanted use class workshop brought broadway 1993 messing got role harper perestroika agoraphobe returns reality part ones drugfueled fantasies caught eye talent agent saw performance signed even graduated program point goal became work best regional theaters country play great female roles says messing set fulfill dream first job grad school playing debutante cecily importance earnest seattle quickly realized lifestyle came living suitcase truly embedded content told agents wasnt going audition anything thats town kind shocked 99 work new york messing recalls ended wait long local acting job came way two months later cast polly drapers understudy john patrick shanleys broadway version four dogs bone opposite draper female lead role marylouise parker women busy juggling multiple projects wasnt long call came understudy messing end going draper also parker whose understudy abruptly quit messing went back forth playing different roles one 30something woman one teenager seven months moving onto paul rudnicks naked truth simultaneously first film role walk clouds addition performance annie messing still elementary school television comedies leading ladies big influence youth grew watching love lucy carol burnett madeline kahn mary tyler moore women really shaped messing says thinking committing time television career messing gravitated toward sean hayes messings longtime costar amp grace considers tour de force within genre surprised see jump effortlessly multiple media years lets face much talent debra messing pretty much shine anything hayes says much talent debra messing pretty much shine anything dosean hayes hollywood officially calling messing began expand resume nabbing first primetime television guest spot nypd blue led general meeting fox execs script felt perfect relationship sitcom vein mad show ned stacey marriage convenience whose titular couple falls love fact messing already auditioned initially series executive producer michael j weithorn told wasnt right said im looking neurotic jew new york see audition messing remembers asked let try said dont like leave never see one call make see give one chance something different messing chemistry read thomas haden church questions one role though church says met sunday afternoon debra rehearsed hours least remember millionwatt smile says church also struck messings confidence ability considering never seen comedy debra dedicated creating unique character managed carve journey going actor never going zany homage comedy actresses compared really loved afraid challenge traditional fourcamera comedy idea character knew knew ideas least heard although messing found comfortable groove sitcom schedule although already telling agents wanted work james burrows show nbc didnt want give love theater ned stacey ended two years mid1990s took another play donald margulies collected stories joined cast abcs shortlived scifi drama prey prey messings first fulltime foray singlecamera schedule proved different experienced thus far agent called script amp grace nbc sitcom going directed burrows exactly messing told wanted initially turned told going sleep three months call messing laughs messing credits agents lindsay porter leslie siebert insistence meet amp grace creators max mutchnick david kohan first concern time theyd portray gay characters way different second thing didnt want pretty girl sets funny guys messing admits told way service bring mix physical comedy agreed messing met eric mccormack remembers laughed things saying even started read ing scene immediately hit said thats show doesnt matter write ingredient mccormack says one mccormacks favorite memories working messing still fifth season premiere amp grace characters get argument fact agreed baby together backs ill never forget feeling audiences hearts tighten started yell mistakes perfect raw scene ends us telling go hell mccormack says standing ovation dont often get sitcom knew result honing relationship amp grace eight years explosive fun joy laughter yes lot hard physical work messing acknowledges years though messing also dabbled film roles like wedding date hiatus hit sitcom actors really built play role years end reason became actors loved telling different stories transforming different characters messing points amp grace came end therefore ready flex slightly different muscle dramedy miniseries starter wife 2007 turned full television series 2008 also served producer starter wife lasted one season series messing ended taking short break acting fulltime mom figure wanted next place felt creatively life wasnt reading comedy pilots funny pilot read amp grace says next thing perked smash pilot best id read thing felt strongly enough would move theresa rebecks 2012 dramatic sendup theater community gave messing start saw taking role broadway playwright working new script marilyn monroe thought great see take debraness adapt sure mccormack says watching messing smash think great people see someone like debra like lucille ball fun turn play serious play wounded play angry exciting thats actors supposed kind range supposed bring table smash cancelled two seasons nbc saddened messing allowed get back theater roots broadway play outside mullingar 2014 going back nbc detective drama mysteries laura later year back amp grace messing laughs never would conceived possible im glad grew woods tv really thing made happy loved stories loved laughing able long dream | 930 |
<p>After the underclassman deadline expired Monday, the next step of the NFL Draft process is to add about 100 underclassmen to this draft class. Then there is the scouting all-star circuit, followed by the Combine and a series of pro days and individual workouts.</p>
<p>Arguably the deepest position in this year’s draft class, cornerback, also is the most well-represented position in this mock draft scenario. Alabama’s Minkah Fitzpatrick is a near lock for a top-10 pick and Ohio State’s Denzel Ward shouldn’t have to wait much longer to hear his name.</p>
<p>The next three corners in this mock draft: Iowa’s <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Josh-Jackson/" type="external">Josh Jackson</a> put himself on the first-round radar with his ball production in 2017, UCF’s Mike Hughes emerged as a lock-down player for the undefeated Knights, and Louisville’s Jaire Alexander put together strong tape that gives off a <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe-Haden/" type="external">Joe Haden</a> vibe.</p>
<p>1. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cleveland-Browns/" type="external">Cleveland Browns</a> – Sam Darnold, QB, USC</p>
<p>The Browns’ search for a long-term answer at quarterback will continue into the off-season. Darnold’s turnovers stand out, but so do his intangibles, passing instincts and ability to move the pocket and create plays. Three months before the draft, Darnold is the current favorite to go No. 1 to the Browns.</p>
<p>2. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New_York_Giants/" type="external">New York Giants</a> – Josh Rosen, QB, UCLA</p>
<p>The Giants don’t expect to be drafting in the top three very often and with the future of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Eli_Manning/" type="external">Eli Manning</a> very much up in the air, the Giants should target the quarterback of the future. Rosen is far from a clean prospect, but his natural passing skills and arm talent are starter quality.</p>
<p>3. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Indianapolis-Colts/" type="external">Indianapolis Colts</a> – Bradley Chubb, DE, N.C. State</p>
<p>Entering his second draft, Colts’ general manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chris-Ballard/" type="external">Chris Ballard</a> has plenty of holes to fill. The defense lacks impact players on the edge who can put pressure on the quarterback, but Chubb would change that. The N.C. State pass rusher is a strong candidate to be the first non-quarterback drafted.</p>
<p>4. Cleveland Browns (from Houston) – Minkah Fitzpatrick, CB, Alabama</p>
<p>With a league-low 13 takeaways on the season, the Browns lack playmakers in the secondary. Regardless if he is playing cornerback, free safety or nickel, Fitzpatrick has the intelligence, leadership and physical skill-set to be a game-changer.</p>
<p>5. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Denver_Broncos/" type="external">Denver Broncos</a> – Josh Allen, QB, Wyoming</p>
<p>Denver has major question marks at quarterback and there are obvious connections to make between the Broncos and the Wyoming quarterback. In a controlled setting like the Senior Bowl, Allen has a chance to shine under the direction of the Broncos’ coaching staff, and it is fair to assume that <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Elway/" type="external">John Elway</a> will be intrigued with his elite physical traits.</p>
<p>6. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-York-Jets/" type="external">New York Jets</a> – Saquon Barkley, RB, Penn State</p>
<p>With three quarterbacks off the board in this scenario, the Jets could look to Oklahoma’s Baker Mayfield. However, a playmaker like Barkley still on the board would be hard to pass up.</p>
<p>7. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tampa-Bay-Buccaneers/" type="external">Tampa Bay Buccaneers</a> – Quenton Nelson, OG, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Notre_Dame/" type="external">Notre Dame</a></p>
<p>The Buccaneers need to do some reshuffling and upgrading on the offensive line. An offensive guard in the top seven picks isn’t a sexy selection, but Nelson is arguably the best player in the 2018 draft class and would help stabilize Tampa’s interior protection.</p>
<p>8. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago_Bears/" type="external">Chicago Bears</a> – Denzel Ward, CB, Ohio State</p>
<p>Chicago lacks playmakers on the outside at cornerback and needs to find upgrades this off-season. Ward lacks ideal height, but his feet, hips and eyes are what make him a potentially special cover man.</p>
<p>9. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/San-Francisco-49ers/" type="external">San Francisco 49ers</a> – Roquan Smith, LB, Georgia</p>
<p>Combining the talents of Smith with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Reuben-Foster/" type="external">Reuben Foster</a> would remind 49ers’ fans of Patrick Willis and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/NaVorro-Bowman/" type="external">NaVorro Bowman</a>. Smith would be drafted to be the starting WILL linebacker, but with Foster’s injury history and off-field concerns, he would also provide insurance.</p>
<p>10. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Oakland-Raiders/" type="external">Oakland Raiders</a> – Vita Vea, DT, Washington</p>
<p>The Raiders have one of the weakest interior defensive-line units in the AFC and need to upgrade from the inside out on defense. At 340 pounds, Vea is a rare player with the power to handle double-teams and athleticism to chase down ballcarriers on the perimeter.</p>
<p>11. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Miami-Dolphins/" type="external">Miami Dolphins</a> – Tremaine Edmunds, LB, Virginia Tech</p>
<p>Quarterback and offensive line are options here, but the Dolphins also need to make upgrades on the defensive side of the ball, including at linebacker. Edmunds has the size of a defensive end, but moves more like a safety and displays the budding instincts to be a future NFL Pro Bowler.</p>
<p>12. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cincinnati-Bengals/" type="external">Cincinnati Bengals</a> – Connor Williams, OT, Texas</p>
<p>The Bengals need to address offensive tackle this off-season, possibly with this pick. After putting together first-round tape in 2016, Williams had a roller coaster 2017 season, starting with a poor September followed by a mid-season knee injury and then a strong finish.</p>
<p>13. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Green_Bay_Packers/" type="external">Green Bay Packers</a> – Marcus Davenport, DE/OLB, Texas-San Antonio</p>
<p>With the future of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Clay-Matthews/" type="external">Clay Matthews</a> Jr. in a Packers’ uniform in doubt, Green Bay will be looking to add another pass-rush option to the arsenal. Davenport is a good-looking athlete with a hoops background and the potential to be a difference-maker.</p>
<p>14. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Washington-Redskins/" type="external">Washington Redskins</a> – Da’Ron Payne, DT, Alabama</p>
<p>After drafting an Alabama defensive lineman in the first round last year ( <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jonathan-Allen/" type="external">Jonathan Allen</a>), the Redskins could repeat the recipe this April. Payne moves very well for his size and has the upper body power to bully blockers, allowing coaches to line him up at various positions.</p>
<p>15. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Arizona-Cardinals/" type="external">Arizona Cardinals</a> – Baker Mayfield, QB, Oklahoma</p>
<p>The quarterback position is currently a question mark on the Cardinals’ depth chart and Mayfield is one of the possible answers. He would present a considerable change from the retired <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carson_Palmer/" type="external">Carson Palmer</a>, but that is not exactly a bad thing.</p>
<p>16. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Baltimore-Ravens/" type="external">Baltimore Ravens</a> – Calvin Ridley, WR, Alabama</p>
<p>The Ravens have only two wideouts with 20-plus catches this season ( <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Wallace/" type="external">Mike Wallace</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jeremy_Maclin/" type="external">Jeremy Maclin</a>) and need to add a young playmaker to help quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Flacco/" type="external">Joe Flacco</a>. Ridley offers NFL-ready route-running and the play speed to create — both before and after the catch.</p>
<p>17. Los Angeles Chargers – Derwin James, SS, Florida State</p>
<p>Picking a safety this high in the draft would buck the trend of what the Chargers usually do in the first round, but James has the athletic profile and NFL ceiling that should force the front office to think outside the box.</p>
<p>18. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Seattle-Seahawks/" type="external">Seattle Seahawks</a> – Josh Jackson, CB, Iowa</p>
<p>One of the break-through prospects this season, Jackson was No. 1 in ball production (26 passes defended, eight interceptions), and he offers the size, length and instincts that fit well in Seattle.</p>
<p>19. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dallas-Cowboys/" type="external">Dallas Cowboys</a> – Maurice Hurst, DT, Michigan</p>
<p>Most Cowboys fans weren’t thrilled with a Michigan defensive lineman in the first round last year, but they should be intrigued if Dallas goes back to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ann_Arbor/" type="external">Ann Arbor</a> to upgrade the defensive front. Hurst is a disruptive three-technique prospect who offers the quickness and power to surge through gaps and make plays in the backfield.</p>
<p>20. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Detroit-Lions/" type="external">Detroit Lions</a> – Billy Price, C, Ohio State</p>
<p>The Lions drafted an Ohio State offensive lineman (Taylor Decker) in Bob Quinn’s first draft as general manager and he could return to Columbus for another one. Price is a day one starter at either center or guard and will help stabilize the interior of Detroit’s line.</p>
<p>21. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Buffalo-Bills/" type="external">Buffalo Bills</a> – Mike McGlinchey, OT, Notre Dame</p>
<p>The Bills need to make some changes on the offensive line. McGlinchey has experience on both sides of the offensive line and could help inside at guard if needed with his power as a run blocker.</p>
<p>22. Buffalo Bills (from Kansas City) – Christian Kirk, WR, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Texas_A&amp;M/" type="external">Texas A&amp;M</a></p>
<p>The Bills traded for Kelvin Benjamin and drafted Zay Jones in the second round last year, but there is still a need for a playmaker like Kirk. The former Texas A&amp;M receiver would also be an immediate upgrade as a return man.</p>
<p>23. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/los-angeles-rams/" type="external">Los Angeles Rams</a> – Mike Hughes, CB, Central Florida</p>
<p>Regardless if <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Trumaine-Johnson/" type="external">Trumaine Johnson</a> returns beyond this season, the Rams need help at the cornerback position. Hughes, who is at his best in press-man coverage, emerged this past season as one of college football’s top cover men and returners.</p>
<p>24. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carolina_Panthers/" type="external">Carolina Panthers</a> – Orlando Brown, OT, Oklahoma</p>
<p>The Panthers have some questions on the offensive line and one of the answers could come at this pick. Brown blocks out the sun with his size, which also limits his movement, but he does just enough to get the job done.</p>
<p>25. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tennessee-Titans/" type="external">Tennessee Titans</a> – Sam Hubbard, DE, Ohio State</p>
<p>Tennessee’s defensive front hasn’t created enough pressure on the quarterback, making pass rusher a likely option here. Hubbard thrives with his athleticism and intelligence to break down the edge and cause disruption.</p>
<p>26. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Atlanta-Falcons/" type="external">Atlanta Falcons</a> – Harrison Phillips, DT, Stanford</p>
<p>With Dontari Poe currently on a one-year deal, the Falcons could be in the mix for a versatile defensive tackle in the early rounds. Phillips was a one-man wrecking crew at the nose for Stanford with 103 tackles, which led all FBS defensive linemen.</p>
<p>27. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-Orleans-Saints/" type="external">New Orleans Saints</a> – Dallas Goedert, TE, South Dakota State</p>
<p>New Orleans has struggled to fill the shoes of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jimmy-Graham/" type="external">Jimmy Graham</a> since he departed via trade. Goedert has Pro Bowl potential with his athleticism for his size.</p>
<p>28. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pittsburgh_Steelers/" type="external">Pittsburgh Steelers</a> – Ronnie Harrison, SS, Alabama</p>
<p>The Steelers have dealt with several issues in the back half of the defense all season, something that was obvious in the loss to the Jaguars. Adding a player with Harrison’s downhill speed and toughness would be a good start to rebuilding the Pittsburgh image on defense.</p>
<p>29. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jacksonville-Jaguars/" type="external">Jacksonville Jaguars</a> – Courtland Sutton, WR, SMU</p>
<p>With <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Allen-Robinson/" type="external">Allen Robinson</a> and Marqise Lee both free agents, the Jaguars will potentially be in the market for an athletic big man for the outside. Sutton is unpolished in several areas, but he plays like a power forward on the football field.</p>
<p>30. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Philadelphia-Eagles/" type="external">Philadelphia Eagles</a> – Chukwuma Okorafor, OT, Western Michigan</p>
<p>With Jason Peters coming off ACL surgery and turning 36 years old in the off-season, the Eagles would be wise to upgrade the offensive tackle position. Okorafor is still in the development phase, but his traits have NFL scouts drooling, boasting impressive movements for his 330-pound frame.</p>
<p>31. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Minnesota-Vikings/" type="external">Minnesota Vikings</a> – Taven Bryan, DT, Florida</p>
<p>The Vikings have one of the NFL’s top defensive units, but are always looking to add depth in the trenches. Bryan is still figuring things out, but his athletic movement skills for a three-technique jump off the screen.</p>
<p>32. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New_England_Patriots/" type="external">New England Patriots</a> – Jaire Alexander, CB, Louisville</p>
<p>With the future of <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Malcolm-Butler/" type="external">Malcolm Butler</a> in New England up in the air, the Patriots will be doing homework on this year’s cornerback class. Alexander lacks elite size, but he puts himself in position to make plays on the ball.</p> | false | 1 | underclassman deadline expired monday next step nfl draft process add 100 underclassmen draft class scouting allstar circuit followed combine series pro days individual workouts arguably deepest position years draft class cornerback also wellrepresented position mock draft scenario alabamas minkah fitzpatrick near lock top10 pick ohio states denzel ward shouldnt wait much longer hear name next three corners mock draft iowas josh jackson put firstround radar ball production 2017 ucfs mike hughes emerged lockdown player undefeated knights louisvilles jaire alexander put together strong tape gives joe haden vibe 1 cleveland browns sam darnold qb usc browns search longterm answer quarterback continue offseason darnolds turnovers stand intangibles passing instincts ability move pocket create plays three months draft darnold current favorite go 1 browns 2 new york giants josh rosen qb ucla giants dont expect drafting top three often future eli manning much air giants target quarterback future rosen far clean prospect natural passing skills arm talent starter quality 3 indianapolis colts bradley chubb de nc state entering second draft colts general manager chris ballard plenty holes fill defense lacks impact players edge put pressure quarterback chubb would change nc state pass rusher strong candidate first nonquarterback drafted 4 cleveland browns houston minkah fitzpatrick cb alabama leaguelow 13 takeaways season browns lack playmakers secondary regardless playing cornerback free safety nickel fitzpatrick intelligence leadership physical skillset gamechanger 5 denver broncos josh allen qb wyoming denver major question marks quarterback obvious connections make broncos wyoming quarterback controlled setting like senior bowl allen chance shine direction broncos coaching staff fair assume john elway intrigued elite physical traits 6 new york jets saquon barkley rb penn state three quarterbacks board scenario jets could look oklahomas baker mayfield however playmaker like barkley still board would hard pass 7 tampa bay buccaneers quenton nelson og notre dame buccaneers need reshuffling upgrading offensive line offensive guard top seven picks isnt sexy selection nelson arguably best player 2018 draft class would help stabilize tampas interior protection 8 chicago bears denzel ward cb ohio state chicago lacks playmakers outside cornerback needs find upgrades offseason ward lacks ideal height feet hips eyes make potentially special cover man 9 san francisco 49ers roquan smith lb georgia combining talents smith reuben foster would remind 49ers fans patrick willis navorro bowman smith would drafted starting linebacker fosters injury history offfield concerns would also provide insurance 10 oakland raiders vita vea dt washington raiders one weakest interior defensiveline units afc need upgrade inside defense 340 pounds vea rare player power handle doubleteams athleticism chase ballcarriers perimeter 11 miami dolphins tremaine edmunds lb virginia tech quarterback offensive line options dolphins also need make upgrades defensive side ball including linebacker edmunds size defensive end moves like safety displays budding instincts future nfl pro bowler 12 cincinnati bengals connor williams ot texas bengals need address offensive tackle offseason possibly pick putting together firstround tape 2016 williams roller coaster 2017 season starting poor september followed midseason knee injury strong finish 13 green bay packers marcus davenport deolb texassan antonio future clay matthews jr packers uniform doubt green bay looking add another passrush option arsenal davenport goodlooking athlete hoops background potential differencemaker 14 washington redskins daron payne dt alabama drafting alabama defensive lineman first round last year jonathan allen redskins could repeat recipe april payne moves well size upper body power bully blockers allowing coaches line various positions 15 arizona cardinals baker mayfield qb oklahoma quarterback position currently question mark cardinals depth chart mayfield one possible answers would present considerable change retired carson palmer exactly bad thing 16 baltimore ravens calvin ridley wr alabama ravens two wideouts 20plus catches season mike wallace jeremy maclin need add young playmaker help quarterback joe flacco ridley offers nflready routerunning play speed create catch 17 los angeles chargers derwin james ss florida state picking safety high draft would buck trend chargers usually first round james athletic profile nfl ceiling force front office think outside box 18 seattle seahawks josh jackson cb iowa one breakthrough prospects season jackson 1 ball production 26 passes defended eight interceptions offers size length instincts fit well seattle 19 dallas cowboys maurice hurst dt michigan cowboys fans werent thrilled michigan defensive lineman first round last year intrigued dallas goes back ann arbor upgrade defensive front hurst disruptive threetechnique prospect offers quickness power surge gaps make plays backfield 20 detroit lions billy price c ohio state lions drafted ohio state offensive lineman taylor decker bob quinns first draft general manager could return columbus another one price day one starter either center guard help stabilize interior detroits line 21 buffalo bills mike mcglinchey ot notre dame bills need make changes offensive line mcglinchey experience sides offensive line could help inside guard needed power run blocker 22 buffalo bills kansas city christian kirk wr texas aampm bills traded kelvin benjamin drafted zay jones second round last year still need playmaker like kirk former texas aampm receiver would also immediate upgrade return man 23 los angeles rams mike hughes cb central florida regardless trumaine johnson returns beyond season rams need help cornerback position hughes best pressman coverage emerged past season one college footballs top cover men returners 24 carolina panthers orlando brown ot oklahoma panthers questions offensive line one answers could come pick brown blocks sun size also limits movement enough get job done 25 tennessee titans sam hubbard de ohio state tennessees defensive front hasnt created enough pressure quarterback making pass rusher likely option hubbard thrives athleticism intelligence break edge cause disruption 26 atlanta falcons harrison phillips dt stanford dontari poe currently oneyear deal falcons could mix versatile defensive tackle early rounds phillips oneman wrecking crew nose stanford 103 tackles led fbs defensive linemen 27 new orleans saints dallas goedert te south dakota state new orleans struggled fill shoes jimmy graham since departed via trade goedert pro bowl potential athleticism size 28 pittsburgh steelers ronnie harrison ss alabama steelers dealt several issues back half defense season something obvious loss jaguars adding player harrisons downhill speed toughness would good start rebuilding pittsburgh image defense 29 jacksonville jaguars courtland sutton wr smu allen robinson marqise lee free agents jaguars potentially market athletic big man outside sutton unpolished several areas plays like power forward football field 30 philadelphia eagles chukwuma okorafor ot western michigan jason peters coming acl surgery turning 36 years old offseason eagles would wise upgrade offensive tackle position okorafor still development phase traits nfl scouts drooling boasting impressive movements 330pound frame 31 minnesota vikings taven bryan dt florida vikings one nfls top defensive units always looking add depth trenches bryan still figuring things athletic movement skills threetechnique jump screen 32 new england patriots jaire alexander cb louisville future malcolm butler new england air patriots homework years cornerback class alexander lacks elite size puts position make plays ball | 1,122 |
<p>Clearly frustrated by the Pentagon’s ineffective strategies, Donald Trump has vowed to fire some of his top generals and aggressively gain ground in Afghanistan. But will the US president be able to prevail in a 16-year war where his two predecessors failed?</p>
<p>Dragging on longer than the Vietnam and Iraq campaigns, Afghanistan is becoming yet another swamp Trump wants to drain in keeping with his colorful election campaign. George W. Bush presided over the two post-9/11 military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq and Barack Obama promised to end them – but the everlasting Afghan war relentlessly rolls on.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/398625-trump-afghanistan-military-reshuffle/" type="external" /></p>
<p>During a high-profile situation room meeting in July, Trump reportedly told his national security team it’s time for a rapid breakthrough in Afghanistan.</p>
<p>“We are not winning,” he said, as cited in an NBC report. “We are losing.”</p>
<p>Trump, who made headlines after allegedly comparing America’s Afghanistan strategy review with renovations of his favorite Manhattan restaurant, appears to be determined to end the sixteen-year Afghan quagmire.</p>
<p>America must go offensive, Trump argued at the meeting, adding, he will not even hesitate to fire General John Nicholson, commander of the US troops in Afghanistan and hire someone who would bring a steadfast, decisive victory.</p>
<p>But the current state of affairs in Afghanistan – dubbed the ‘Graveyard of Empires’ – suggests how different it is from the conflict’s portrayal in the media and the very perception of it among the elites in Washington.</p>
<p>While military leaders are calculating the risks and floating strategies – ranging from raising troop levels to sending a mercenary-manned air force – the Taliban are quietly securing area by area in the lands they want to cleanse of any foreign presence.</p>
<p>In late July, Taliban fighters assaulted and seized the district of Jani Khel in Paktia province lying south of Kabul. The fall of Jani Khel marked the third victory in a row by the Islamists in just four days.</p>
<p>Previously, the Taliban overran Kohistan district in northern Faryab province after storming the district government’s headquarters, forcing local security forces to retreat to another base. Just hours after the seizure of Kohistan, Taliban fighters captured the Taywara district in western Ghor province.</p>
<p>The Taliban’s propaganda wing releasedan array of <a href="http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2017/08/taliban-video-details-takeover-of-eastern-afghan-district.php" type="external">photos</a> showing cheering militants next to dead Afghan soldiers as well as US-made Humvees and Ranger pickup trucks. Piles of RPGs, machine guns, rifles, mortars, and other weapons looted from local police arsenals can be seen in the images.</p>
<p>In March, the reclusive Taliban delivered yet another bitter blow to Kabul and its Western backers. The town of Sangin in Helmand province, where more than 100 British troops lost their lives, fell to the Taliban after a year-long siege.</p>
<p>Once dubbed the ‘Sangingrad’ – compared to the bloody 1942 Battle of Stalingrad for the ferocity of the fighting – it claimed a quarter of all British fatalities in four years of the entire Afghan campaign, according to the <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/taliban-capture-town-that-cost-100-british-lives-8p6r0fdh6" type="external">Times</a>.</p>
<p>The province of Helmand has long been the heartland of Afghanistan’s opium cultivation, which is an important gain for the Taliban; and the loss of the Sangin garrison was humiliating for NATO forces, considering the province houses two large NATO-built bases – Camp Bastion, once the largest British overseas military camp built since the Second World War, and Camp Leatherneck, hosting US Marines and British soldiers.</p>
<p>As the Afghan war enters its 17th year, the Trump administration is reportedly expected to send 4,000 additional troops to Afghanistan in the first sizeable deployment since NATO’s withdrawal in 2014. The president himself has wondered aloud “why we’ve been there for 17 years,” but his own actions resemble those of his predecessors.</p>
<p>With each year that followed the 2001 invasion, US casualties and civilian deaths rose as steadily as did local drug production. Thousands of British troops were deployed to a make difference on the ground, as were tens of thousands of US troops, at the request of General Stanley McChrystal, following a six-month review of the war plan after President Obama took office. By 2012, the number of US-led coalition troops deployed in Afghanistan reached 130,000 – the size of an average European army.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/392511-afghanistan-us-troops-increase-mattis-trump/" type="external" /></p>
<p>From being engaged in fierce firefights that lasted days to suicide bombers and IEDs targeting military convoys, the mighty American contingent lost 2,350 soldiers, with 1,846 killed in action, according to the latest <a href="https://www.defense.gov/casualty.pdf" type="external">Pentagon</a> statistics. But the figure pales in comparison to the number of innocent Afghans killed just in the first half of 2017. Some 1,662 civilians were killed and over 3,500 wounded, according to the <a href="https://unama.unmissions.org/sites/default/files/protection_of_civilians_in_armed_conflict_midyear_report_2017_july_2017.pdf" type="external">mid-year report</a>, by UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA).&#160;</p>
<p>The US is not likely to ever achieve victory in Afghanistan without involving other regional players, believes former Pentagon official Michael Maloof.</p>
<p>“The military solution itself isn’t going to work. It hasn’t worked before with more troops. It’s not going to work even if he (Trump) orders another 4,000,” he told RT.</p>
<p>According to Maloof, the out-of-the-box approach the US president is looking for may be to “call for a conference of the regional players such as Russia, China, Iran, India – Pakistan, even – and sit down with them and initiate a process whereby we try to look for a political resolution of the crisis.”</p>
<p>“The key is that people who invest an interest in the region, and we certainly all do now because of the threat of terrorism, we all need to be working and talking together,” he added.</p>
<p>The former Pentagon official proposed a “hybrid approach of military and diplomatic initiatives” for Afghanistan.</p>
<p>He reminded that the previous round of peace negotiation in the country broke down after the US announced the withdrawal of its troops and “Taliban said: ‘Well, why should we talk? We should wait for you to leave and do what we want to do.”</p>
<p>“As long as the Taliban realizes that forces in the region are there to stay to ensure the stability of Afghanistan, you can bring them (Taliban) in and talk and see how they can get involved in the government,” Maloof said.</p>
<p>The US is estimated to have spent over $700 billion on military assistance, reconstruction and economic aid to Afghanistan, but has achieved no significant results. Most of the money was dissolved through the corrupt and criminalized political and military elites as Afghanistan keeps plunging on the Transparency International’s corruption perception <a href="https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016#table" type="external">index</a>, slumping to 169th on the list in 2016.</p>
<p>In 2013, USAID put its programs in the country on hold after the Afghan health ministry was unable to account for $63 million from the American support package of $236 million.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/op-edge/398342-afghanistan-opium-us-poppy/" type="external" /></p>
<p>US troops have also not capped one of the Taliban’s major sources of income – drugs. In 2016, illicit opium production grew a whopping 43 percent and reached 4,800 tons, with cultivation areas continuing to grow, according to a <a href="https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/quarterlyreports/2017-04-30qr.pdf" type="external">report</a> by Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction’s estimates.&#160;</p>
<p>The booming drug trade provides for 90 percent of the world’s illegal opium and has an annual turnover of over $3 billion. A few years ago, Russia’s drugs control agency said that as much as a third of Afghan security forces were involved in selling drugs.</p>
<p>With no end in sight to the hostilities, the bloodshed, drug trafficking, poverty and corruption coupled with deep tribal feuds, even in the highest echelons of power, continue to plague the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Not even General John Nicholson, the current American commander in charge of the mission, appear to have a clue on when, or if the war will end.</p>
<p>Speaking in Washington in March, General Nicholson insisted that the Afghan campaign was a “stalemate where the equilibrium favors the government.” Carefully avoiding terms like “victory” or “win,” he described his military strategy as “hold-fight-disrupt,” according to the New York Times.</p>
<p>Washington’s approach towards fixing Afghanistan’s seemingly never-ending war has already been portrayed in popular culture. A much-anticipated 2017 Netflix film War Machine, starring Brad Pitt as a fictitious General Glen McMahon, offered a caricatured version of America’s strategy of winning the Afghan war.</p>
<p>“Ah, America,” one of the characters says, with the script sitting well with the current discussions in&#160; Washington. “What do you do when the war you’re fighting just can’t possibly be won in any meaningful sense? Well, obviously, you sack the guy not winning it and you bring in some other guy.”</p> | false | 1 | clearly frustrated pentagons ineffective strategies donald trump vowed fire top generals aggressively gain ground afghanistan us president able prevail 16year war two predecessors failed dragging longer vietnam iraq campaigns afghanistan becoming yet another swamp trump wants drain keeping colorful election campaign george w bush presided two post911 military interventions afghanistan iraq barack obama promised end everlasting afghan war relentlessly rolls read highprofile situation room meeting july trump reportedly told national security team time rapid breakthrough afghanistan winning said cited nbc report losing trump made headlines allegedly comparing americas afghanistan strategy review renovations favorite manhattan restaurant appears determined end sixteenyear afghan quagmire america must go offensive trump argued meeting adding even hesitate fire general john nicholson commander us troops afghanistan hire someone would bring steadfast decisive victory current state affairs afghanistan dubbed graveyard empires suggests different conflicts portrayal media perception among elites washington military leaders calculating risks floating strategies ranging raising troop levels sending mercenarymanned air force taliban quietly securing area area lands want cleanse foreign presence late july taliban fighters assaulted seized district jani khel paktia province lying south kabul fall jani khel marked third victory row islamists four days previously taliban overran kohistan district northern faryab province storming district governments headquarters forcing local security forces retreat another base hours seizure kohistan taliban fighters captured taywara district western ghor province talibans propaganda wing releasedan array photos showing cheering militants next dead afghan soldiers well usmade humvees ranger pickup trucks piles rpgs machine guns rifles mortars weapons looted local police arsenals seen images march reclusive taliban delivered yet another bitter blow kabul western backers town sangin helmand province 100 british troops lost lives fell taliban yearlong siege dubbed sangingrad compared bloody 1942 battle stalingrad ferocity fighting claimed quarter british fatalities four years entire afghan campaign according times province helmand long heartland afghanistans opium cultivation important gain taliban loss sangin garrison humiliating nato forces considering province houses two large natobuilt bases camp bastion largest british overseas military camp built since second world war camp leatherneck hosting us marines british soldiers afghan war enters 17th year trump administration reportedly expected send 4000 additional troops afghanistan first sizeable deployment since natos withdrawal 2014 president wondered aloud weve 17 years actions resemble predecessors year followed 2001 invasion us casualties civilian deaths rose steadily local drug production thousands british troops deployed make difference ground tens thousands us troops request general stanley mcchrystal following sixmonth review war plan president obama took office 2012 number usled coalition troops deployed afghanistan reached 130000 size average european army read engaged fierce firefights lasted days suicide bombers ieds targeting military convoys mighty american contingent lost 2350 soldiers 1846 killed action according latest pentagon statistics figure pales comparison number innocent afghans killed first half 2017 1662 civilians killed 3500 wounded according midyear report un assistance mission afghanistan unama160 us likely ever achieve victory afghanistan without involving regional players believes former pentagon official michael maloof military solution isnt going work hasnt worked troops going work even trump orders another 4000 told rt according maloof outofthebox approach us president looking may call conference regional players russia china iran india pakistan even sit initiate process whereby try look political resolution crisis key people invest interest region certainly threat terrorism need working talking together added former pentagon official proposed hybrid approach military diplomatic initiatives afghanistan reminded previous round peace negotiation country broke us announced withdrawal troops taliban said well talk wait leave want long taliban realizes forces region stay ensure stability afghanistan bring taliban talk see get involved government maloof said us estimated spent 700 billion military assistance reconstruction economic aid afghanistan achieved significant results money dissolved corrupt criminalized political military elites afghanistan keeps plunging transparency internationals corruption perception index slumping 169th list 2016 2013 usaid put programs country hold afghan health ministry unable account 63 million american support package 236 million read us troops also capped one talibans major sources income drugs 2016 illicit opium production grew whopping 43 percent reached 4800 tons cultivation areas continuing grow according report special inspector general afghanistan reconstructions estimates160 booming drug trade provides 90 percent worlds illegal opium annual turnover 3 billion years ago russias drugs control agency said much third afghan security forces involved selling drugs end sight hostilities bloodshed drug trafficking poverty corruption coupled deep tribal feuds even highest echelons power continue plague islamic republic afghanistan even general john nicholson current american commander charge mission appear clue war end speaking washington march general nicholson insisted afghan campaign stalemate equilibrium favors government carefully avoiding terms like victory win described military strategy holdfightdisrupt according new york times washingtons approach towards fixing afghanistans seemingly neverending war already portrayed popular culture muchanticipated 2017 netflix film war machine starring brad pitt fictitious general glen mcmahon offered caricatured version americas strategy winning afghan war ah america one characters says script sitting well current discussions in160 washington war youre fighting cant possibly meaningful sense well obviously sack guy winning bring guy | 817 |
<p>MIAMI DOLPHINS (4-6) AT NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS (8-2)</p>
<p>KICKOFF: Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, Mercedes-Benz Stadium. TV: CBS, Ian Eagle, Dan Fours and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Evan-Washburn/" type="external">Evan Washburn</a> (field reporter).</p>
<p>SERIES HISTORY: 101st regular-season meeting. Dolphins lead series, 52-48. Miami and New England have a rivalry that dates back to the days of the AFL. The Dolphins dominated large chunks of the matchups over the years in the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s. But of late New England has had the upper hand, especially in Foxborough. The Patriots have beaten the Dolphins eight straight times at Gillette Stadium and 10 of the last 11, though New England has been less successful in Miami, where the Dolphins have won three of the last four. New England won the last meeting, 35-14, in last year’s season finale in Miami.</p>
<p>KEYS TO THE GAME: The Patriots’ switch to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dion-Lewis/" type="external">Dion Lewis</a> as a featured back has given the running game a boost. And now Lewis and backfield mates <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/James_White/" type="external">James White</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Rex-Burkhead/" type="external">Rex Burkhead</a> face a Dolphins defense that surrendered 294 yards to Carolina two weeks ago.</p>
<p>Now Miami, which has given up more than 35 points per game during a four-game losing streak, must contend with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tom_Brady/" type="external">Tom Brady</a>.</p>
<p>Brady, who completed 30 of 37 in last week’s win over Oakland, will look to capitalize on the rapport he has built with speedy wideout <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brandin-Cooks/" type="external">Brandin Cooks</a>, who has 20 catches for 203 yards in the past two games.</p>
<p>With quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jay_Cutler/" type="external">Jay Cutler</a> still in the concussion protocol, Miami coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adam-Gase/" type="external">Adam Gase</a> has yet to name a starter for Sunday.</p>
<p>The Dolphins are not a real threat to run the ball and will depend on the big-play ability of wide receivers <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jarvis-Landry/" type="external">Jarvis Landry</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kenny-Stills/" type="external">Kenny Stills</a>, who have combined for more than 1,100 yards.</p>
<p>Cameron Wake and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ndamukong-Suh/" type="external">Ndamukong Suh</a> are the only pass-rushing threats for a defense that was largely responsible for the Dolphins’ 4-2 start to the season. The two have combined for 9.5 sacks.</p>
<p>MATCHUPS TO WATCH:</p>
<p>–Dolphins RBs Kenyan Drake and Damien Williams vs. Patriots run defense. The Patriots have surrendered a run of at least 20 yards in each of the last four games. If the Dolphins could get a couple of long runs from these guys, it would help greatly. In the past three games, they’ve had runs of 42, 66 and 69 yards. New England gave up an 87-yard run to Chargers RB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Melvin-Gordon/" type="external">Melvin Gordon</a>.</p>
<p>–Patriots QB Tom Brady vs. Dolphins pass defense. Brady, who has 22 touchdowns and two interceptions, has been hot all season and there’s no reason to think he’ll slow down in a home game. TE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Rob_Gronkowski/" type="external">Rob Gronkowski</a> is an especially big threat to a team that has been burned by tight ends this season. Miami’s linebackers and defensive backs will be under extreme pressure to make plays all day. It’ll be a high-stress environment, for sure.</p>
<p>PLAYER SPOTLIGHT: Dolphins WR Kenny Stills. He’s quietly having an outstanding season, with 40 receptions for 588 yards (14.7 yards per reception) and five touchdowns. Stills could threaten his career bests in receptions (63), yards (931) and TDs (9). He represents a big-play threat in the passing game, which is what Miami will need at New England. Stills has shown he’s not a one-trick pony, getting open on short and intermediate routes, but if the Dolphins want to strike quickly, this seems the best option.</p>
<p>FAST FACTS: Miami QB Jay Cutler had 227 passing yards and three touchdowns in his last game vs. New England (2014 with Chicago). … RB Damien Williams had 102 yards from scrimmage last week. … RB Kenyan Drake has 90 yards from scrimmage in two of past three games. … WR Jarvis Landry has six touchdowns since Week 5, third most in the NFL. He has 211 receiving yards and a TD catch in his past two vs. New England. … WR Kenny Stills had a career-high 180 receiving yards and a TD last week. Is one of five NFL players with 200 catches (204) and 16 yards per catch (16.3) since 2012. He has five TD catches in his past five vs. the AFC East. He aims for a third in a row vs. New England with a receiving touchdown. … WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/DeVante-Parker/" type="external">DeVante Parker</a> has 100 receiving yards in two of the past three vs. New England. … S Reshad Jones has eight-plus tackles in two of the past three meetings. He is one of two active safeties (Harrison Smith) with 15 interceptions (18) and eight sacks (9.5) since 2010. … LB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kiko-Alonso/" type="external">Kiko Alonso</a> has 42 tackles (8.4 per game), two fumble recoveries and a forced fumble in five career games vs. New England. … DE Cameron Wake has nine sacks in the past seven games vs. the division. He has four sacks and two forced fumbles in past five meetings. … DT Ndamukong Suh had a career-high 12 tackles in his last road meeting. … Patriots QB Tom Brady completed 30 of 37 (81.1 percent) for 339 yards and three touchdowns last week. He aims for a third in a row with three touchdowns. He has 1,267 pass yards (316.8 per game) with 10 touchdowns in his past four at home. He has seven touchdowns in his past three vs. Miami. … RB Dion Lewis has 164 yards from scrimmage and a receiving touchdown in the past two vs. Miami. He had a touchdown catch in Week 11. … RB James White is tied for second among AFC RBs with 46 catches. … WR Brandin Cooks had 149 receiving yards with a touchdown last week. He has nine games with 100 yards and a touchdown catch since 2015, tied for third most in the NFL. He has three receiving touchdowns in the past four games at home. … TE Rob Gronkowski has three receiving touchdowns in his past two games vs. AFC East opponents. He aims for a third game in a row at home vs. Miami with a touchdown catch. … WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Danny-Amendola/" type="external">Danny Amendola</a> had two receiving touchdowns in his last game vs. Miami. … S Duron Harmon had an interception in Week 11. He has four interceptions in four career home meetings. … DE Trey Flowers had a fumble recovery in the last home meeting. … K <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Stephen_Gostkowski/" type="external">Stephen Gostkowski</a> kicked a franchise-record 62-yard field goal in Week 11.</p>
<p>PREDICTION: This is a matchup of teams headed in opposite directions. With Tom Brady playing like, well, Tom Brady, and the Patriots’ early-season defensive struggles seemingly fixed, it looks like a rout.</p>
<p>OUR PICK: Patriots, 42-17.</p>
<p>–Ched Whitney</p> | false | 1 | miami dolphins 46 new england patriots 82 kickoff sunday 1 pm et mercedesbenz stadium tv cbs ian eagle dan fours evan washburn field reporter series history 101st regularseason meeting dolphins lead series 5248 miami new england rivalry dates back days afl dolphins dominated large chunks matchups years 70s 80s 90s late new england upper hand especially foxborough patriots beaten dolphins eight straight times gillette stadium 10 last 11 though new england less successful miami dolphins three last four new england last meeting 3514 last years season finale miami keys game patriots switch dion lewis featured back given running game boost lewis backfield mates james white rex burkhead face dolphins defense surrendered 294 yards carolina two weeks ago miami given 35 points per game fourgame losing streak must contend tom brady brady completed 30 37 last weeks win oakland look capitalize rapport built speedy wideout brandin cooks 20 catches 203 yards past two games quarterback jay cutler still concussion protocol miami coach adam gase yet name starter sunday dolphins real threat run ball depend bigplay ability wide receivers jarvis landry kenny stills combined 1100 yards cameron wake ndamukong suh passrushing threats defense largely responsible dolphins 42 start season two combined 95 sacks matchups watch dolphins rbs kenyan drake damien williams vs patriots run defense patriots surrendered run least 20 yards last four games dolphins could get couple long runs guys would help greatly past three games theyve runs 42 66 69 yards new england gave 87yard run chargers rb melvin gordon patriots qb tom brady vs dolphins pass defense brady 22 touchdowns two interceptions hot season theres reason think hell slow home game te rob gronkowski especially big threat team burned tight ends season miamis linebackers defensive backs extreme pressure make plays day itll highstress environment sure player spotlight dolphins wr kenny stills hes quietly outstanding season 40 receptions 588 yards 147 yards per reception five touchdowns stills could threaten career bests receptions 63 yards 931 tds 9 represents bigplay threat passing game miami need new england stills shown hes onetrick pony getting open short intermediate routes dolphins want strike quickly seems best option fast facts miami qb jay cutler 227 passing yards three touchdowns last game vs new england 2014 chicago rb damien williams 102 yards scrimmage last week rb kenyan drake 90 yards scrimmage two past three games wr jarvis landry six touchdowns since week 5 third nfl 211 receiving yards td catch past two vs new england wr kenny stills careerhigh 180 receiving yards td last week one five nfl players 200 catches 204 16 yards per catch 163 since 2012 five td catches past five vs afc east aims third row vs new england receiving touchdown wr devante parker 100 receiving yards two past three vs new england reshad jones eightplus tackles two past three meetings one two active safeties harrison smith 15 interceptions 18 eight sacks 95 since 2010 lb kiko alonso 42 tackles 84 per game two fumble recoveries forced fumble five career games vs new england de cameron wake nine sacks past seven games vs division four sacks two forced fumbles past five meetings dt ndamukong suh careerhigh 12 tackles last road meeting patriots qb tom brady completed 30 37 811 percent 339 yards three touchdowns last week aims third row three touchdowns 1267 pass yards 3168 per game 10 touchdowns past four home seven touchdowns past three vs miami rb dion lewis 164 yards scrimmage receiving touchdown past two vs miami touchdown catch week 11 rb james white tied second among afc rbs 46 catches wr brandin cooks 149 receiving yards touchdown last week nine games 100 yards touchdown catch since 2015 tied third nfl three receiving touchdowns past four games home te rob gronkowski three receiving touchdowns past two games vs afc east opponents aims third game row home vs miami touchdown catch wr danny amendola two receiving touchdowns last game vs miami duron harmon interception week 11 four interceptions four career home meetings de trey flowers fumble recovery last home meeting k stephen gostkowski kicked franchiserecord 62yard field goal week 11 prediction matchup teams headed opposite directions tom brady playing like well tom brady patriots earlyseason defensive struggles seemingly fixed looks like rout pick patriots 4217 ched whitney | 707 |
<p>In what undoubtedly will go down as the upset of the year, if not the decade, Arrogate never ran a lick in Saturday’s San Diego Handicap, finishing off the board for the first time in his career.</p>
<p>The news was lots better for other weekend favorites. Lady Eli eked out a win in the Grade I Diana at Saratoga and, a day later, so did Abel Tasman in the Grade I Coaching Club American Oaks.</p>
<p>Firenze Fire won the Sanford at Saratoga, making him an early candidate for the 2018 Kentucky Derby.</p>
<p>But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. First, this:</p>
<p>Classic</p>
<p>It wasn’t Arrogate’s day Saturday. While the world’s No. 1 rated horse loped listlessly toward the back of the five-horse field in Saturday’s $300,000 Grade II TVG San Diego Handicap, Accelerate made all the going. And when jockey <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Victor_Espinoza/" type="external">Victor Espinoza</a> put the pedal to the metal in the stretch, Accelerator roared off to win by 8 1/2 lengths over Donworth. Cat Burglar was third. Arrogate beat only El Huerfano, who stumbled at the start, causing jockey Evin Roman to lose his irons and dooming his chances.</p>
<p>Accelerate, a 4-year-old Lookin at Lucky colt, finished the 1 1/16 miles over a fast track in 1:42.15. He’s no bum, having finished in the money in 11 of his 12 starts — many of them in graded stakes. But Arrogate came to Del Mar with consecutive wins in the Grade I Travers, the Grade I Breeders’ Cup Classic, the Grade I Pegasus World Cup and, despite missing the break, the Group 1 Dubai World Cup. He took massive amounts of money in the place and show pools, producing outlandish payments there, including a Del Mar record $119.80 place payout on Donworth.</p>
<p>Espinoza said inheriting the lead when El Hurefano stumbled played right into his hands. “I was surprised by how far I won,” Espinoza said. “I wasn’t surprised that I did. I was here to win.” Winning trainer <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Sadler/" type="external">John Sadler</a> added, “You want to win. You don’t want to concede anything. But I’m surprised we won because Arrogate is the best horse in the world. A couple of things went right for us and one of them was that Arrogate didn’t fire his best. That’s what has to happen for these big upsets.”</p>
<p>Trainer <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bob_Baffert/" type="external">Bob Baffert</a> said of Arrogate, sent off at odds of 1-20, “I thought he’d run better than that but he just didn’t want to go. I think he just laid an egg.” Jockey <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Smith/" type="external">Mike Smith</a> confirmed he never felt he had much to work with at any point in the race. “I’m at a loss for words,” he said. “We’ve got to go back and start over again.”</p>
<p>A footnote: Arrogate has lost only twice and Accelerate finished ahead of him both times. In his first career start, at Los Alamitos, Arrogate was a troubled third behind Westbrook and Accelerate.</p>
<p>Distaff</p>
<p>Kentucky Oaks winner Abel Tasman had an eventful trip in Sunday’s $300,000 Grade I Coaching Club American Oaks before scoring a narrow win over Elate — and surviving an objection.</p>
<p>Abel Tasman, a Quality Road filly owned by the China Horse Club and Clearsky Farms, broke a step slowly and was next-last going into the clubhouse turn. As the field straightened out into the backstretch, jockey Mike Smith stepped down hard on the gas and Abel Tasman quickly shot to the lead. She clung to the advantage into the stretch as Elate made a move to her inside. In the final sixteenth, Abel Tasman drifted in and hung on to win by a head. Salty, who reared at the start, came wide into the stretch and finished third. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jose-Ortiz/" type="external">Jose Ortiz</a>, aboard Elate, claimed foul but the stewards let the result stand.</p>
<p>Abel Tasman ran 9 furlongs on a fast track in 1:51.74, scoring her third straight Grade I win and the fourth of her career.</p>
<p>Smith, riding a day after and across the continent from piloting Arrogate, said he shot to the lead because the pace was slow and because his filly could. “She’s capable of that,” he said, “and once she gets in that big, beautiful stride, that’s where you want her. It was there. I took it. If I had got beat, it would have been horrible.” Of the stretch run, he said, “It’s just good, old fashioned race riding … I made it tight, but there’s no rules that say you can’t make it tight. They make it tight on me all the time and I’m too old for that.” Smith will turn 52 next month.</p>
<p>Ami’s Mesa tracked the pace in Saturday’s $150,000 (Canadian) Grade III Ontario Matron over the Woodbine all-weather surface, made up some ground around the turn and closed through the stretch to win by 1 length over Ice Festival. Midnight Crossing and Meadow Rose dead-heated for third and fourth. Ami’s Mesa, a 4-year-old <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sky_Mesa/" type="external">Sky Mesa</a> filly, ran 1 1/16 miles in 1:43.44 with Luis Contreras up. She’s now 2-for-2 since returning from her winter vacation in Florida. “It’s her first time around two turns but he got her to shut off and relax,” winning trainer <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Josie_Carroll/" type="external">Josie Carroll</a> said of Contreras’ ride. “When he picked her up and shook the lines, she really responded. She’s had a few little issues here and there, but she certainly seems to have rebounded now.”</p>
<p>Filly &amp; Mare Turf</p>
<p>Lady Eli and her stablemate, Antonoe, broke through the gate before the start of Saturday’s $500,000 Grade I Diana at Saratoga. Both were corralled quickly and reloaded and both figured in the outcome. After chasing Quidura into the stretch, jockey <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Irad-Ortiz/" type="external">Irad Ortiz</a> Jr. got Lady Eli into gear on the outside while <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Javier_Castellano/" type="external">Javier Castellano</a> found a spot along the rail. The three battled to the wire, with Lady Eli a head in front of Quidura and Antonoe fading just a bit in the final strides to finish third, another 1 length back.</p>
<p>Lady Eli, a 5-year-old Divine Park mare whose career was interrupted by a near-fatal bout of laminitis and 13 months out of action, ran 9 furlongs on firm turf in 1:46.17. She drifted in in the final sixteenth causing the stewards to take a look but there was no action.</p>
<p>“Today was one of her greatest races to date. Maybe her best,” said <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chad_Brown/" type="external">Chad Brown</a>, who trains both Lady Eli and Antonoe. “Giving eight pounds to the horse she ran down late in the stretch after breaking through the gate, going a little wide, she just overcame everything. Today she proved she’s one of the all-time greats.” Lady Eli’s career record now is nine wins and three seconds from 12 starts. The defeats came by 3/4 length, a nose and a head.</p>
<p>Proctor’s Ledge rallied to take the lead a furlong from home in Friday’s $150,000 Grade III Lake George for 3-year-old fillies at Saratoga and edged clear, winning by 1 3/4 lengths over Party Boat. Fifty Five was another 1 3/4 lengths back in third. Proctor’s Ledge, a Ghostzapper filly, ran 1 1/16 miles on firm turf in 1:41.47 with Javier Castellano in the irons. She started the year with a pair of wins, then finished third, fourth and second after entering the graded stakes ranks. “Everything hadn’t quite fallen into place the last few times, but she did it today, so I’ll credit everybody,” said winning trainer Brendan Walsh. “We finally got it right … I think she’s going to have a hell of a second half of the year, and I think she’s going to be a better filly next year.” Turf</p>
<p>Hunt skimmed the rail in Saturday’s $250,000 Grade II Eddie Read Stakes at Del Mar, waited for a gap between rivals entering the stretch and went on with it when he saw daylight, winning by 1 length over the favorite, Ashleyluvssugar. Mr. Roary was another 1/2 length back in third. Hunt, a 5-year-old Irish-bred gelding by Dark Angel, ran 9 furlongs over firm turf in 1:47.62 with Flavien Prat in the irons. “I thought he’d run well here,” Prat said. “I moved up inside and thought they’d leave a hole for me. But it wasn’t happening there for a bit. I had to wait, but when we saw it, he was there. He finished strong.” Trainer Phil D’Amato said Hunt might turn back a furlong for the Del Mar Mile or go on to the Del Mar Handicap.</p>
<p>Final Copy outfinished Conquest Lemonraid in Sunday’s $120,000 (Canadian) Toronto Cup for 3-year-olds at Woodbine, winning by 3/4 length. King and his Court finished third. Final Copy, a <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Malibu_Moon/" type="external">Malibu Moon</a> gelding, ran 9 furlongs on firm turf in 1:49.24 with Rafael Hernandez aboard. It was his first stakes try and third straight win overall following an unsatisfying winter at Tampa Bay Downs where he was 0-for-3. “Everything worked good today,” said Hernandez. “He had a good break, he relaxed and we got a clear trip. He’s doing what he’s been doing the last three times — just let him run in the stretch.”</p>
<p>The seventh on Saratoga’s opening day card wasn’t a stakes race but it might as well have been with three graded stakes winners in the field and a couple others who were close to that level. Still, it was two confirmed residents of this optional claimer level, Muqtaser and Infinite Wisdom, who hooked up while passing the wire for the first time and battled the circumference of the Spa’s grass oval before Muqtaser prevailed by a head. Mesi, a Grade III winner earlier in his career, shot through an opening on the rail to take third, another head back. Muqtaser, a 5-year-old <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Distorted_Humor/" type="external">Distorted Humor</a> gelding, ran 1 3/8 miles on firm turf in 2:15.73 under <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Bravo/" type="external">Joe Bravo</a>.</p>
<p>Turf Mile</p>
<p>Madam Dancealot rallied from last of eight to upset Sunday’s $200,000 Grade II San Clemente Handicap for 3-year-old fillies at Del Mar, winning by 1 3/4 lengths over Lull and another 1/2 length over the favorite, previously undefeated Sircat Sally. Madam Dancealot, an Irish-bred filly by Sir Prancealot, ran 1 mile on firm going in 1:34.73. She was dispatched at odds of better than 21-1, second-longest price in the field. “The way she was finishing the last two races on the grass down the hill at Santa Anita, I thought she could get a mile,” said winning trainer Richard Baltas. “She’s settled now, she’s relaxed and when she was last down the backside, I was like ‘Wow.’ I know she can run and when a good horse gets settled like that they’re going to run at the end, and she did.”</p>
<p>Blackjackcat got first run to the lead in the stetch in Sunday’s $75,000 Wickerr Stakes at Del Mar and fended off the favorite, Vyjack, by 1/2 length at the wire. Calculator was third. Blackjackcat, a 4-year-old Tale of the Cat gelding, ran 1 mile on firm turf in 1:34.20 with Gary Stevens in the irons.</p>
<p>Juvenile</p>
<p>Firenze Fire surged to the lead at the top of the stretch in Saturday’s $150,000 Grade III <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sanford_Stakes/" type="external">Sanford Stakes</a> at Saratoga and held on gamely to win by 1 length from the favorite, Free Drop Billy. Psychoanalyze was third in a wide-open field including horses that last raced at five different tracks. Firenze Fire, a Poseidon’s Warrior colt, ran 6 furlongs on a fast track in 1:11.50 with Irad Ortiz Jr. in the irons. He won at first asking at Monmouth Park on June 18. Might his future extend to next year’s Triple Crown chase? “I think he’ll run long,” said trainer Jason Servis. “I asked Irad and he thinks he’ll run long. He’s kind of laid back. I think he’ll get seven-eighths (for the $350,000 Grade I Hopeful on Sept. 4). I think he’ll get a mile, mile and a quarter, really. He’s that kind of horse.”</p>
<p>Juvenile Fillies</p>
<p>Dream It Is waited behind a blistering early pace in Friday’s $150,000 Grade III Schuylerville at Saratoga, took over turning for home and jetted off to win by 9 lengths. Best Performance and Stainless both came from well back to finish second and third. Snowfire, the favorite, raced close to the winner for the first few furlongs, dropped back approaching the turn and ran evenly thereafter to finish fourth. Dream It Is, a Shackleford filly, ran 6 furlongs on a fast track in 1:11.85 under Luis Contreras and remains undefeated after three starts. Her first two were on the Woodbine all-weather. “What can I say?” said winning trainer Barb Minshall, who went on to say: “To win a race and to win it like that. We came with a horse that we thought was a good filly and had a shot but I can’t say expected her to run as good as she did. It’s ultimately the owner’s decision of where we’ll go next.” But she mentioned the $350,000 Grade I Spinaway on Sept. 2 as “definitely a maybe.”</p>
<p>Glamanation hit the gate at the start of Sunday’s $125,000 (Canadian) Shady Well Stakes at Woodbine, raced near the back of the six-filly field and rallied five-wide to win by 1 length over Mega Monster. Mo Big Cat also found her best stride late to finish third. Glamanation, a Point of Entry filly, ran 5 1/2 furlongs on the all-weather track in 1:05.94 with David Moran in the irons, scoring her first career win.</p>
<p>International:</p>
<p>England</p>
<p>Bengali Boys distanced 22 rivals in the final furlong of Saturday’s Weatherbys Super Sprint Stakes for 2-year-olds at Newbury, kicking off to a 6-lengths score. Declarationoflove was second, edging the favorite, Maggies Angel, in the final strides. Bengali Boys, a Clodovil colt trained by Richard Fahey, now has two wins and two seconds from four career starts. “This is a race that we target every year and we have been lucky enough to win it three times now in the last five years,” Fahey said. “When we go to the sales, we buy horses for the Weatherbys Super Sprint – you need cheap horses for this race and Bengali Boys only cost 11,000 Euros.” The race, run on soft ground that appeared to favor the winner, is restricted to products of certain sales and certain price ranges. Weights are determined in part by sale price. Nonetheless, in the recent past the Super Sprint has attracted the attention of Hong Kong buyers, notably sending Peniaphobia to Group 1 glory in Hong Kong after winning the 2013 renewal of the Super Sprint, also for Fahey.</p>
<p>Around the ovals:</p>
<p>Laurel Park</p>
<p>No Dozing dueled with Honor the Fleet to mid-stretch in Saturday’s $75,000 Concern Stakes for 3-year-olds, then drew off to win by 4 lengths over that foe. Proforma and Alex Again completed the order of finish. No Dozing, a Union Rags colt, negotiated 7 furlongs over a muddy, sealed track in 1:22.85 with Daniel Centeno in the irons. In his previous outing, No Dozing finished second behind Wild Shot in the Grade III Pat Day Mile at Churchill Downs.</p>
<p>Monmouth Park</p>
<p>Snowday pressed the pace in Saturday’s $60,000 My Frenchman Stakes, got the advantage on the turn and finished well, winning by 2 3/4 lengths over Simon Bar Sinister. Black Jet contested the early lead and held on for third at a big price. Snowday, a 7-year-old French-bred gelding by Falco, ran about 5 1/2 furlongs on firm turf in 1:02.27 with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jose_Ferrer/" type="external">Jose Ferrer</a> aboard.</p>
<p>Finger Lakes</p>
<p>Twisted Tom put in his bid on the turn in Saturday’s $150,000 New York Derby, battled down the lane with Broken Engagement and prevailed by 1/2 length. Pat on the Back was third, another 2 1/4 lengths in arrears. Twisted Tom, a Creative Cause gelding, ran 1 1/16 miles on a fast track in 1:44.52 with Feargal Lynch in the irons.</p>
<p>Bonita Bianca rallied from last of six to win Saturday’s $150,000 New York Oaks by a neck over Playinwiththeboys. The odds-on favorite, Tiznow’s Smile, was another 6 3/4 lengths up the track in third. Bonita Bianca, a Curlin filly, reported in 1:46.72 with Dylan Davis riding.</p>
<p>Lone Star Park</p>
<p>Texas Chrome, the odds-on favorite, rated off the pace in Saturday’s $50,000 Assault Stakes for Texas-breds, collared pacesetter Supermason near the sixteenth pole and won by 1 1/4 over that rival. F J Uncle Vic was third, 9 1/4 lengths farther back. Texas Chrome, a 4-year-old Grasshopper colt, got 1 mile on a fast track in 1:36.59 with Richard Eramia riding.</p>
<p>Prada’s Bling pressed the pace in Saturday’s $50,000 Valor Farm Stakes for Texas-bred distaffers, took over in the stretch and won by 1 1/2 lengths over Zappit E. Kat’s Infatuation was another 3/4 length back in third. Prada’s Bling, a 5-year-old mare by Too Much Bling, ran 6 furlongs on a fast track in 1:10.96 with Iram Diego up.</p>
<p>Janae survived a rough start in the $100,000 filly division of the restricted Texas Thoroughbred Futurity, led all the way and held on at the end of 5 furlongs, winning by a neck over Ms Classic West and another head from Patrona Margarita. Janae, a <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Closing_Argument/" type="external">Closing Argument</a> filly, was clocked in 59.08 seconds with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kerwin_Clark/" type="external">Kerwin Clark</a> in the irons.</p>
<p>In the colts and geldings division of the Futurity, Galactica pressed the pace, moved to the lead with more than a furlong left and held on to win by 3/4 length over Aceguitar. It was another 6 lengths back to Toledo Pache. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brian_Hernandez/" type="external">Brian Hernandez</a> Jr. piloted Galactia, an Uncle Abie gelding, who covered 5 furlongs in 58.12.</p>
<p>Emerald Downs</p>
<p>Little Dancer stalked the pace in Sunday’s $75,000 Washington Oaks, got by the leader, Daddyalwayssays in the late going and won by 1/2 length over that rival. Reginella was third. Little Dancer, a Successful Appeal filly, ran 9 furlongs on a fast track in 1:50.05 with Rocco Bowen up.</p>
<p>Albuquerque</p>
<p>Kentucky invader Anythingyoucando blew by the pacesetter in the lane in Saturday’s $55,000 Albuquerque Distaff and drew off to a 3 1/4-lengths victory. Caviar Kitty was up for second, a neck better than tiring early leader Bella Anatola. Anythingyoucando, a 5-year-old Curlin mare, ran 1 mile on a fast track in 1:37.65 with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Alfredo_Juarez/" type="external">Alfredo Juarez</a> Jr. in the irons for trainer <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Steve_Asmussen/" type="external">Steve Asmussen</a>.</p>
<p>Parx Racing</p>
<p>Threeohtwocassie was along in the final stages to upset Saturday’s $100,000 Crowd Pleaser Stakes for Pennsylvania-bred 3-year-olds. Iggy Loco was second, 3/4 length back and the favorite, Fast and Accurate, settled for show money. Threeohtwocassie, an E Dubai gelding, ran 1 1/16 miles on firm turf in 1:44.14 with Edwin Gonzalez in the irons.</p>
<p>Firsthand Report pushed the favorite, Fat Kat, through the early furlongs of Saturday’s $100,000 Power By Far Stakes for state-bred fillies and mares, then left that one behind, winning off by 3 lengths. Zensational Merry was up for third, 2 lengths in arrears of Fat Kat. Firsthand Report, a 4-year-old Blame filly, got 5 furlongs on firm turf in 58.03 seconds under John Bisono.</p>
<p>Sacramento</p>
<p>Alliford Bay got by the early leader, Fast and Foxy, in the stretch run of Saturday’s $50,000 California Governor’s Cup for fillies and mares, winning by 3/4 length over that one. Princess Ashlyn was third. Alliford Bay, a 3-year-old City Zip filly, got 6 furlongs on a fast track in 1:09.53 with Irving Orozco in the irons.</p>
<p>Thistledown</p>
<p>Tango Run found running room on the inside entering the stretch in Saturday’s $75,000 Miss Ohio Stakes for state-bred 2-year-old fillies and went on to win by 2 3/4 lengths over Count de Loot. Summit Point showed the way early and salvaged show money. Tango Run, a daughter of Run Away and Hide, ran 5 1/2 furlongs on a muddy track in 1:06.88 with Rex Stokes III in the irons.</p>
<p>Belterra Park</p>
<p>Nikki My Darling led all the way in Sunday’s $75,000 Norm Barron Queen City Stakes for 3-year-old Ohio-bred fillies and dominated the final furlong, winning by 6 1/2 lengths. My Ticket Home was best of the rest, 2 1/4 lengths ahead of Cali Dream. Nikki My Darling, a daughter of Creative Cause, ran 9 furlongs on a muddy, sealed track in 1:49.41 with Luis Colon up.</p> | false | 1 | undoubtedly go upset year decade arrogate never ran lick saturdays san diego handicap finishing board first time career news lots better weekend favorites lady eli eked win grade diana saratoga day later abel tasman grade coaching club american oaks firenze fire sanford saratoga making early candidate 2018 kentucky derby lets get ahead first classic wasnt arrogates day saturday worlds 1 rated horse loped listlessly toward back fivehorse field saturdays 300000 grade ii tvg san diego handicap accelerate made going jockey victor espinoza put pedal metal stretch accelerator roared win 8 12 lengths donworth cat burglar third arrogate beat el huerfano stumbled start causing jockey evin roman lose irons dooming chances accelerate 4yearold lookin lucky colt finished 1 116 miles fast track 14215 hes bum finished money 11 12 starts many graded stakes arrogate came del mar consecutive wins grade travers grade breeders cup classic grade pegasus world cup despite missing break group 1 dubai world cup took massive amounts money place show pools producing outlandish payments including del mar record 11980 place payout donworth espinoza said inheriting lead el hurefano stumbled played right hands surprised far espinoza said wasnt surprised win winning trainer john sadler added want win dont want concede anything im surprised arrogate best horse world couple things went right us one arrogate didnt fire best thats happen big upsets trainer bob baffert said arrogate sent odds 120 thought hed run better didnt want go think laid egg jockey mike smith confirmed never felt much work point race im loss words said weve got go back start footnote arrogate lost twice accelerate finished ahead times first career start los alamitos arrogate troubled third behind westbrook accelerate distaff kentucky oaks winner abel tasman eventful trip sundays 300000 grade coaching club american oaks scoring narrow win elate surviving objection abel tasman quality road filly owned china horse club clearsky farms broke step slowly nextlast going clubhouse turn field straightened backstretch jockey mike smith stepped hard gas abel tasman quickly shot lead clung advantage stretch elate made move inside final sixteenth abel tasman drifted hung win head salty reared start came wide stretch finished third jose ortiz aboard elate claimed foul stewards let result stand abel tasman ran 9 furlongs fast track 15174 scoring third straight grade win fourth career smith riding day across continent piloting arrogate said shot lead pace slow filly could shes capable said gets big beautiful stride thats want took got beat would horrible stretch run said good old fashioned race riding made tight theres rules say cant make tight make tight time im old smith turn 52 next month amis mesa tracked pace saturdays 150000 canadian grade iii ontario matron woodbine allweather surface made ground around turn closed stretch win 1 length ice festival midnight crossing meadow rose deadheated third fourth amis mesa 4yearold sky mesa filly ran 1 116 miles 14344 luis contreras shes 2for2 since returning winter vacation florida first time around two turns got shut relax winning trainer josie carroll said contreras ride picked shook lines really responded shes little issues certainly seems rebounded filly amp mare turf lady eli stablemate antonoe broke gate start saturdays 500000 grade diana saratoga corralled quickly reloaded figured outcome chasing quidura stretch jockey irad ortiz jr got lady eli gear outside javier castellano found spot along rail three battled wire lady eli head front quidura antonoe fading bit final strides finish third another 1 length back lady eli 5yearold divine park mare whose career interrupted nearfatal bout laminitis 13 months action ran 9 furlongs firm turf 14617 drifted final sixteenth causing stewards take look action today one greatest races date maybe best said chad brown trains lady eli antonoe giving eight pounds horse ran late stretch breaking gate going little wide overcame everything today proved shes one alltime greats lady elis career record nine wins three seconds 12 starts defeats came 34 length nose head proctors ledge rallied take lead furlong home fridays 150000 grade iii lake george 3yearold fillies saratoga edged clear winning 1 34 lengths party boat fifty five another 1 34 lengths back third proctors ledge ghostzapper filly ran 1 116 miles firm turf 14147 javier castellano irons started year pair wins finished third fourth second entering graded stakes ranks everything hadnt quite fallen place last times today ill credit everybody said winning trainer brendan walsh finally got right think shes going hell second half year think shes going better filly next year turf hunt skimmed rail saturdays 250000 grade ii eddie read stakes del mar waited gap rivals entering stretch went saw daylight winning 1 length favorite ashleyluvssugar mr roary another 12 length back third hunt 5yearold irishbred gelding dark angel ran 9 furlongs firm turf 14762 flavien prat irons thought hed run well prat said moved inside thought theyd leave hole wasnt happening bit wait saw finished strong trainer phil damato said hunt might turn back furlong del mar mile go del mar handicap final copy outfinished conquest lemonraid sundays 120000 canadian toronto cup 3yearolds woodbine winning 34 length king court finished third final copy malibu moon gelding ran 9 furlongs firm turf 14924 rafael hernandez aboard first stakes try third straight win overall following unsatisfying winter tampa bay downs 0for3 everything worked good today said hernandez good break relaxed got clear trip hes hes last three times let run stretch seventh saratogas opening day card wasnt stakes race might well three graded stakes winners field couple others close level still two confirmed residents optional claimer level muqtaser infinite wisdom hooked passing wire first time battled circumference spas grass oval muqtaser prevailed head mesi grade iii winner earlier career shot opening rail take third another head back muqtaser 5yearold distorted humor gelding ran 1 38 miles firm turf 21573 joe bravo turf mile madam dancealot rallied last eight upset sundays 200000 grade ii san clemente handicap 3yearold fillies del mar winning 1 34 lengths lull another 12 length favorite previously undefeated sircat sally madam dancealot irishbred filly sir prancealot ran 1 mile firm going 13473 dispatched odds better 211 secondlongest price field way finishing last two races grass hill santa anita thought could get mile said winning trainer richard baltas shes settled shes relaxed last backside like wow know run good horse gets settled like theyre going run end blackjackcat got first run lead stetch sundays 75000 wickerr stakes del mar fended favorite vyjack 12 length wire calculator third blackjackcat 4yearold tale cat gelding ran 1 mile firm turf 13420 gary stevens irons juvenile firenze fire surged lead top stretch saturdays 150000 grade iii sanford stakes saratoga held gamely win 1 length favorite free drop billy psychoanalyze third wideopen field including horses last raced five different tracks firenze fire poseidons warrior colt ran 6 furlongs fast track 11150 irad ortiz jr irons first asking monmouth park june 18 might future extend next years triple crown chase think hell run long said trainer jason servis asked irad thinks hell run long hes kind laid back think hell get seveneighths 350000 grade hopeful sept 4 think hell get mile mile quarter really hes kind horse juvenile fillies dream waited behind blistering early pace fridays 150000 grade iii schuylerville saratoga took turning home jetted win 9 lengths best performance stainless came well back finish second third snowfire favorite raced close winner first furlongs dropped back approaching turn ran evenly thereafter finish fourth dream shackleford filly ran 6 furlongs fast track 11185 luis contreras remains undefeated three starts first two woodbine allweather say said winning trainer barb minshall went say win race win like came horse thought good filly shot cant say expected run good ultimately owners decision well go next mentioned 350000 grade spinaway sept 2 definitely maybe glamanation hit gate start sundays 125000 canadian shady well stakes woodbine raced near back sixfilly field rallied fivewide win 1 length mega monster mo big cat also found best stride late finish third glamanation point entry filly ran 5 12 furlongs allweather track 10594 david moran irons scoring first career win international england bengali boys distanced 22 rivals final furlong saturdays weatherbys super sprint stakes 2yearolds newbury kicking 6lengths score declarationoflove second edging favorite maggies angel final strides bengali boys clodovil colt trained richard fahey two wins two seconds four career starts race target every year lucky enough win three times last five years fahey said go sales buy horses weatherbys super sprint need cheap horses race bengali boys cost 11000 euros race run soft ground appeared favor winner restricted products certain sales certain price ranges weights determined part sale price nonetheless recent past super sprint attracted attention hong kong buyers notably sending peniaphobia group 1 glory hong kong winning 2013 renewal super sprint also fahey around ovals laurel park dozing dueled honor fleet midstretch saturdays 75000 concern stakes 3yearolds drew win 4 lengths foe proforma alex completed order finish dozing union rags colt negotiated 7 furlongs muddy sealed track 12285 daniel centeno irons previous outing dozing finished second behind wild shot grade iii pat day mile churchill downs monmouth park snowday pressed pace saturdays 60000 frenchman stakes got advantage turn finished well winning 2 34 lengths simon bar sinister black jet contested early lead held third big price snowday 7yearold frenchbred gelding falco ran 5 12 furlongs firm turf 10227 jose ferrer aboard finger lakes twisted tom put bid turn saturdays 150000 new york derby battled lane broken engagement prevailed 12 length pat back third another 2 14 lengths arrears twisted tom creative cause gelding ran 1 116 miles fast track 14452 feargal lynch irons bonita bianca rallied last six win saturdays 150000 new york oaks neck playinwiththeboys oddson favorite tiznows smile another 6 34 lengths track third bonita bianca curlin filly reported 14672 dylan davis riding lone star park texas chrome oddson favorite rated pace saturdays 50000 assault stakes texasbreds collared pacesetter supermason near sixteenth pole 1 14 rival f j uncle vic third 9 14 lengths farther back texas chrome 4yearold grasshopper colt got 1 mile fast track 13659 richard eramia riding pradas bling pressed pace saturdays 50000 valor farm stakes texasbred distaffers took stretch 1 12 lengths zappit e kats infatuation another 34 length back third pradas bling 5yearold mare much bling ran 6 furlongs fast track 11096 iram diego janae survived rough start 100000 filly division restricted texas thoroughbred futurity led way held end 5 furlongs winning neck ms classic west another head patrona margarita janae closing argument filly clocked 5908 seconds kerwin clark irons colts geldings division futurity galactica pressed pace moved lead furlong left held win 34 length aceguitar another 6 lengths back toledo pache brian hernandez jr piloted galactia uncle abie gelding covered 5 furlongs 5812 emerald downs little dancer stalked pace sundays 75000 washington oaks got leader daddyalwayssays late going 12 length rival reginella third little dancer successful appeal filly ran 9 furlongs fast track 15005 rocco bowen albuquerque kentucky invader anythingyoucando blew pacesetter lane saturdays 55000 albuquerque distaff drew 3 14lengths victory caviar kitty second neck better tiring early leader bella anatola anythingyoucando 5yearold curlin mare ran 1 mile fast track 13765 alfredo juarez jr irons trainer steve asmussen parx racing threeohtwocassie along final stages upset saturdays 100000 crowd pleaser stakes pennsylvaniabred 3yearolds iggy loco second 34 length back favorite fast accurate settled show money threeohtwocassie e dubai gelding ran 1 116 miles firm turf 14414 edwin gonzalez irons firsthand report pushed favorite fat kat early furlongs saturdays 100000 power far stakes statebred fillies mares left one behind winning 3 lengths zensational merry third 2 lengths arrears fat kat firsthand report 4yearold blame filly got 5 furlongs firm turf 5803 seconds john bisono sacramento alliford bay got early leader fast foxy stretch run saturdays 50000 california governors cup fillies mares winning 34 length one princess ashlyn third alliford bay 3yearold city zip filly got 6 furlongs fast track 10953 irving orozco irons thistledown tango run found running room inside entering stretch saturdays 75000 miss ohio stakes statebred 2yearold fillies went win 2 34 lengths count de loot summit point showed way early salvaged show money tango run daughter run away hide ran 5 12 furlongs muddy track 10688 rex stokes iii irons belterra park nikki darling led way sundays 75000 norm barron queen city stakes 3yearold ohiobred fillies dominated final furlong winning 6 12 lengths ticket home best rest 2 14 lengths ahead cali dream nikki darling daughter creative cause ran 9 furlongs muddy sealed track 14941 luis colon | 2,072 |
<p />
<p>Washington’s decision not to let President Isaias Afewerki join over forty other African heads of government for the US-Africa summit in D.C. early this month was a huge blow to the regime but a monumental victory for Eritreans fighting for freedom and democracy.</p>
<p>Like Isaias, Sudan’s Al-Bashir and Zimbabwe’s Mugabe were also uninvited for committing genocidal atrocities against their own people. The barely known interim leader of the war-torn Central African Republic Catherine Samba-Panza was also not invited. To be consistent, the US should also have excluded other repressive dictators, among them, Equatorial Guinea’s Nguema and Uganda’s Museveni.</p>
<p>Keeping aside its inconsistencies, the US saw no purpose in inviting Isaias who is widely seen as Africa’s worst violator of fundamental human and democratic rights. His government has not only been committing atrocities against Eritreans, but as the UN Somalia and Eritrea Monitoring Group has concluded, it has also supported international terrorism by aiding and abetting the deadly Al-Qaeda linked Al-Shabab group which has slaughtered thousands of civilians in Somalia and beyond.</p>
<p>It would have been a terrible setback for the exiled pro-democracy Eritrean movement had Isaias been invited as a guest in Washington, where he would be lecturing on his impractical “self-reliance” philosophy and where he would be denying that thousands have been sent&#160; to jail for their political or religious convictions as reported by human rights agencies.</p>
<p>Then to add salt to injury, there are the misinformed worshipers of the president who would be welcoming and cheering him. Ironically, most of these misguided followers fled the homeland because they themselves were unsafe and impoverished under Isaias or Mengistu Hailemariam before him.</p>
<p>Lack of Democratic Institutions</p>
<p>Obama says no person wants to live in a society where the rule of law gives way to the rule of brutality and corruption. Visiting Africa in 2009, he emphasized that “Africa did not need strong men, but strong institutions.”</p>
<p>He was referring to democratic institutions where there is no trace of them in Eritrea. By excluding the Eritrean leader from the august Washington summit, the US President was sending the message that there is no peace or prosperity without political participation of the people.</p>
<p>Eritrea has come a long way since Isaias staged a disturbing “coup” against the people on September 18, 2001 when the press and dissenting voices were buried alive. He ordered the imprisonment of almost all of government ministers including the vice president as well as almost all journalists with privately owned newspapers. They have been languishing in unknown prisons since.</p>
<p>For several years following this fateful event, it was hard for exiled Eritrean journalists and activists to get the attention and support from the West let alone from a US President who now tells the Eritrean leader that he is not qualified to take part in talks pertaining to Africa’s future unless he first respects the will of his own people.</p>
<p>More Isolation</p>
<p>There was yet another embarrassing moment for the Isaias regime when in 2009 the 54-member African Union unanimously adopted a resolution to ask the UN Security Council to slap the Eritrean government with sanctions for posing a threat to the peace and security of the East and Horn of Africa Region. Two years later, the Security Council imposed yet more stringent economic and military sanctions on the Asmara government for failing to abide by the 2009 sanction resolutions.</p>
<p>In mid-December last year, Isaias was in Nairobi along with most of East and Horn of African leaders who had in the past condemned his siding with the Islamist radicals in Somalia, who have been threatening the stability of the region. He was among 20 heads of state attending Kenya’s 50th independence anniversary. President Uhuru Kenyatta is an ICC suspect for crimes against humanity and he needs any UN member state on his side. Apart from the fact that both leaders are in trouble, Uhuru and Isaias have nothing in common.</p>
<p>Although hyped by Eri-TV as an important three day Kenya trip, there were no reports of Uhuru-Isaias meetings in the State House or on the sidelines of the celebrations to discuss any investment or trade deals. During the festivities Isaias was many times seen next to former Kenya President Mwai Kibaki who is most unhappy with the Eritrean leader for his reported support of Al-Shabab. In 2011, the then-President Kibaki dispatched thousands of troops to Somalia after Al-Shabab attacked tourist sites and hotels in Kenya. Isaias could not have been thrilled with having Kibaki’s company in the anniversary programs given the huge rift between the two.</p>
<p>Isaias however found consolation and relief when he was warmly welcomed in an event organized by the Eritrean Community of refugees and immigrants in Nairobi many of whom were in need of visas and passports from the government in exchange for payment of the notorious 2% “diaspora income tax” banned under UN sanctions.</p>
<p>Squandering Public Trust</p>
<p>The Eritrean government lost almost all of its friends in Africa because of its alleged destabilizing role in the region and partly because of its poor foreign policy, thus leading to most damaging sanctions unprecedented in recent African history. At the UN, it could not garner the support of Russia or China when sanctions were debated in 2009 and again in 2011. In any case China or Russia could not do much to help unless regional blocs like IGAD-East Africa or the African Union were willing to cooperate.</p>
<p>Isaias and his advisors have repeatedly squandered the good-will and trust of African and western governments, and above all that of his own people claiming that the country was facing “unique” survival problems. For many years after the 1998-2000 war with Ethiopia, many Eritreans, young and old, wanted to sacrifice individual interests for the sake of the nation.</p>
<p>Western establishments were ok with this even though Isaias was openly becoming a full-fledged authoritarian trampling on democratic and human rights and defying US and UN warnings against his government’s reported association with Al-Shabab.</p>
<p>Contrary to Washington’s strongly held position, former US Under-Secretary for African Affairs Herman Cohen says Eritrea has had no contacts with Al-Shabab since 2009 and stresses that “Eritrean leadership fears Islamic militancy as much as any other country in the Horn of Africa region”.</p>
<p>Moving Forward</p>
<p>Cohen and some International Crisis Group experts believe that ending the UN sanctions on Eritrea and resolving its border conflict with Ethiopia would automatically bring about change in domestic policy. Vital as such achievements would be in themselves, they cannot guarantee establishment of rule of law, and respect for rights and freedoms of the people. The government itself says it is ruling without a constitution, elections and enforcing endless national services because of external pressures.</p>
<p>The situation calls for change and neither the sanctions nor the “Ethiopia threat” can prevent the government to end repression and allow freedom of speech and start working with the people in building a democratic, prosperous country.</p>
<p>The next step would be to reestablish friendly relations with neighbors, beginning with Ethiopia. The president has reportedly said that Eritrea’s future is tied to that of Ethiopia. And Premier Hailemariam Desalegn of Ethiopia says he is ready to go to Asmara if it meant normalizing relations with Eritrea.</p>
<p>Such a move is bound to encourage him to normalize relations with Ethiopia as the best strategy to get rid of the excruciating sanctions. The US will not vote to have these sanctions lifted without the agreement from Ethiopia and other concerned East African governments.</p> | false | 1 | washingtons decision let president isaias afewerki join forty african heads government usafrica summit dc early month huge blow regime monumental victory eritreans fighting freedom democracy like isaias sudans albashir zimbabwes mugabe also uninvited committing genocidal atrocities people barely known interim leader wartorn central african republic catherine sambapanza also invited consistent us also excluded repressive dictators among equatorial guineas nguema ugandas museveni keeping aside inconsistencies us saw purpose inviting isaias widely seen africas worst violator fundamental human democratic rights government committing atrocities eritreans un somalia eritrea monitoring group concluded also supported international terrorism aiding abetting deadly alqaeda linked alshabab group slaughtered thousands civilians somalia beyond would terrible setback exiled prodemocracy eritrean movement isaias invited guest washington would lecturing impractical selfreliance philosophy would denying thousands sent160 jail political religious convictions reported human rights agencies add salt injury misinformed worshipers president would welcoming cheering ironically misguided followers fled homeland unsafe impoverished isaias mengistu hailemariam lack democratic institutions obama says person wants live society rule law gives way rule brutality corruption visiting africa 2009 emphasized africa need strong men strong institutions referring democratic institutions trace eritrea excluding eritrean leader august washington summit us president sending message peace prosperity without political participation people eritrea come long way since isaias staged disturbing coup people september 18 2001 press dissenting voices buried alive ordered imprisonment almost government ministers including vice president well almost journalists privately owned newspapers languishing unknown prisons since several years following fateful event hard exiled eritrean journalists activists get attention support west let alone us president tells eritrean leader qualified take part talks pertaining africas future unless first respects people isolation yet another embarrassing moment isaias regime 2009 54member african union unanimously adopted resolution ask un security council slap eritrean government sanctions posing threat peace security east horn africa region two years later security council imposed yet stringent economic military sanctions asmara government failing abide 2009 sanction resolutions middecember last year isaias nairobi along east horn african leaders past condemned siding islamist radicals somalia threatening stability region among 20 heads state attending kenyas 50th independence anniversary president uhuru kenyatta icc suspect crimes humanity needs un member state side apart fact leaders trouble uhuru isaias nothing common although hyped eritv important three day kenya trip reports uhuruisaias meetings state house sidelines celebrations discuss investment trade deals festivities isaias many times seen next former kenya president mwai kibaki unhappy eritrean leader reported support alshabab 2011 thenpresident kibaki dispatched thousands troops somalia alshabab attacked tourist sites hotels kenya isaias could thrilled kibakis company anniversary programs given huge rift two isaias however found consolation relief warmly welcomed event organized eritrean community refugees immigrants nairobi many need visas passports government exchange payment notorious 2 diaspora income tax banned un sanctions squandering public trust eritrean government lost almost friends africa alleged destabilizing role region partly poor foreign policy thus leading damaging sanctions unprecedented recent african history un could garner support russia china sanctions debated 2009 2011 case china russia could much help unless regional blocs like igadeast africa african union willing cooperate isaias advisors repeatedly squandered goodwill trust african western governments people claiming country facing unique survival problems many years 19982000 war ethiopia many eritreans young old wanted sacrifice individual interests sake nation western establishments ok even though isaias openly becoming fullfledged authoritarian trampling democratic human rights defying us un warnings governments reported association alshabab contrary washingtons strongly held position former us undersecretary african affairs herman cohen says eritrea contacts alshabab since 2009 stresses eritrean leadership fears islamic militancy much country horn africa region moving forward cohen international crisis group experts believe ending un sanctions eritrea resolving border conflict ethiopia would automatically bring change domestic policy vital achievements would guarantee establishment rule law respect rights freedoms people government says ruling without constitution elections enforcing endless national services external pressures situation calls change neither sanctions ethiopia threat prevent government end repression allow freedom speech start working people building democratic prosperous country next step would reestablish friendly relations neighbors beginning ethiopia president reportedly said eritreas future tied ethiopia premier hailemariam desalegn ethiopia says ready go asmara meant normalizing relations eritrea move bound encourage normalize relations ethiopia best strategy get rid excruciating sanctions us vote sanctions lifted without agreement ethiopia concerned east african governments | 701 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans were barreling ahead Monday for a showdown vote on a health care reform bill despite independent analysis that showed the GOP plan would leave 22 million uninsured.</p>
<p>President Donald Trump weighed in Monday, calling Democrats “obstructionists” for their opposition to repealing and replacing former President Barack Obama’s signature health care legacy legislation.</p>
<p>But Republicans were scrambling to appease factions within their own party before a vote expected later this week.</p>
<p>Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., blew open the intra-party divide the Senate GOP faces when he announced Friday that he would vote against the current draft of the bill because of its cuts to Medicaid and the end of expansion of the program, which insured more than 200,000 additional Nevadans.</p>
<p>Heller’s opposition followed four conservative GOP lawmakers, led by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who said the draft bill did not go far enough to cut costs and fully repeal the Affordable Care Act, commonly called Obamacare.</p>
<p>The Senate is trying to pass the bill under budget reconciliation rules, which allow it to approve legislation with a simple majority and without threat of a Democratic filibuster. But the Senate must stay within budget parameters.</p>
<p>The Congressional Budget Office found the Senate draft would leave 22 million uninsured over 10 years yet reduce federal deficits by $321 billion over that time.</p>
<p>The CBO found that a House-passed health-care bill would leave about 23 million without coverage over a 10-year period and reduce the federal deficit by $119 billion over the same period.</p>
<p>The extra savings in the Senate bill, which comes from tax cuts, gives Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., more flexibility to offer programs like opioid addiction coverage to attract moderate senators wavering on the bill.</p>
<p>Groups announce opposition</p>
<p>Still, the analysis comes on the heels of several major groups announcing their opposition to the bill and its proposals, particularly Medicaid cuts.</p>
<p>The National Association of Medicaid Directors, a bipartisan organization that represents state agencies across the country, said any changes to Medicaid need clearly articulated legislative changes for states to follow.</p>
<p>“The Senate bill does not accomplish that. It would be a transfer of risk, responsibility and cost to the states of historic proportions,” the association stated.</p>
<p>And the nation’s largest doctors’ group, the American Medical Association, sent McConnell and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., a letter outlining its opposition.</p>
<p>“Medicine has long operated under the precept of Primum non nocere, or ‘first, do no harm.’ The draft legislation violates that standard on many levels,” the AMA wrote.</p>
<p>Democrats have remained united in opposition of repeal of the ACA, instead urging Republicans to make changes to the program instead of replacing it with one that is being crafted without committee hearings.</p>
<p>“There is a reason they want to jam this through in one week,” Schumer said, “They are ashamed of their bill.”</p>
<p>Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., said the Senate’s draft bill would not only hurt many Nevadans, but it would have a disproportionate impact on minority communities. She said uninsurance rates for Latinos in the state fell from 34 percent to 19 percent under the ACA — and dropped from 20 percent to 10.7 percent for Latino children.</p>
<p>Cortez Masto said non-elderly Latinos would suffer the most under Medicaid cuts in the Senate draft.</p>
<p>Republicans update bill</p>
<p>Trump, in a tweet early Monday, said Republicans were working “very hard” to craft health care legislation without support of Democrats. Trump said the alternative would be to let Obamacare “crash and burn” on its own.The Senate released an updated version of its bill Monday.</p>
<p>A change in the bill was aimed at closing a gap that would allow healthy people to not buy insurance until they became ill, and purchasing a plan when they had a pre-existing condition.</p>
<p>The change would require that people who let their coverage lapse for 63 days in one year would be locked out of the insurance market for six months the following year.</p>
<p>Republican leaders were still crafting changes to the legislation on Monday, seeking ways to sway lawmakers. There are nine senators who have voiced concerns about the bill, and five who have said they would not vote for it in the current form.</p>
<p>Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, noted that the bill defunds Planned Parenthood, which offers cancer screening and family planning for low-income women. She also questioned coverage under the bill for people in rural areas.</p>
<p>White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump called Paul and Sen.Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and probably others, over the weekend. Paul and Cruz are two of four conservatives who have called the draft legislation too liberal.</p>
<p>Paul said Monday that the lack of time to digest the 149-page bill, the CBO score and additional changes would make it difficult for many senators to vote for it this week.</p>
<p>Heller, who faces re-election challenges in 2018 in Nevada, said “The CBO score confirms that the bill in its current form doesn’t go far enough to lower costs for Nevada families or protect Nevadans on Medicaid.”</p>
<p>Contact Gary Martin at 202-662-7390 or [email protected]. Follow @garymartindc on Twitter.</p>
<p>RELATED</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Heller talks of effort to spare Nevadans from deep Medicaid cuts</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Senate Republicans unveil Obamacare replacement, but run into opposition</a></p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington senate republicans barreling ahead monday showdown vote health care reform bill despite independent analysis showed gop plan would leave 22 million uninsured president donald trump weighed monday calling democrats obstructionists opposition repealing replacing former president barack obamas signature health care legacy legislation republicans scrambling appease factions within party vote expected later week sen dean heller rnev blew open intraparty divide senate gop faces announced friday would vote current draft bill cuts medicaid end expansion program insured 200000 additional nevadans hellers opposition followed four conservative gop lawmakers led sen rand paul rky said draft bill go far enough cut costs fully repeal affordable care act commonly called obamacare senate trying pass bill budget reconciliation rules allow approve legislation simple majority without threat democratic filibuster senate must stay within budget parameters congressional budget office found senate draft would leave 22 million uninsured 10 years yet reduce federal deficits 321 billion time cbo found housepassed healthcare bill would leave 23 million without coverage 10year period reduce federal deficit 119 billion period extra savings senate bill comes tax cuts gives senate majority leader mitch mcconnell rky flexibility offer programs like opioid addiction coverage attract moderate senators wavering bill groups announce opposition still analysis comes heels several major groups announcing opposition bill proposals particularly medicaid cuts national association medicaid directors bipartisan organization represents state agencies across country said changes medicaid need clearly articulated legislative changes states follow senate bill accomplish would transfer risk responsibility cost states historic proportions association stated nations largest doctors group american medical association sent mcconnell senate democratic leader chuck schumer dny letter outlining opposition medicine long operated precept primum non nocere first harm draft legislation violates standard many levels ama wrote democrats remained united opposition repeal aca instead urging republicans make changes program instead replacing one crafted without committee hearings reason want jam one week schumer said ashamed bill sen catherine cortez masto dnev said senates draft bill would hurt many nevadans would disproportionate impact minority communities said uninsurance rates latinos state fell 34 percent 19 percent aca dropped 20 percent 107 percent latino children cortez masto said nonelderly latinos would suffer medicaid cuts senate draft republicans update bill trump tweet early monday said republicans working hard craft health care legislation without support democrats trump said alternative would let obamacare crash burn ownthe senate released updated version bill monday change bill aimed closing gap would allow healthy people buy insurance became ill purchasing plan preexisting condition change would require people let coverage lapse 63 days one year would locked insurance market six months following year republican leaders still crafting changes legislation monday seeking ways sway lawmakers nine senators voiced concerns bill five said would vote current form sen susan collins rmaine noted bill defunds planned parenthood offers cancer screening family planning lowincome women also questioned coverage bill people rural areas white house spokesman sean spicer said trump called paul sented cruz rtexas probably others weekend paul cruz two four conservatives called draft legislation liberal paul said monday lack time digest 149page bill cbo score additional changes would make difficult many senators vote week heller faces reelection challenges 2018 nevada said cbo score confirms bill current form doesnt go far enough lower costs nevada families protect nevadans medicaid contact gary martin 2026627390 gmartinreviewjournalcom follow garymartindc twitter related heller talks effort spare nevadans deep medicaid cuts senate republicans unveil obamacare replacement run opposition | 561 |
<p />
<p>The Spanish-American War was caused by three people:&#160; Teddy Roosevelt, Henry Cabot Lodge, and William Randolph Hearst.&#160; The war, which killed a number of Spaniards and Americans, including some prominent Harvard "Swells," was based entirely on lies and machinations of these three men and served no purpose other than their personal needs. Princeton University historian Evan Thomas calls these three monsters The War Lovers.</p>
<p>Hearst needed a war to build his newspaper circulation.&#160; Roosevelt needed a war to slate his blood-lust and desire for military glory.&#160; Lodge needed a war to reinvigorate American manhood and to enlist American manhood in his "Large Policy" of American Empire. Between them, thanks to the ignorance and stupidity of the American people, they pulled it off.</p>
<p>Their adversary was Speaker of the House, Thomas Brackett Reed, "the Czar," the most powerful politician in Washington. Reed, an honest and incorruptible politician, saw Lodge's policy of "American exceptionalism" as naked imperialism that stood in total opposition and in great danger to American purposes.&#160; Reed saw Roosevelt's war lust as a diversion of national purpose from the reconstruction of an economy that increasingly served a shrinking minority at the expense of the American people. But Hearst, Roosevelt, and Lodge made "peace" an epithet. The American people, whose gullibility is never-ending, were captivated by war-lust.&#160; Reed lost confidence in the American people whom he so well served. Reed could find no moral purpose in pushing the country toward war over nothing but fake news reports by "yellow journalism."</p>
<p>Only a few years previously, Reed had had to halt the Cleveland administration from going to war with Great Britain over a British boundary dispute with Venezuela concerning mineral-rich land claimed by British Guyana. Somehow this boundary dispute, which had no more to do with US security than Honduras, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Georgia, Ukraine, and the South China Sea have today, was seen as a "threat to US national security."</p>
<p>Roosevelt and Lodge were ecstatic over the possibility of War with Great Britain. War was its own goal. Roosevelt wrote to Lodge: "I don't care whether our sea coast cities are bombarded or not; we would take Canada." Fortunately, or perhaps unfortunately, hard facts prevailed over American war lust. The American navy had 3 battleships. The British had 50. If only Washington had gone to war with Great Britain over a British boundary dispute with Venezuela. The total destruction of the American navy and coastal cities might have taught Americans a lesson and made the population less lustful for war and more suspicious of Washington's war lies: the Gulf of Tonkin, Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, Iranian nukes, Assad's use of chemical weapons, Russian invasion of Crimea, etc.</p>
<p>Roosevelt and Lodge searched for a weaker adversary than the British navy and settled on Spain.</p>
<p>But how to bring about a war with a declining and tired 400-year old empire far removed from American interests?</p>
<p>Hearst, desperate to sell newspapers, knew what to do.&#160; He hired the artist, Frederic Remington, a painter and sculptor much worshipped by American conservatives today.</p>
<p>Remington provided a drawing, filling half of the front page of Hearst's New York Journal, of a comely nude young woman surrounded by sinister Spaniards.</p>
<p>Hearst alleged that three lady passengers on the US mail steamer Olivette were strip-searched in the Harbor of Havana, Cuba, by leering Spanish males.</p>
<p>America had a rare moment of rational thought and philosophical reflection during the brief period of its Founding Fathers. Ever since America has been a country of pulp romances and court histories written as "chivalric derring-do." Hearst asked where were the knightly American males who would rescue womankind from these indignities at the hands of cruel, wanton, Spaniards.</p>
<p>Hearst repeated the story with Evangelina Cisneros, "a beautiful young woman from the gentlest of families." In Hearst's story Evangelina went to the Island of Pines to beg for her elderly father's release from the cruel Spaniards. As she resisted the sexual advances of the leering Spanish prison commander, she was thrown into a squalid prison for prostitutes.</p>
<p>Having created his heroine, Hearst rushed to rescue her. Hearst hired the son of a Confederate cavalry colonel, Karl Decker, to rescue the fair lady. Thousands of words were printed to describe Decker's daring rescue, but what really happened is that Hearst bribed the Spanish guards to let her go from her comfortable hotel room. Having freed "one Cuban girl," Hearst wanted to know "when shall we free Cuba."</p>
<p>Teddy Roosevelt wanted to be the star of the event. Senator Lodge and the American newsman Richard Harding Davis made it so. Teddy charging up the hill, leading the Rough Riders, not urging from behind, defeated the Spanish all by himself and won the war.</p>
<p>What did it mean for the Cubans, a mixed and varied peoples, who had been fighting the Spanish for independence for years before self-righteous, self-serving Americans saw the opportunity to advance their interests and careers?</p>
<p>For Cubans, it meant swapping one master for another.</p>
<p>General William Shafter, the American in charge of the invasion force, declared: "Why these people [Cubans] are no more fit for self-government than gunpowder is for hell!"</p>
<p>Calixto Garcia, who had been fighting for thirty years for Cuba's liberation from Spain, was not allowed to be present when Spain surrendered Cuba. It was purely an American show devoid of the revolutionaries in whose name the war had been fought.</p>
<p>Roosevelt wrote home that the Cubans had fought badly and were not responsible for their liberation from Spain. It was Teddy and his Rough Riders who brought freedom to Cuba. The Teller Amendment passed by Congress in 1898 guaranteeing independence to Cuba was superseded by the Platt Amendment of 1901. The Platt Amendment gave Washington the right to intervene in Cuba whenever Washington pleased.</p>
<p>It finally dawned on Cubans that "civilization," a word used by Americans, meant "denying the darker races the power to govern." In 1908 Cubans who had fought against Spain formed an independent political party.&#160; They were massacred by the thousands by the Cuban government now more sensitive to pleasing Washington than to the voice of its own people.</p>
<p>The story of American intervention is the same everywhere.&#160; American intervention has never benefited any peoples except those allied with Washington and American corporations.</p>
<p>Hearst's rival in yellow journalism was Joseph Pulitzer, whose name ended up on a prestigious journalism award. Today the entire US print and TV media engage in the yellow journalism of the Hearst/Pulitzer era. Yellow journalism has helped to keep America in wars as nonsensical as the Spanish-American war ever since the 21st century began. The neoconservatives have resurrected Lodge's "Large Policy" of American imperialism justified by the doctrine of American exceptionalism.</p>
<p>If Americans were to read three history books, they could free themselves from their self-righteous delusions that endanger all life on earth.&#160; Those books are: A People's History Of The United States by Howard Zinn, The Untold History of the United States by Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick, and The War Lovers by Evan Thomas.</p>
<p>No one who reads one of these books will ever again believe that the US government in Washington is the "light unto the world," the "exceptional and indispensable" government that brings "freedom and democracy" to the conquered provinces of the American Empire.</p>
<p>Washington is the home of warmongering self-interested parties that have no concept of compassion or justice and serve only their own power and enrichment. Americans are as indifferent to the populations that their government bombs as Teddy Roosevelt was to the prospect of his own country's coastal cities being bombarded. As Russia's President Putin reminded the world on March 18, 2014, the US prefers the rule of the gun to international law.</p> | false | 1 | spanishamerican war caused three people160 teddy roosevelt henry cabot lodge william randolph hearst160 war killed number spaniards americans including prominent harvard swells based entirely lies machinations three men served purpose personal needs princeton university historian evan thomas calls three monsters war lovers hearst needed war build newspaper circulation160 roosevelt needed war slate bloodlust desire military glory160 lodge needed war reinvigorate american manhood enlist american manhood large policy american empire thanks ignorance stupidity american people pulled adversary speaker house thomas brackett reed czar powerful politician washington reed honest incorruptible politician saw lodges policy american exceptionalism naked imperialism stood total opposition great danger american purposes160 reed saw roosevelts war lust diversion national purpose reconstruction economy increasingly served shrinking minority expense american people hearst roosevelt lodge made peace epithet american people whose gullibility neverending captivated warlust160 reed lost confidence american people well served reed could find moral purpose pushing country toward war nothing fake news reports yellow journalism years previously reed halt cleveland administration going war great britain british boundary dispute venezuela concerning mineralrich land claimed british guyana somehow boundary dispute us security honduras afghanistan iraq libya syria pakistan somalia yemen georgia ukraine south china sea today seen threat us national security roosevelt lodge ecstatic possibility war great britain war goal roosevelt wrote lodge dont care whether sea coast cities bombarded would take canada fortunately perhaps unfortunately hard facts prevailed american war lust american navy 3 battleships british 50 washington gone war great britain british boundary dispute venezuela total destruction american navy coastal cities might taught americans lesson made population less lustful war suspicious washingtons war lies gulf tonkin saddam husseins weapons mass destruction iranian nukes assads use chemical weapons russian invasion crimea etc roosevelt lodge searched weaker adversary british navy settled spain bring war declining tired 400year old empire far removed american interests hearst desperate sell newspapers knew do160 hired artist frederic remington painter sculptor much worshipped american conservatives today remington provided drawing filling half front page hearsts new york journal comely nude young woman surrounded sinister spaniards hearst alleged three lady passengers us mail steamer olivette stripsearched harbor havana cuba leering spanish males america rare moment rational thought philosophical reflection brief period founding fathers ever since america country pulp romances court histories written chivalric derringdo hearst asked knightly american males would rescue womankind indignities hands cruel wanton spaniards hearst repeated story evangelina cisneros beautiful young woman gentlest families hearsts story evangelina went island pines beg elderly fathers release cruel spaniards resisted sexual advances leering spanish prison commander thrown squalid prison prostitutes created heroine hearst rushed rescue hearst hired son confederate cavalry colonel karl decker rescue fair lady thousands words printed describe deckers daring rescue really happened hearst bribed spanish guards let go comfortable hotel room freed one cuban girl hearst wanted know shall free cuba teddy roosevelt wanted star event senator lodge american newsman richard harding davis made teddy charging hill leading rough riders urging behind defeated spanish war mean cubans mixed varied peoples fighting spanish independence years selfrighteous selfserving americans saw opportunity advance interests careers cubans meant swapping one master another general william shafter american charge invasion force declared people cubans fit selfgovernment gunpowder hell calixto garcia fighting thirty years cubas liberation spain allowed present spain surrendered cuba purely american show devoid revolutionaries whose name war fought roosevelt wrote home cubans fought badly responsible liberation spain teddy rough riders brought freedom cuba teller amendment passed congress 1898 guaranteeing independence cuba superseded platt amendment 1901 platt amendment gave washington right intervene cuba whenever washington pleased finally dawned cubans civilization word used americans meant denying darker races power govern 1908 cubans fought spain formed independent political party160 massacred thousands cuban government sensitive pleasing washington voice people story american intervention everywhere160 american intervention never benefited peoples except allied washington american corporations hearsts rival yellow journalism joseph pulitzer whose name ended prestigious journalism award today entire us print tv media engage yellow journalism hearstpulitzer era yellow journalism helped keep america wars nonsensical spanishamerican war ever since 21st century began neoconservatives resurrected lodges large policy american imperialism justified doctrine american exceptionalism americans read three history books could free selfrighteous delusions endanger life earth160 books peoples history united states howard zinn untold history united states oliver stone peter kuznick war lovers evan thomas one reads one books ever believe us government washington light unto world exceptional indispensable government brings freedom democracy conquered provinces american empire washington home warmongering selfinterested parties concept compassion justice serve power enrichment americans indifferent populations government bombs teddy roosevelt prospect countrys coastal cities bombarded russias president putin reminded world march 18 2014 us prefers rule gun international law | 766 |
<p>Jan. 20 (UPI) — Hours after the government shut down because a stop-gap spending bill failed, Congress was figuring out how to end the stalemate.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&amp;session=2&amp;vote=00014#top" type="external">U.S. Senate</a> didn’t get the necessary 60 votes to approve a temporary spending bill through Feb. 16 that doesn’t protect nearly 800,000 undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United States as children. Fifty Senators approved the measure and 49 were opposed less than an hour before the midnight deadline as a <a href="https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2018/01/19/Government-shuts-down-as-Senate-fails-to-reach-deal/1961516377683/?utm_source=fp&amp;utm_campaign=ls&amp;utm_medium=1" type="external">few members from from both parties</a> voted with the other side.</p>
<p>Members of both parties are planning <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/government-shuts-down-after-senate-bill-collapses-negotiations-fail/2018/01/20/dca0d7e0-fda6-11e7-8f66-2df0b94bb98a_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_shutdown0121-753am-desktoptablet%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&amp;utm_term=.14907871846d" type="external">weekend sessions</a>.</p>
<p>The House, which passed its <a href="https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2018/01/18/House-approves-short-term-spending-bill-Senate-Democrats-vow-to-block-it/4571516326016/" type="external">measure Thursday by a 230-197 vote</a> was scheduled to reconvene at 9 a.m. and the Senate at noon Saturday. House Republicans and Democrats planned for separate caucus meetings at 10 a.m. Saturday to kick off private talks.</p>
<p>President <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Donald_Trump/" type="external">Donald Trump</a> remained in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, canceling a weekend trip to Palm Beach, Fla., where he had scheduled a fundraising party at his Mar-a-Lago oceanside club to celebrate the anniversary of his inauguration.</p>
<p>Both sides are blaming each other, with Senate Minority Leader <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chuck_Schumer/" type="external">Chuck Schumer</a> of New York calling it the Trump shutdown and Republicans and Trump calling it the Schumer shutdown.</p>
<p>“This is the One Year Anniversary of my Presidency and the Democrats wanted to give me a nice present,” Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954678287820902401" type="external">posted on Twitter</a>.</p>
<p>His first post of the day <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954674157144477696" type="external">came minutes earlier at 6:17 a.m.</a>: “Democrats are far more concerned with Illegal Immigrants than they are with our great Military or Safety at our dangerous Southern Border. They could have easily made a deal but decided to play Shutdown politics instead.”</p>
<p>The government was shut down, except for essential services, for the first time in four years. In 2013, the government shut down for 13 days when more than 850,000, <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/20/us/five-things-january-20-trnd/index.html" type="external">“non-essential” federal workers</a> had to stay home, though they ultimately were paid for their time off.</p>
<p>Essential services will continue to function, including the U.S. mail, issuance of Social Security checks, air traffic control and screening and the military. The National Zoo and the Smithsonian museums will close starting Monday.</p>
<p>On Friday, Office of Management and Budget Director <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mick-Mulvaney/" type="external">Mick Mulvaney</a> said the impact could be limited before government offices open Monday.</p>
<p>The two sides don’t differ on spending, but whether to include a fix for the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/daca/" type="external">Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals</a> program, which provides a pathway for young undocumented immigrations brought to the United States by their parents.</p>
<p>The Democrats and a few Republican allies refused to vote for the bill in an attempt to force Republicans to negotiate.</p>
<p>Outgoing Republican Sen. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jeff_Flake/" type="external">Jeff Flake</a> of Arizona, who voted against the spending bill, predicted the Senate will agree on a spending bill that would restore government functions through Feb. 8. Before that deadline, he hoped, McConnell would revisit a bipartisan bill from <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Lindsey_Graham/" type="external">Lindsey Graham</a>, R-S.C., and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dick_Durbin/" type="external">Dick Durbin</a>, D-Ill.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/Trump-rejects-bipartisan-immigration-deal-denies-controversial-remark/9221515760001/" type="external">Trump voiced his displeasure</a> with that bill last week in a rant targeted at African nations, Haiti and El Salvador.</p>
<p>The White House said after the shutdown they would not negotiate over immigration until Congress restores government funding.</p>
<p>“We will not negotiate the status of unlawful immigrants while Democrats hold our lawful citizens hostage over their reckless demands,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders <a href="https://twitter.com/presssec?lang=en" type="external">said in a statement</a> after the vote. “This is the behavior of obstructionist losers, not legislators. When Democrats start paying our armed forces and first responders we will reopen negotiations on <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Immigration_Reform/" type="external">immigration reform</a>.”</p>
<p><a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954680914998648833" type="external">In another tweet</a>, Trump said more Republicans are needed in the Senate: “For those asking, the Republicans only have 51 votes in the Senate, and they need 60. That is why we need to win more Republicans in 2018 Election! We can then be even tougher on Crime (and Border), and even better to our Military &amp; Veterans!”</p>
<p>In the meantime, Republicans need help from Democrats to pass legislation in the Senate.</p>
<p>Schumer called for a <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/369892-congress-looks-for-way-out-of-government-shutdown" type="external">White House summit</a> between congressional leaders and Trump to hash out a broad deal that also deals with immigration, spending caps and disaster relief.</p>
<p>“The president and the four leaders should immediately sit down and finish this deal so the entire government can get back to work on Monday,” Schumer said.</p>
<p>Like the president, McConnell blamed the Democrats.</p>
<p>“A government shutdown was 100 percent avoidable,” McConnell said on the floor. “Completely avoidable. Now it is imminent. Perhaps across the aisle some of our Democratic colleagues are feeling proud of themselves, but what has their filibuster accomplished? . . . The answer is simple: Their very own government shutdown.”</p>
<p>Schumer said Trump walked away from a deal on immigration during a meeting at the White House Friday afternoon.</p>
<p>“He walked away from two bipartisan deals, including one today in which I even put the border wall on the table. What will it take for President Trump to say yes and learn how to execute the rudiments of government?” Schumer said.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/more-blame-republicans-than-democrats-for-potential-government-shutdown-post-abc-poll-finds/2018/01/19/c4fce2f6-fd32-11e7-ad8c-ecbb62019393_story.html?utm_term=.704a5536f47e" type="external">In a Washington Post poll</a> released Friday, 48 percent of respondents said Trump and congressional Republicans would be mainly responsible for the shutdown while 28 percent faulted Democrats.</p>
<p>But a <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/19/politics/cnn-poll-shutdown-trump-immigration-daca/index.html" type="external">CNN survey</a> released Friday that found 56 percent of polled voters believed that passing a budget to avoid a shutdown is more important than an agreement to help Dreamers.</p> | false | 1 | jan 20 upi hours government shut stopgap spending bill failed congress figuring end stalemate us senate didnt get necessary 60 votes approve temporary spending bill feb 16 doesnt protect nearly 800000 undocumented immigrants arrived united states children fifty senators approved measure 49 opposed less hour midnight deadline members parties voted side members parties planning weekend sessions house passed measure thursday 230197 vote scheduled reconvene 9 senate noon saturday house republicans democrats planned separate caucus meetings 10 saturday kick private talks president donald trump remained washington dc saturday canceling weekend trip palm beach fla scheduled fundraising party maralago oceanside club celebrate anniversary inauguration sides blaming senate minority leader chuck schumer new york calling trump shutdown republicans trump calling schumer shutdown one year anniversary presidency democrats wanted give nice present trump posted twitter first post day came minutes earlier 617 democrats far concerned illegal immigrants great military safety dangerous southern border could easily made deal decided play shutdown politics instead government shut except essential services first time four years 2013 government shut 13 days 850000 nonessential federal workers stay home though ultimately paid time essential services continue function including us mail issuance social security checks air traffic control screening military national zoo smithsonian museums close starting monday friday office management budget director mick mulvaney said impact could limited government offices open monday two sides dont differ spending whether include fix deferred action childhood arrivals program provides pathway young undocumented immigrations brought united states parents democrats republican allies refused vote bill attempt force republicans negotiate outgoing republican sen jeff flake arizona voted spending bill predicted senate agree spending bill would restore government functions feb 8 deadline hoped mcconnell would revisit bipartisan bill lindsey graham rsc dick durbin dill trump voiced displeasure bill last week rant targeted african nations haiti el salvador white house said shutdown would negotiate immigration congress restores government funding negotiate status unlawful immigrants democrats hold lawful citizens hostage reckless demands white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders said statement vote behavior obstructionist losers legislators democrats start paying armed forces first responders reopen negotiations immigration reform another tweet trump said republicans needed senate asking republicans 51 votes senate need 60 need win republicans 2018 election even tougher crime border even better military amp veterans meantime republicans need help democrats pass legislation senate schumer called white house summit congressional leaders trump hash broad deal also deals immigration spending caps disaster relief president four leaders immediately sit finish deal entire government get back work monday schumer said like president mcconnell blamed democrats government shutdown 100 percent avoidable mcconnell said floor completely avoidable imminent perhaps across aisle democratic colleagues feeling proud filibuster accomplished answer simple government shutdown schumer said trump walked away deal immigration meeting white house friday afternoon walked away two bipartisan deals including one today even put border wall table take president trump say yes learn execute rudiments government schumer said washington post poll released friday 48 percent respondents said trump congressional republicans would mainly responsible shutdown 28 percent faulted democrats cnn survey released friday found 56 percent polled voters believed passing budget avoid shutdown important agreement help dreamers | 517 |
<p>Nevada Sen. Dean Heller had a message Friday for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell: If you want his support on the Republican health care bill, change it.</p>
<p>Otherwise, count him out.</p>
<p>That’s essentially what Heller said in a joint press conference with Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval at the Sawyer State Office Building in Las Vegas.</p>
<p>“It’s going to be very hard to get me to a yes,” Heller said. “I will not support it in this form.”</p>
<p>Facing unanimous Democratic opposition, McConnell, R-Ky., must get yes votes from 50 of the 52 GOP senators to avoid a defeat that would be a major embarrassment to President Donald Trump and the Republican Party. He wants to put it to a vote by July 4.</p>
<p>Heller became the fifth GOP senator to announce opposition to the bill. Four conservative senators said Thursday they oppose the draft bill because it is too liberal and fails to fully repeal the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.</p>
<p>Though Heller cited a number of reasons for opposing the bill, there is no question that the major one was its deep reductions in federal support for Medicaid.</p>
<p>Under the proposed Senate bill, what now costs the state $121 million to cover 210,000 people on Medicaid would jump to more than $400 million by 2024 as federal support is phased out.</p>
<p>Under the Affordable Care Act, Sandoval expanded Medicaid three years ago, which translated to coverage for 210,000 additional state residents.</p>
<p>Nevada and 31 states and the District of Columbia expanded Medicaid under Obamacare, covering an additional 11 million people nationally.</p>
<p>‘Not the answer’</p>
<p>Both Sandoval and Heller said it was virtually impossible for the state to pick up an additional $300 million yearly Medicaid tab. Without increased federal funding, that means those who had become insured would lose insurance.</p>
<p>“This bill will mean a loss of coverage for millions of Americans and many Nevadans,” Heller said. “It doesn’t protect Nevadans on Medicaid and the most vulnerable Nevadans.”</p>
<p>The bill, he said, was “simply not the answer,” noting that it does not decrease premiums for people, which he said is a “lie” perpetuated by supporters of the legislation.</p>
<p>Heller said the only bigger lie made in a discussion on health care was President Barack Obama’s oft-repeated promise to Americans that they could keep their own doctor under the Affordable Care Act.</p>
<p>“There is nothing in this legislation that will lower premiums,” the senator said.</p>
<p>Heller also said also he was not pleased with the bill’s commitment for treatment for opioid addiction. He said his mother is now struggling with the problem following surgery.</p>
<p>McConnell has acknowledged that he’s willing to change the health care legislation measure before it’s voted on.</p>
<p>McConnell released the bill Thursday after weeks of closed-door meetings searching for middle ground between conservative senators seeking an aggressive repeal of Obama’s statute and centrists warning about going too far.</p>
<p>‘Worth fighting for’</p>
<p>In explaining why he took the opportunity to expand Medicaid, Sandoval pointed out that nearly a quarter of Nevadans were uninsured when he took office. That number has dropped to just over 10 percent.</p>
<p>“These are folks worth fighting for,” he said. “There was a commitment made to them.”</p>
<p>The Senate bill would cut and redesign the Medicaid program for low-income and disabled people, and erase taxes on higher earners and the medical industry that helped pay for the roughly 20 million Americans covered by Obamacare. It would let insurers provide fewer benefits, offer less generous subsidies than the Affordable Care Act to help people buy policies and end the statute’s tax penalties on people who don’t buy policies and on larger firms that don’t offer coverage to workers.</p>
<p>Shortly after the 142-page bill was distributed, more than a half-dozen GOP lawmakers signaled concerns or initial opposition.</p>
<p>Sen. Susan Collins of Maine reiterated her opposition to language blocking federal money for Planned Parenthood for a year, which many Republicans oppose because it provides abortions.</p>
<p>When Heller was questioned about that part of the bill Friday, he said: “I want just to be very clear. I do not have a beef with Planned Parenthood. I’m not opposed to Planned Parenthood. What I’m opposed to is any group or organization or clinic, regardless of who they are, if they receive federal funds and perform abortions, I won’t support it. That’s my position.”</p>
<p />
<p>Dawn Laguens, an executive vice president for Planned Parenthood, responded to Heller’s comment:</p>
<p>”As Sen. Heller knows full and well, federal funding does not pay for abortions. Like other health care providers, Planned Parenthood receives Medicaid reimbursements for preventive care, including birth control, life saving cancer screenings, and HIV testing.”</p>
<p>The bill would also bar using tax credits to buy coverage that includes abortions.</p>
<p>2018 election issue</p>
<p>The House approved its version of the bill last month. Though Trump lauded its passage in a Rose Garden ceremony, he called the House measure “mean” last week.</p>
<p>The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said that under the House bill, 23 million fewer people would have coverage by 2026. The budget office analysis of the Senate measure is expected early next week.</p>
<p>The Senate health care vote could be a central campaign issue in the 2018 midterm election in Nevada.</p>
<p>A likely Democratic challenger to Heller, Rep. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., has called the Senate draft legislation “an assault on Nevadans’ health care.”</p>
<p>“Senate Republicans are rallying around a plan that will make health care even more expensive for Nevadans and with the deep cuts to Medicaid, entirely out of reach for some of our families,” Rosen said.</p>
<p>Two major labor groups announced Friday that they would begin airing videos and ads targeting Heller and the health care vote.</p>
<p>The AFL-CIO is running ads on newspaper websites and digital billboards in Nevada, Ohio, West Virginia, Alaska and Maine, encouraging Republican senators in those states to reject the Senate bill.</p>
<p>“Working people are demanding that their senators reject this terrible bill that would take away health care for tens of millions of people and drive up costs,” said Richard Trumpka, AFL-CIO president.</p>
<p>In Las Vegas, The Culinary Union and the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada released a video asking Heller to protect Nevadans and Medicaid.</p>
<p>Contact Paul Harasim at [email protected] or 702 387-5273. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/paulharasim" type="external">@paulharasim</a> on Twitter. Gary Martin contributed to this report.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/352115460/Comparing-congressional-health-overhaul-bills#from_embed" type="external">Comparing congressional health overhaul bills</a> by <a href="https://www.scribd.com/user/234057260/Las-Vegas-Review-Journal#from_embed" type="external">Las Vegas Review-Journal</a> on Scribd</p>
<p />
<p>RELATED</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Senate Republicans unveil Obamacare replacement, but run into opposition</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Ads target Dean Heller, other GOP senators to sway vote on health care bill</a></p>
<p /> | false | 1 | nevada sen dean heller message friday senate majority leader mitch mcconnell want support republican health care bill change otherwise count thats essentially heller said joint press conference nevada gov brian sandoval sawyer state office building las vegas going hard get yes heller said support form facing unanimous democratic opposition mcconnell rky must get yes votes 50 52 gop senators avoid defeat would major embarrassment president donald trump republican party wants put vote july 4 heller became fifth gop senator announce opposition bill four conservative senators said thursday oppose draft bill liberal fails fully repeal affordable care act also known obamacare though heller cited number reasons opposing bill question major one deep reductions federal support medicaid proposed senate bill costs state 121 million cover 210000 people medicaid would jump 400 million 2024 federal support phased affordable care act sandoval expanded medicaid three years ago translated coverage 210000 additional state residents nevada 31 states district columbia expanded medicaid obamacare covering additional 11 million people nationally answer sandoval heller said virtually impossible state pick additional 300 million yearly medicaid tab without increased federal funding means become insured would lose insurance bill mean loss coverage millions americans many nevadans heller said doesnt protect nevadans medicaid vulnerable nevadans bill said simply answer noting decrease premiums people said lie perpetuated supporters legislation heller said bigger lie made discussion health care president barack obamas oftrepeated promise americans could keep doctor affordable care act nothing legislation lower premiums senator said heller also said also pleased bills commitment treatment opioid addiction said mother struggling problem following surgery mcconnell acknowledged hes willing change health care legislation measure voted mcconnell released bill thursday weeks closeddoor meetings searching middle ground conservative senators seeking aggressive repeal obamas statute centrists warning going far worth fighting explaining took opportunity expand medicaid sandoval pointed nearly quarter nevadans uninsured took office number dropped 10 percent folks worth fighting said commitment made senate bill would cut redesign medicaid program lowincome disabled people erase taxes higher earners medical industry helped pay roughly 20 million americans covered obamacare would let insurers provide fewer benefits offer less generous subsidies affordable care act help people buy policies end statutes tax penalties people dont buy policies larger firms dont offer coverage workers shortly 142page bill distributed halfdozen gop lawmakers signaled concerns initial opposition sen susan collins maine reiterated opposition language blocking federal money planned parenthood year many republicans oppose provides abortions heller questioned part bill friday said want clear beef planned parenthood im opposed planned parenthood im opposed group organization clinic regardless receive federal funds perform abortions wont support thats position dawn laguens executive vice president planned parenthood responded hellers comment sen heller knows full well federal funding pay abortions like health care providers planned parenthood receives medicaid reimbursements preventive care including birth control life saving cancer screenings hiv testing bill would also bar using tax credits buy coverage includes abortions 2018 election issue house approved version bill last month though trump lauded passage rose garden ceremony called house measure mean last week nonpartisan congressional budget office said house bill 23 million fewer people would coverage 2026 budget office analysis senate measure expected early next week senate health care vote could central campaign issue 2018 midterm election nevada likely democratic challenger heller rep jacky rosen dnev called senate draft legislation assault nevadans health care senate republicans rallying around plan make health care even expensive nevadans deep cuts medicaid entirely reach families rosen said two major labor groups announced friday would begin airing videos ads targeting heller health care vote aflcio running ads newspaper websites digital billboards nevada ohio west virginia alaska maine encouraging republican senators states reject senate bill working people demanding senators reject terrible bill would take away health care tens millions people drive costs said richard trumpka aflcio president las vegas culinary union progressive leadership alliance nevada released video asking heller protect nevadans medicaid contact paul harasim pharasimreviewjournalcom 702 3875273 follow paulharasim twitter gary martin contributed report comparing congressional health overhaul bills las vegas reviewjournal scribd related senate republicans unveil obamacare replacement run opposition ads target dean heller gop senators sway vote health care bill | 684 |
<p>President Donald Trump is counting on bipartisan support for his tax reform plan, which he says will boost the economy and the middle-class. And, he may be in luck, as Democratic lawmakers facing reelection in states Trump won feel the political pressure.</p>
<p>At a manufacturer in Springfield, Missouri, Trump told an audience of supporters that he was going to bring back Main Street with a tax plan that he said is “pro-growth, pro-jobs, pro-worker and pro-American.”</p>
<p>“We’re here today to launch our plans to bring back Main Street by reducing the crumbling burden on our companies and on our workers,” Trump said. “The foundation of our job creation agenda is to fundamentally reform our tax code for the first time in more than 30 years.”</p>
<p>Trump urged members of Congress to get behind his efforts, saying that this is a “once in a generation opportunity to deliver real tax reform for everyday hard-working Americans.”</p>
<p>“I don’t want to be disappointed by Congress. Do you understand me?” Trump said to the cheering crowd. “I think Congress is going to make a comeback. I hope so. I’ll tell you what, the United States is counting on it.”</p>
<p />
<p>‘I do not want to be disappointed by Congress. I think Congress is going to make a comeback… the United States is counting on it’ – Trump <a href="https://t.co/B7pD7Ie8gg" type="external">pic.twitter.com/B7pD7Ie8gg</a></p>
<p>— RT America (@RT_America) <a href="https://twitter.com/RT_America/status/902972186981486594" type="external">August 30, 2017</a></p>
<p />
<p>While calling for bipartisanship, Trump told his audience that if Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) did not support his proposals, they should vote her out of office.</p>
<p>“We must lower our taxes and your senator, Claire McCaskill, she must do this for you, and if she doesn’t, you have to vote her out of office,” Trump said. “You can’t do this anymore with the obstruction and the obstructionists.”</p>
<p>On Sunday, Trump tweeted that McCaskill, who faces reelection in 2018, would lose her seat to a Republican because she “is opposed to big tax cuts.”</p>
<p />
<p>I will also be going to a wonderful state, Missouri, that I won by a lot in ’16. Dem C.M. is opposed to big tax cuts. Republican will win S!</p>
<p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/901795255086968833" type="external">August 27, 2017</a></p>
<p />
<p>However, Trump’s wish for bipartisan support could be answered, as some Democrats are facing tough 2018 reelection races in states Trump won.</p>
<p>The White House is reportedly looking to gather support from three Democratic senators who will face reelection bids in states that Trump won by large margins.</p>
<p>On August 1, nearly every Democratic senator signed a <a href="https://www.durbin.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate%20Dems%20Tax%20Reform%20Principles%208.1.17.pdf" type="external">letter</a> to the Trump administration, listing the changes that had to be made to the proposed tax reform plan in order to gain their support. Senators Joe Donnelly (D-Indiana) Heidi Heitkamp (D-North Dakota) and Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia) were the only three members who broke with the party line and refused to sign the letter.</p>
<p>One White House official told <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/30/white-house-trump-tax-push-democrats-targeted-242175" type="external">Politico</a> that if Democrats don’t help them, “it could end up hurting them in the 2018 midterms.”</p>
<p>Under his plan, Trump said the tax would be simple, fair and easy to understand. In order to achieve this, Trump said he would get rid of loopholes, reduce the number of tax brackets, and lower rates.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/396741-budget-2018-house-gop-proposal/" type="external" /></p>
<p>Trump cited the fact that there has not been a major rewrite of the tax code since 1986, when former President Ronald Reagan was in office. Since then, Trump said the tax code has tripled in size to 2,600 pages. He said that more than 90 percent of Americans need professional help to do their taxes because the rules are “not understandable.”</p>
<p>Trump also called for a competitive tax code that creates more jobs at higher wages for more Americans. Trump said the US has fallen behind other countries and proposed cutting business tax down to 15 percent.</p>
<p>“America must lead the way, not follow from behind,” Trump said. “We have totally surrendered our competitive edge to other countries… We’re not surrendering anymore!”</p>
<p>The president then called for tax relief for middle-class families in order to reduce the costs of child care and raising a family.</p>
<p>“We want to help them take home as much of their money as possible,” Trump said.</p>
<p>Finally, Trump said his plan would bring back trillions in wealth parked overseas. Under his proposal, he said companies would be incentivized to return 3-4 trillion dollars to the US that has been kept overseas.</p>
<p>While Trump said that his proposal would benefit the middle-class, many Democrats disagree.</p>
<p>Democratic National Committee chair Tom Perez said Trump’s proposal would “overwhelmingly benefit the super-rich and corporations over hardworking Americans.”</p>
<p>“Under this plan, the richest Americans would become even richer at the expense of middle-class families,” Perez said in a statement obtained by <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/30/politics/trump-tax-reform-springfield-missouri/index.html" type="external">CNN</a>.</p>
<p>Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) accused Trump of using populism to sell his tax plan, adding Democrats are ready to fight him over the coming months to stop his proposals from becoming law.</p>
<p>“If the president wants to use populism to sell his tax plan, he ought to consider actually putting his money where his mouth is and putting forward a plan that puts the middle class, not the top 1 percent, first,” Schumer said in a conference call, according to the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/30/us/politics/trump-missouri-tax-plan.html" type="external">New York Times</a>. “This is going to be one of the biggest fights of the next three, four months, and Democrats are ready for it.”</p>
<p>Most Republicans came out in support of Trump’s proposals, with Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) saying Wednesday that Congress is “united in our determination to get this done.”</p>
<p>“We’ve made it clear that our top priority this fall is reforming the tax code and cutting people’s taxes,” Ryan said in a <a href="http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/speaker-ryan-statement-tax-reform" type="external">statement</a>.</p>
<p />
<p>Thank you, Mr. President, for calling for a level playing field for American workers &amp; job creators. The time for major tax reform has come.</p>
<p>— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) <a href="https://twitter.com/SpeakerRyan/status/902974058505043972" type="external">August 30, 2017</a></p>
<p />
<p>House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Texas) released a statement saying that he was “encouraged” by the president’s proposals.</p>
<p>“He explained clearly today why Washington must act now on pro-growth tax reform that will create jobs, grow paychecks, and improve the lives of all Americans,” Brady said in a <a href="https://waysandmeans.house.gov/brady-praises-president-trumps-commitment-texas-hurricane-recovery-pro-growth-tax-reform/" type="external">statement</a>. “The Ways and Means Committee is ready to work with the president and deliver on this important priority this year.”</p>
<p>Several other Republicans and conservative groups came out in support of Trump’s proposals, tweeting their support just after his speech.</p>
<p />
<p>. <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS" type="external">@POTUS</a> is absolutely right. We need <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TaxReform?src=hash" type="external">#TaxReform</a> that lets families keep more of their hard-earned money.</p>
<p>— House Freedom Caucus (@freedomcaucus) <a href="https://twitter.com/freedomcaucus/status/902971493830844416" type="external">August 30, 2017</a></p>
<p />
<p />
<p>I came to Washington to reform this outdated tax code –feeling energized to get back to DC &amp; push our pro-growth reform to <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS" type="external">@POTUS</a> desk</p>
<p>— Rep. Jim Renacci (@RepJimRenacci) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepJimRenacci/status/902978806373330944" type="external">August 30, 2017</a></p>
<p />
<p />
<p>. <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS" type="external">@POTUS</a> is right, we’ve completely surrendered our competitive edge. We need <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/taxreform?src=hash" type="external">#taxreform</a> so American businesses are on a level playing field</p>
<p>— Congressman Tom Rice (@RepTomRice) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepTomRice/status/902970482890346496" type="external">August 30, 2017</a></p>
<p />
<p />
<p>Happy to work w/ <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS" type="external">@POTUS</a> &amp; across the aisle to create a fair tax code to create more jobs &amp; allow people to keep more of their money.</p>
<p>— Tom Reed (@RepTomReed) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepTomReed/status/902973075280539649" type="external">August 30, 2017</a></p>
<p /> | false | 1 | president donald trump counting bipartisan support tax reform plan says boost economy middleclass may luck democratic lawmakers facing reelection states trump feel political pressure manufacturer springfield missouri trump told audience supporters going bring back main street tax plan said progrowth projobs proworker proamerican today launch plans bring back main street reducing crumbling burden companies workers trump said foundation job creation agenda fundamentally reform tax code first time 30 years trump urged members congress get behind efforts saying generation opportunity deliver real tax reform everyday hardworking americans dont want disappointed congress understand trump said cheering crowd think congress going make comeback hope ill tell united states counting want disappointed congress think congress going make comeback united states counting trump pictwittercomb7pd7ie8gg rt america rt_america august 30 2017 calling bipartisanship trump told audience senator claire mccaskill dmissouri support proposals vote office must lower taxes senator claire mccaskill must doesnt vote office trump said cant anymore obstruction obstructionists sunday trump tweeted mccaskill faces reelection 2018 would lose seat republican opposed big tax cuts also going wonderful state missouri lot 16 dem cm opposed big tax cuts republican win donald j trump realdonaldtrump august 27 2017 however trumps wish bipartisan support could answered democrats facing tough 2018 reelection races states trump white house reportedly looking gather support three democratic senators face reelection bids states trump large margins august 1 nearly every democratic senator signed letter trump administration listing changes made proposed tax reform plan order gain support senators joe donnelly dindiana heidi heitkamp dnorth dakota joe manchin dwest virginia three members broke party line refused sign letter one white house official told politico democrats dont help could end hurting 2018 midterms plan trump said tax would simple fair easy understand order achieve trump said would get rid loopholes reduce number tax brackets lower rates read trump cited fact major rewrite tax code since 1986 former president ronald reagan office since trump said tax code tripled size 2600 pages said 90 percent americans need professional help taxes rules understandable trump also called competitive tax code creates jobs higher wages americans trump said us fallen behind countries proposed cutting business tax 15 percent america must lead way follow behind trump said totally surrendered competitive edge countries surrendering anymore president called tax relief middleclass families order reduce costs child care raising family want help take home much money possible trump said finally trump said plan would bring back trillions wealth parked overseas proposal said companies would incentivized return 34 trillion dollars us kept overseas trump said proposal would benefit middleclass many democrats disagree democratic national committee chair tom perez said trumps proposal would overwhelmingly benefit superrich corporations hardworking americans plan richest americans would become even richer expense middleclass families perez said statement obtained cnn senate minority leader chuck schumer dnew york accused trump using populism sell tax plan adding democrats ready fight coming months stop proposals becoming law president wants use populism sell tax plan ought consider actually putting money mouth putting forward plan puts middle class top 1 percent first schumer said conference call according new york times going one biggest fights next three four months democrats ready republicans came support trumps proposals speaker house paul ryan rwisconsin saying wednesday congress united determination get done weve made clear top priority fall reforming tax code cutting peoples taxes ryan said statement thank mr president calling level playing field american workers amp job creators time major tax reform come paul ryan speakerryan august 30 2017 house ways means committee chairman kevin brady rtexas released statement saying encouraged presidents proposals explained clearly today washington must act progrowth tax reform create jobs grow paychecks improve lives americans brady said statement ways means committee ready work president deliver important priority year several republicans conservative groups came support trumps proposals tweeting support speech potus absolutely right need taxreform lets families keep hardearned money house freedom caucus freedomcaucus august 30 2017 came washington reform outdated tax code feeling energized get back dc amp push progrowth reform potus desk rep jim renacci repjimrenacci august 30 2017 potus right weve completely surrendered competitive edge need taxreform american businesses level playing field congressman tom rice reptomrice august 30 2017 happy work w potus amp across aisle create fair tax code create jobs amp allow people keep money tom reed reptomreed august 30 2017 | 716 |
<p>NEW YORK — President-elect Donald Trump, a political newcomer who touts his corporate skills, turned businessman-in-chief Tuesday, first demanding the government cancel a multibillion-dollar order for new presidential planes and then hailing a Japanese company’s commitment to invest billions in the U.S.</p>
<p>Six weeks before taking office, Trump is telegraphing that he’ll take an interventionist role in the nation’s economy — as well as play showman when he sees a chance. The celebrity businessman’s declaration about Air Force One caused manufacturer Boeing’s stock to drop temporarily and raised fresh questions about how his administration — not to mention his Twitter volleys — could affect the economy.</p>
<p>“The plane is totally out of control,” Trump told reporters in the lobby of Trump Tower. “I think Boeing is doing a little bit of a number. We want Boeing to make a lot of money, but not that much money.” Earlier he had tweeted that the deal’s costs were “out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!”</p>
<p>Not long after his first appearance, Trump returned to the lobby with Masayoshi Son, the CEO of SoftBank, a massive telecommunications company that counts Sprint among its holdings. Trump pointed proudly to Son’s commitment to invest $50 billion in the United States, which Trump said could create 50,000 jobs.</p>
<p>Trump — who also tweeted the deal — shook Son’s hand and posed for photos, reveling as he had last week when he toured a Carrier plant in Indiana where he said he had instigated an agreement that will preserve about 1,000 jobs the appliance maker had planned to move to Mexico.</p>
<p>As for Air Force One, the government has contracted with Boeing to build two new planes, which would go into service around 2024. That means Trump might never fly on the aircraft, which carry U.S. presidents around the globe.</p>
<p>The Air Force has pressed for a faster schedule, saying the aging current Boeing 747s are becoming too expensive to repair and keep in good flying shape. The contract for developing and building new planes was to be about $3 billion, but costs have been reported to be rising.</p>
<p>The General Accountability Office estimated in March that about $2 billion of the total — for work between 2010 and 2020 — was for research and development, not the actual planes. The inflated $4 billion figure Trump cited appears to include operation and maintenance as well.</p>
<p>Trump began his onslaught against Boeing at 8:52 a.m., tweeting “Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!”</p>
<p>That tweet came 22 minutes after The Chicago Tribune posted a story in which the Boeing CEO voiced concerns about Trump’s views on trade.</p>
<p>The president-elect then descended to the lobby of the Manhattan skyscraper that bears his name to reiterate his case.</p>
<p>Trump had tweeted in 2013 that he owned Boeing stock, but a spokesman said Tuesday he sold all of his stock holdings in June. That sale was not publicized by the campaign at the time, and aides did not reveal how much cash it might have generated.</p>
<p>If Trump had held onto his stock portfolio, he would have been required to repeatedly file reports with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics. A 2012 update of the Ethics in Government Act obliges presidents and other senior government officials to report such transactions.</p>
<p>Boeing responded to Trump Tuesday in a statement: “We are currently under contract for $170 million to help determine the capabilities of these complex military aircraft that serve the unique requirements of the president of the United States. We look forward to working with the U.S. Air Force on subsequent phases of the program allowing us to deliver the best planes for the president at the best value for the American taxpayer.”</p>
<p>The $170 million figure is just for a portion of the research and development efforts.</p>
<p>Trump now uses his own plane, a Boeing 757, which he has outfitted with white leather and gold, a large flat-screen television and a bedroom. But as president it is expected that he would travel aboard the Air Force jet, which is equipped with special safety, defensive and communications equipment. Air Force One also has seating for reporters; Trump generally does not allow the press on his own plane.</p>
<p>Late Tuesday, Trump will be using his own 757 to travel to the second stop of his post-election “thank you” tour, in North Carolina, less than a week after an Ohio appearance that felt more like a raucous campaign stop than a traditional speech by a president-to-be.</p>
<p>Retired Gen. James Mattis, who Trump announced as his pick for secretary of defense, at last week’s rally, is to appear with Trump at the evening event in Fayetteville.</p>
<p>Later this week there will be rallies in Iowa and Michigan. And on Saturday, Trump will attend the 117th annual Army-Navy football game. The game between the two military academies often draws the commander in chief; both Barack Obama and George W. Bush have attended in recent years.</p>
<p>Before leaving for North Carolina Tuesday, Trump held a number of meetings in New York, including with Rex Tillerson, the CEO of ExxonMobil; Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, who was meeting about a diplomatic post, and radio host Laura Ingraham who is being considered for press secretary.</p> | false | 1 | new york presidentelect donald trump political newcomer touts corporate skills turned businessmaninchief tuesday first demanding government cancel multibilliondollar order new presidential planes hailing japanese companys commitment invest billions us six weeks taking office trump telegraphing hell take interventionist role nations economy well play showman sees chance celebrity businessmans declaration air force one caused manufacturer boeings stock drop temporarily raised fresh questions administration mention twitter volleys could affect economy plane totally control trump told reporters lobby trump tower think boeing little bit number want boeing make lot money much money earlier tweeted deals costs control 4 billion cancel order long first appearance trump returned lobby masayoshi son ceo softbank massive telecommunications company counts sprint among holdings trump pointed proudly sons commitment invest 50 billion united states trump said could create 50000 jobs trump also tweeted deal shook sons hand posed photos reveling last week toured carrier plant indiana said instigated agreement preserve 1000 jobs appliance maker planned move mexico air force one government contracted boeing build two new planes would go service around 2024 means trump might never fly aircraft carry us presidents around globe air force pressed faster schedule saying aging current boeing 747s becoming expensive repair keep good flying shape contract developing building new planes 3 billion costs reported rising general accountability office estimated march 2 billion total work 2010 2020 research development actual planes inflated 4 billion figure trump cited appears include operation maintenance well trump began onslaught boeing 852 tweeting boeing building brand new 747 air force one future presidents costs control 4 billion cancel order tweet came 22 minutes chicago tribune posted story boeing ceo voiced concerns trumps views trade presidentelect descended lobby manhattan skyscraper bears name reiterate case trump tweeted 2013 owned boeing stock spokesman said tuesday sold stock holdings june sale publicized campaign time aides reveal much cash might generated trump held onto stock portfolio would required repeatedly file reports us office government ethics 2012 update ethics government act obliges presidents senior government officials report transactions boeing responded trump tuesday statement currently contract 170 million help determine capabilities complex military aircraft serve unique requirements president united states look forward working us air force subsequent phases program allowing us deliver best planes president best value american taxpayer 170 million figure portion research development efforts trump uses plane boeing 757 outfitted white leather gold large flatscreen television bedroom president expected would travel aboard air force jet equipped special safety defensive communications equipment air force one also seating reporters trump generally allow press plane late tuesday trump using 757 travel second stop postelection thank tour north carolina less week ohio appearance felt like raucous campaign stop traditional speech presidenttobe retired gen james mattis trump announced pick secretary defense last weeks rally appear trump evening event fayetteville later week rallies iowa michigan saturday trump attend 117th annual armynavy football game game two military academies often draws commander chief barack obama george w bush attended recent years leaving north carolina tuesday trump held number meetings new york including rex tillerson ceo exxonmobil iowa gov terry branstad meeting diplomatic post radio host laura ingraham considered press secretary | 517 |
<p>Senator Barack Obama is clearly benefiting from voter anxiety associated with turmoil in worldwide financial markets. Confronted with daily reminders that the economy has slowed down considerably, many voters are instinctively moving toward the candidate whom they and the media associate with “change.”</p>
<p>Ironically, though, Senator Obama really does not represent change on economic matters — or at least not a change toward something that hasn’t already been tried before, and that might have a chance of improving our economy. Indeed, Senator Obama’s economic ideas and outlook — large expansions of federal entitlements and explicit efforts to redistribute income — look little different from the failed liberal policies of the 1960s.</p>
<p>In the aftermath of President Lyndon Johnson’s landslide victory in 1964, Congress embarked on a period of unprecedented governmental activism. A flurry of new laws expanded welfare benefits, created two health-care entitlement programs, thrust the federal government into education financing and policy — and much, much more. To pay for these initiatives, Congress increased federal taxes substantially, including payroll taxes. Between 1965 and 1969, federal taxes increased from 17.0 to 19.7 percent of GDP.</p>
<p>Senator Obama’s economic plan is remarkably similar to those Johnson-era efforts in terms of its goals, even if the legislative tactics are somewhat different. Senator Obama promises to expand welfare benefits to many more households, although he would do so mainly with a series of expensive, refundable tax credits. He has proposed an unprecedented increase in federal spending on K-12 education programs. And his health-care plan would offer publicly funded insurance to nearly 50 million more people — at a time when the federal budget is already groaning under the weight of existing health-care entitlements.</p>
<p>Senator Obama would pay for this expansion of government with a massive tax increase. He is promising to raise the top marginal income-tax rate to nearly 40 percent. He wants to increase payroll taxes on high-income earners as well to pay for an unreformed Social Security program that will have fewer workers paying the benefits of growing numbers of baby-boomer retirees. And, according to an <a href="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411749_updated_candidates.pdf" type="external">analysis</a> from the independent Tax Policy Center, his plan depends on somehow finding nearly $1 trillion in revenue over ten years from as-yet-unspecified sources.</p>
<p>Americans are not averse to paying for government programs that genuinely help people. Indeed, many Americans would have concluded that 60s government activism was worth the cost — if it had actually worked to bring about prosperity and equality. But no reasonable observer could conclude that it did — and frequently enough, it made matters worse.</p>
<p>Instead of ending poverty, the Great Society ushered in an era of deepening welfare dependency and inner-city cultural decline. Well-intentioned support for single mothers and their children enabled an epidemic of fatherless families, with disastrous results. Family breakdown accelerated, and out-of-wedlock births soared. Moreover — with taxes and spending rising, the national economy fell into a decade-long period of sluggish economic growth, with high inflation and high unemployment. American businesses became less competitive. Confidence in our future fell.</p>
<p>Were Senator Obama’s program to be adopted, expect unintended consequences. Alex Brill and Alan Viand of the American Enterprise Institute have <a href="http://www.american.com/archive/2008/august-08-08/the-folly-of-obama2019s-tax-plan" type="external">shown</a> that his lavish new refundable tax credits would have the perverse effect of increasing the tax rate faced by many low-wage workers looking for better-paying jobs. The more these households earn, the less they would get from Senator Obama’s program of government-engineered financial assistance.</p>
<p>Similarly, Senator Obama’s plan for improving education would backfire. Increasing federal spending for K-12 education would simply allow state and local governments to cut back on their own funding commitments. The net financial gain to schools would be minimal at best. Moreover, with more federal funds comes muddled political accountability: No matter how much money is provided, it won’t stop local school administrators from claiming that their problems are due to insufficient federal support.</p>
<p>In addition, Senator Obama’s health-care plan would stifle job creation. Employers would be required to “pay or play,” meaning they would either have to offer government-approved insurance, or pay a new payroll tax. Such a mandate would make it more expensive for firms to hire low-wage workers. Unemployment would rise.</p>
<p>Moreover, many businesses that sponsor insurance for their workers today would stop doing so when faced with Obama’s expensive insurance mandates. Millions of workers and their dependents currently in private insurance would therefore end up in a government-run plan, with price controls and other regulatory red-tape. In time, increased government dominance in the health sector would undermine quality and stifle investments in those new drugs and devices which might provide breakthrough improvements in patients’ health.</p>
<p>And of course, Senator Obama’s marginal income-tax rate increases would reduce incentives for work and entrepreneurial activity at a time when our global competitors are moving in the opposite direction.</p>
<p>It took the presidency of Ronald Reagan to get things back on track after the decade-long malaise of the 1970s. Reagan understood that broad-based prosperity comes not from the government trying to engineer economic results but from the accumulated efforts of millions of individuals striving to improve their standards of living with hard work. Given the right incentives — and it’s the government’s job to get the incentives right in tax and spending policy — businesses and households will find ways to improve productivity and bring valuable innovations to the marketplace.</p>
<p>Even President Reagan came up short when it came to reforming the welfare state. That did not occur until Republicans took over Congress. Voters going to the polls in November would do well to recall the debate over the 1996 welfare-reform law. At the time, proponents argued that ending the entitlement to cash welfare benefits was crucial to breaking the culture of dependency so prevalent in urban America. They pushed successfully to replace the entitlement structure with a fixed block grant that states could use to provide temporary cash assistance and support services for those families trying to stay in the workforce.</p>
<p>Opponents of the law argued strenuously that it would produce a calamity, with millions of households getting pushed into poverty — with children starving in the streets, according to the most hyperbolic Democratic rhetoric.</p>
<p>What happened? Welfare caseloads fell by more than half almost overnight, from 4.6 million in 1996 to just over 2 million in 2002. And the Congressional Budget Office <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8113/05-16-Low-Income.pdf" type="external">found</a> that the lowest-income households experienced a 35-percent jump in their real incomes between 1991 and 2005, as rising wage income more than offset the reduction in cash welfare benefits. The 1996 welfare reform law is almost surely the most successful social-policy change in a generation.</p>
<p>It is instructive that Barack Obama, then a state senator in Illinois, strongly <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/06/obama-shifts-on.html" type="external">opposed n&gt;</a> welfare reform — and criticized President Bill Clinton for signing it — before claiming to have changed his mind about it during the presidential campaign.</p>
<p>The present moment cries out for an aggressive economic-reform agenda. Federal tax law has become a jumbled mess of excessive social engineering. Entitlement spending is set to rise dramatically over the next two decades as baby boomers head into retirement. Government agencies operate today much like they did in 1980, even though businesses have been transformed by the information-technology revolution.</p>
<p>What is not needed, however, is to revert to the policies of an era during which activist government undermined incentives for work with ill-advised promises of expanded entitlement benefits. That may constitute change, but history shows that it would offer little hope.</p>
<p>— James C. Capretta is a Fellow at the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>, a health policy and research consultant, and the author of the health care policy blog “ <a href="http://www.thenewatlantis.com/blog/diagnosis" type="external">Diagnosis</a>.”</p> | false | 1 | senator barack obama clearly benefiting voter anxiety associated turmoil worldwide financial markets confronted daily reminders economy slowed considerably many voters instinctively moving toward candidate media associate change ironically though senator obama really represent change economic matters least change toward something hasnt already tried might chance improving economy indeed senator obamas economic ideas outlook large expansions federal entitlements explicit efforts redistribute income look little different failed liberal policies 1960s aftermath president lyndon johnsons landslide victory 1964 congress embarked period unprecedented governmental activism flurry new laws expanded welfare benefits created two healthcare entitlement programs thrust federal government education financing policy much much pay initiatives congress increased federal taxes substantially including payroll taxes 1965 1969 federal taxes increased 170 197 percent gdp senator obamas economic plan remarkably similar johnsonera efforts terms goals even legislative tactics somewhat different senator obama promises expand welfare benefits many households although would mainly series expensive refundable tax credits proposed unprecedented increase federal spending k12 education programs healthcare plan would offer publicly funded insurance nearly 50 million people time federal budget already groaning weight existing healthcare entitlements senator obama would pay expansion government massive tax increase promising raise top marginal incometax rate nearly 40 percent wants increase payroll taxes highincome earners well pay unreformed social security program fewer workers paying benefits growing numbers babyboomer retirees according analysis independent tax policy center plan depends somehow finding nearly 1 trillion revenue ten years asyetunspecified sources americans averse paying government programs genuinely help people indeed many americans would concluded 60s government activism worth cost actually worked bring prosperity equality reasonable observer could conclude frequently enough made matters worse instead ending poverty great society ushered era deepening welfare dependency innercity cultural decline wellintentioned support single mothers children enabled epidemic fatherless families disastrous results family breakdown accelerated outofwedlock births soared moreover taxes spending rising national economy fell decadelong period sluggish economic growth high inflation high unemployment american businesses became less competitive confidence future fell senator obamas program adopted expect unintended consequences alex brill alan viand american enterprise institute shown lavish new refundable tax credits would perverse effect increasing tax rate faced many lowwage workers looking betterpaying jobs households earn less would get senator obamas program governmentengineered financial assistance similarly senator obamas plan improving education would backfire increasing federal spending k12 education would simply allow state local governments cut back funding commitments net financial gain schools would minimal best moreover federal funds comes muddled political accountability matter much money provided wont stop local school administrators claiming problems due insufficient federal support addition senator obamas healthcare plan would stifle job creation employers would required pay play meaning would either offer governmentapproved insurance pay new payroll tax mandate would make expensive firms hire lowwage workers unemployment would rise moreover many businesses sponsor insurance workers today would stop faced obamas expensive insurance mandates millions workers dependents currently private insurance would therefore end governmentrun plan price controls regulatory redtape time increased government dominance health sector would undermine quality stifle investments new drugs devices might provide breakthrough improvements patients health course senator obamas marginal incometax rate increases would reduce incentives work entrepreneurial activity time global competitors moving opposite direction took presidency ronald reagan get things back track decadelong malaise 1970s reagan understood broadbased prosperity comes government trying engineer economic results accumulated efforts millions individuals striving improve standards living hard work given right incentives governments job get incentives right tax spending policy businesses households find ways improve productivity bring valuable innovations marketplace even president reagan came short came reforming welfare state occur republicans took congress voters going polls november would well recall debate 1996 welfarereform law time proponents argued ending entitlement cash welfare benefits crucial breaking culture dependency prevalent urban america pushed successfully replace entitlement structure fixed block grant states could use provide temporary cash assistance support services families trying stay workforce opponents law argued strenuously would produce calamity millions households getting pushed poverty children starving streets according hyperbolic democratic rhetoric happened welfare caseloads fell half almost overnight 46 million 1996 2 million 2002 congressional budget office found lowestincome households experienced 35percent jump real incomes 1991 2005 rising wage income offset reduction cash welfare benefits 1996 welfare reform law almost surely successful socialpolicy change generation instructive barack obama state senator illinois strongly opposed ngt welfare reform criticized president bill clinton signing claiming changed mind presidential campaign present moment cries aggressive economicreform agenda federal tax law become jumbled mess excessive social engineering entitlement spending set rise dramatically next two decades baby boomers head retirement government agencies operate today much like 1980 even though businesses transformed informationtechnology revolution needed however revert policies era activist government undermined incentives work illadvised promises expanded entitlement benefits may constitute change history shows would offer little hope james c capretta fellow ethics public policy center health policy research consultant author health care policy blog diagnosis | 797 |
<p>Canada’s stock market has been ablaze with reefer madness, but the country’s largest exchange is grappling with how to deal with pot companies that have investments in the U.S., where marijuana is still banned by federal law.</p>
<p>There could be more certainty soon, according to Vic Neufeld, the chief executive officer of licensed producer Aphria Inc. TMX Group Ltd.,&#160;the parent company for sister bourses Toronto Stock Exchange and TSX Venture Exchange, has held several conversations with Aphria and is probably “very close” to making a policy announcement, Neufeld said.</p>
<p>TMX is in a predicament because on the one hand many of the Canadian producers that investors have fallen in love with are increasing their U.S. footprint or are making plans to do so. But at the same time, the exchange mandates that all listed companies are expected to comply with relevant laws and regulations in the jurisdictions in which they operate, TMX spokeswoman&#160;Catherine Kee said. She declined to comment on whether a new policy for pot producers is in the works, adding that the company doesn’t comment on specific issuer matters.</p>
<p>“It’s a real delicate issue for them,” Aphria’s Neufeld said. The company is listed on the TSX and is&#160;making a $25 million investment in Florida as part of its U.S. expansion strategy. “They don’t want to get in the way of Canadian commerce, but they also understand in the U.S., federally, it’s a no-no.”</p>
<p>Legalize It</p>
<p>Recreational cannabis is expected to become legal in Canada by this time next year, and there’s been an explosion in companies cultivating the stuff. At least 10 marijuana companies have new listings this year on the TSX, TSX Venture and rival Canadian Securities Exchange, and some 51 enterprises have gotten the green light to grow pot. The upstart industry is eyeing the U.S. as a potential behemoth market.&#160;</p>
<p>Yet, marijuana has fallen into a gray area in the U.S., where eight states have legalized medical and recreational marijuana, including Colorado and Nevada. The drug is still outlawed by the federal government.</p>
<p>No major moves have come against states that have legalized, but many in the Trump administration, Attorney General Jeff Sessions in particular, are no friends of the industry. Major U.S. exchanges, such as the Nasdaq, won’t accept listings for cannabis companies, and banks and other lenders remain wary of the industry.</p>
<p>In the meantime, TMX appears to be taking a case-by-case approach to how it handles companies with U.S. interests. While Aphria is still listed even with its Florida investment, other producers have faced some push back.</p>
<p>No Consistent Answer</p>
<p>Canadian Bioceutical Corporation voluntarily delisted from the TSX Venture Exchange this year when the company was told it couldn’t pursue opportunities in the U.S. recreational market, said CEO Scott Boyes. The uncertainty has hampered the company’s efforts to partner with other larger Canadian firms, he said.</p>
<p>TMX hasn’t clearly explained its strategy and is depriving investors of a diversity of marijuana companies to choose from, said CannaRoyalty Corp. CEO Marc Lustig. The Ottawa-based company has the bulk of its assets in the U.S. and is listed on the Canadian Securities Exchange.</p>
<p>“They tell different companies different things about a policy, a made-up policy that doesn’t actually exist,” Lustig said by phone. “Nobody has an answer and nobody has a clear, consistent answer, which is a joke.”</p>
<p>That allegation isn’t true, Kee of TMX said.</p>
<p>“Ensuring compliance with TMX’s published rules and policies across our broad issuer base is an integral, ongoing function we perform and each issuer is handled on a fact-specific basis,” Kee said.</p>
<p>Rival Exchange</p>
<p>In the meantime, competitor Canadian Securities Exchange has become a haven for tiny, unlicensed Canadian companies as well as U.S.-based corporations barred from selling shares in their domestic markets.&#160;</p>
<p>Canada Exchanges Battle for Pot Stocks as Legalization Looms</p>
<p>TMX is signaling it has “deep concerns” about listing companies with U.S. exposure and is reviewing eligibility for listing, said Canadian Securities Exchange CEO Richard Carleton. Marijuana companies with U.S. investments already make extensive disclosures on their operations and any move to restrict or prevent companies from listing will be a disappointment to investors, he said.</p>
<p>Officials with Canadian Securities Administrators, an umbrella organization for provincial and territorial regulators, are currently discussing these issues with the exchanges, Ontario Securities Commission spokeswoman Kristen Rose said in an email.</p>
<p>Legality Risk</p>
<p>Some Canadian companies would rather stay out of the U.S. than take the legality risks associated with the market.</p>
<p>Institutional investors should be able to feel confident that funds from Canadian marijuana operations are not going toward illegal activities, and disclosing U.S. operations in a prospectus is not a sufficient way “to explain away breaking a law,” said Bruce Linton, the CEO of pot producer Canopy Growth Corp. The company isn’t pursuing any U.S. investments, he said.</p>
<p>“If there’s a doubt, err on the side of clarity,” Linton said.</p>
<p>A new TMX policy would give licensed producers clarity on how to proceed for the number of of companies that are considering expansion in the U.S. or embarking on deals with brands that produce infused products in states such as Colorado and Washington, Aphria’s Neufeld said.</p>
<p>In TMX’s review, the company is examining both companies that are directly investing in U.S. marijuana production and those that have more passive investments, such as marketing agreements, Neufeld said.</p>
<p>“I just hope when the new policy comes down it’s not punitive to my shareholders,” Neufeld said by phone. “We feel very, very confident what we’ve done is all legal&#160;in the concept of Canadian law.”</p> | false | 1 | canadas stock market ablaze reefer madness countrys largest exchange grappling deal pot companies investments us marijuana still banned federal law could certainty soon according vic neufeld chief executive officer licensed producer aphria inc tmx group ltd160the parent company sister bourses toronto stock exchange tsx venture exchange held several conversations aphria probably close making policy announcement neufeld said tmx predicament one hand many canadian producers investors fallen love increasing us footprint making plans time exchange mandates listed companies expected comply relevant laws regulations jurisdictions operate tmx spokeswoman160catherine kee said declined comment whether new policy pot producers works adding company doesnt comment specific issuer matters real delicate issue aphrias neufeld said company listed tsx is160making 25 million investment florida part us expansion strategy dont want get way canadian commerce also understand us federally nono legalize recreational cannabis expected become legal canada time next year theres explosion companies cultivating stuff least 10 marijuana companies new listings year tsx tsx venture rival canadian securities exchange 51 enterprises gotten green light grow pot upstart industry eyeing us potential behemoth market160 yet marijuana fallen gray area us eight states legalized medical recreational marijuana including colorado nevada drug still outlawed federal government major moves come states legalized many trump administration attorney general jeff sessions particular friends industry major us exchanges nasdaq wont accept listings cannabis companies banks lenders remain wary industry meantime tmx appears taking casebycase approach handles companies us interests aphria still listed even florida investment producers faced push back consistent answer canadian bioceutical corporation voluntarily delisted tsx venture exchange year company told couldnt pursue opportunities us recreational market said ceo scott boyes uncertainty hampered companys efforts partner larger canadian firms said tmx hasnt clearly explained strategy depriving investors diversity marijuana companies choose said cannaroyalty corp ceo marc lustig ottawabased company bulk assets us listed canadian securities exchange tell different companies different things policy madeup policy doesnt actually exist lustig said phone nobody answer nobody clear consistent answer joke allegation isnt true kee tmx said ensuring compliance tmxs published rules policies across broad issuer base integral ongoing function perform issuer handled factspecific basis kee said rival exchange meantime competitor canadian securities exchange become tiny unlicensed canadian companies well usbased corporations barred selling shares domestic markets160 canada exchanges battle pot stocks legalization looms tmx signaling deep concerns listing companies us exposure reviewing eligibility listing said canadian securities exchange ceo richard carleton marijuana companies us investments already make extensive disclosures operations move restrict prevent companies listing disappointment investors said officials canadian securities administrators umbrella organization provincial territorial regulators currently discussing issues exchanges ontario securities commission spokeswoman kristen rose said email legality risk canadian companies would rather stay us take legality risks associated market institutional investors able feel confident funds canadian marijuana operations going toward illegal activities disclosing us operations prospectus sufficient way explain away breaking law said bruce linton ceo pot producer canopy growth corp company isnt pursuing us investments said theres doubt err side clarity linton said new tmx policy would give licensed producers clarity proceed number companies considering expansion us embarking deals brands produce infused products states colorado washington aphrias neufeld said tmxs review company examining companies directly investing us marijuana production passive investments marketing agreements neufeld said hope new policy comes punitive shareholders neufeld said phone feel confident weve done legal160in concept canadian law | 549 |
<p>Palestinian refugees know too well what their Arab brethren are going through: the massacres, the unredeemable loss, the despair, and the sinking boats.</p>
<p>In a western capital far away from Gaza and Cairo, I recently shared a pot of tea with an “Egyptian refugee”.</p>
<p>The term is familiar to me, but never have I encountered an Egyptian who refers to himself as such. He stated it as a matter of fact by saying, “As an Egyptian refugee…” and carrying on to talk about the political turmoil in his country.</p>
<p>It made me shudder as I tried to conjure up a possible estimation of Arabs who have been made refugees in recent years. But where does one start the estimation if we are to set aside the Palestinian Nakba in 1948? Or forget the successive waves of ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians that followed, and disregard the various exoduses of Lebanese civilians as a result of Israeli invasions and civil war?</p>
<p>Iraq can be the start—the country that served as a foundation of everything Arab. Their culture, history, and civilization, which extends to the very beginning of human civilization, ushered in the new Arab exodus.</p>
<p>The American promise to bomb it “back to the stone age” was worse than expected. Millions of Iraqis became refugees after the US-led war, a situation that was exasperated in the mid-2000s with the invasion-provoked civil war.</p>
<p>Last year alone over two million Iraqis were displaced, most of them internally as a result of the so-called Islamic State’s violent takeover of numerous territories in northern and western Iraq.</p>
<p>A recent report by the Geneva-based <a href="http://www.arabnews.com/world/news/743041" type="external">Internal Displacement Monitoring Center</a> (IDMC) finally placed the crises in Syria, Iraq, Libya, etc., in a larger context, accentuating the collective Arab tragedy. “These are the worst figures for forced displacement in a generation, signaling our complete failure to protect innocent civilians,” according to Jan Egeland, head of the Norwegian Refugee Council, the organization behind IDMC.</p>
<p>War and conflicts have resulted in the displacement of 38 million people, <a href="http://www.arabnews.com/world/news/743041" type="external">of whom 11 million were displaced last year alone</a>. This number is constantly fortified by new refugees, while the total number of people who flee their homes every single day averages 30,000, a third of those are Arabs who flee their own countries.</p>
<p>Yes, <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/africa/article4432645.ece" type="external">10,000 Arabs are made refugees every day</a>, according to IDMC. Many of them are internally displaced people (IDPs), others are refugees in other countries, and thousands take their chances by sailing in small boats across the Mediterranean. Thousands die trying.</p>
<p>“I am a Syrian refugee from the Palestinian al-Yarmouk camp in Damascus,” <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/apr/24/syrian-palestinian-refugee-lebanon-migrant-i-thought-the-boat-was-my-only-chance" type="external">wrote Ali Sandeed in the British Guardian</a> newspaper. “When I was small, my grandmother used to tell us how she felt when she was forced to flee to Syria from her home in Palestine in 1948, and how she hoped that her children and grandchildren would never have to experience what it feels like to be a refugee. But we did. I was born a Palestinian refugee, and almost three years ago I became a refugee once more, when my family and I had to flee the Syrian war to Lebanon.”</p>
<p>“’I thought the boat was my only chance,” was the title of the article where Sandeed described his journey to Europe via boat.</p>
<p>Many of Yarmouk’s refugees are refugees or descendants of Palestinian refugees who once lived in northern Palestine—in Haifa, Akka and Saffad. Reading his testimony immediately summoned the chaotic scenes as the <a href="http://muftah.org/the-nakba-65-years-and-ongoing-2/#.VUxe_5MY3gV" type="external">refugees fled the Zionist invasion</a> of Haifa in 1948.</p>
<p>Thanks to Palestinian and Israel’s new historians like Ilan Pappe, we know so much about what has taken place when the tens of thousands of people attempted to escape for their lives using small fishing boats:</p>
<p>“Men stepped on their friends and women on their own children. The boats in the port were soon filled with living cargo. The overcrowding in them was horrible. Many turned over and sank with all their passengers.” (Pappe, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00KT5W342/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B00KT5W342&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=forepolijour-20&amp;linkId=SZM7W2XQKMCNDUV4" type="external">The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine</a>, p. 96)</p>
<p>The brutality and sense of despair embodied in that scene is repeated every single day in various manifestations throughout Arab countries: Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen and so on. If the destination of these refugees were illustrations via small arrows, the arrows would be pointing in many different directions. They would overlap and they would, at times, oppose one another: innocent people from all walks of life, sects, and religions dashing around in complete panic along with their children and carrying whatever they could salvage.</p>
<p>The Palestinian Nakba (the catastrophe of war, displacement and dispossession of 1948) has now become the Arab Nakba. Palestinian refugees know too well what their Arab brethren are going through: the massacres, the unredeemable loss, the despair, and the sinking boats.</p>
<p>One recalls a question that persisted in the minds of many when the so-called Arab Spring first began in early 2011: “Are Arab revolutions good for Palestine?”</p>
<p>It was impossible to answer. Not enough variables were in place for any intelligent assessment, or an educated guess even. The assumption was: if Arab revolutions culminate into truly democratic outcomes, then, naturally, it would be good for the Palestinians. This assumption followed the simple logic that historically Arab masses—particularly in poorer Arab countries—perceived Palestine as the central and most common struggle that unified Arab identity and nationalism for generations.</p>
<p>But not only did democracy never prevail (with the Tunisian exception), but many millions of Arabs joined millions of Palestinians in their perpetual exile.</p>
<p>What does that mean?</p>
<p>My Egyptian friend, who declared himself a “refugee,” told me: “I am optimistic.”</p>
<p>“I am too,” I replied, with neither one of us feeling a bit surprised by the seemingly curious statements.</p>
<p>The source of optimism is twofold: Firstly, Arabs have finally broken the fear barrier, a prerequisite essential for any popular movement that opts for fundamental change. Secondly, now most Arabs are equally sharing the burden of war, revolution, destitution and exile.</p>
<p>That is far from being a “good thing,” but it certainly accentuates the element of urgency in the collective Arab fate.</p>
<p>“We are in this together,” I told my Egyptian friend. Indeed, it is as if all Arabs are riding on a single, overcrowded dinghy and we must all make it to the other side safely. Sinking is not an option.</p> | false | 1 | palestinian refugees know well arab brethren going massacres unredeemable loss despair sinking boats western capital far away gaza cairo recently shared pot tea egyptian refugee term familiar never encountered egyptian refers stated matter fact saying egyptian refugee carrying talk political turmoil country made shudder tried conjure possible estimation arabs made refugees recent years one start estimation set aside palestinian nakba 1948 forget successive waves ethnic cleansing palestinians followed disregard various exoduses lebanese civilians result israeli invasions civil war iraq startthe country served foundation everything arab culture history civilization extends beginning human civilization ushered new arab exodus american promise bomb back stone age worse expected millions iraqis became refugees usled war situation exasperated mid2000s invasionprovoked civil war last year alone two million iraqis displaced internally result socalled islamic states violent takeover numerous territories northern western iraq recent report genevabased internal displacement monitoring center idmc finally placed crises syria iraq libya etc larger context accentuating collective arab tragedy worst figures forced displacement generation signaling complete failure protect innocent civilians according jan egeland head norwegian refugee council organization behind idmc war conflicts resulted displacement 38 million people 11 million displaced last year alone number constantly fortified new refugees total number people flee homes every single day averages 30000 third arabs flee countries yes 10000 arabs made refugees every day according idmc many internally displaced people idps others refugees countries thousands take chances sailing small boats across mediterranean thousands die trying syrian refugee palestinian alyarmouk camp damascus wrote ali sandeed british guardian newspaper small grandmother used tell us felt forced flee syria home palestine 1948 hoped children grandchildren would never experience feels like refugee born palestinian refugee almost three years ago became refugee family flee syrian war lebanon thought boat chance title article sandeed described journey europe via boat many yarmouks refugees refugees descendants palestinian refugees lived northern palestinein haifa akka saffad reading testimony immediately summoned chaotic scenes refugees fled zionist invasion haifa 1948 thanks palestinian israels new historians like ilan pappe know much taken place tens thousands people attempted escape lives using small fishing boats men stepped friends women children boats port soon filled living cargo overcrowding horrible many turned sank passengers pappe ethnic cleansing palestine p 96 brutality sense despair embodied scene repeated every single day various manifestations throughout arab countries iraq syria libya yemen destination refugees illustrations via small arrows arrows would pointing many different directions would overlap would times oppose one another innocent people walks life sects religions dashing around complete panic along children carrying whatever could salvage palestinian nakba catastrophe war displacement dispossession 1948 become arab nakba palestinian refugees know well arab brethren going massacres unredeemable loss despair sinking boats one recalls question persisted minds many socalled arab spring first began early 2011 arab revolutions good palestine impossible answer enough variables place intelligent assessment educated guess even assumption arab revolutions culminate truly democratic outcomes naturally would good palestinians assumption followed simple logic historically arab massesparticularly poorer arab countriesperceived palestine central common struggle unified arab identity nationalism generations democracy never prevail tunisian exception many millions arabs joined millions palestinians perpetual exile mean egyptian friend declared refugee told optimistic replied neither one us feeling bit surprised seemingly curious statements source optimism twofold firstly arabs finally broken fear barrier prerequisite essential popular movement opts fundamental change secondly arabs equally sharing burden war revolution destitution exile far good thing certainly accentuates element urgency collective arab fate together told egyptian friend indeed arabs riding single overcrowded dinghy must make side safely sinking option | 579 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Montana Congressman Ryan Zinke, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to head the Interior Department, told a Senate hearing Tuesday he would review a recent controversial presidential declaration to create national monuments in Nevada and Utah.</p>
<p>But Zinke pledged to visit Nevada and speak with officials in the Silver State before making a recommendation on whether the incoming administration should try to rescind <a href="" type="internal">President Barack Obama’s declaration to designate the Gold Butte</a> <a href="" type="internal">region</a>, and Bears Ears in Utah, as monuments.</p>
<p>“Before I make a recommendation to the president, I’m going to talk to you,” Zinke said under questioning by U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev.</p>
<p>Obama used the Antiquities Act of 1906 on Dec. 28 to create the Gold Butte National Monument on 300,000 acres southeast of Las Vegas. In 2015, Obama created the Basin and Range National Monument on 704,000 acres in remote Lincoln and Nye counties.</p>
<p>“The vast majority of Nevadans support these designations,” Cortez Masto told Zinke during a confirmation hearing by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.</p>
<p>Republicans on the committee, however, pressed Zinke to push for a rollback of Obama executive orders and presidential actions on federal lands.</p>
<p>Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, said the Bears Ears designation, placing 1.3 million acres under protection, would have a profound economic impact on one of the poorest regions in that state.</p>
<p>The national monument declarations by Obama prevents commercial use and prohibits drilling, logging and other private use of resources.</p>
<p>Zinke said that if confirmed, one of his goals as Interior Department secretary would be to restore trust by “working with, rather than against local communities and states.”</p>
<p>Zinke, a Montana native, said he believes there are public lands that need protection under wilderness designations, and other lands best suited for multiple use.</p>
<p>He said decisions on those lands are “best achieved through the approval and consent of Congress.”</p>
<p>Lawmakers grilled Zinke, 55, on a wide range of issues, but mostly on land use in Western states where the federal government manages and maintains nearly 30 percent of the acreage.</p>
<p>In Nevada, Cortez Masto said the federal government oversees 85 percent of the land.</p>
<p>Although Democrats have cheered the president’s use of the Antiquities Act to protect public lands from commercial use, Republicans in Congress have criticized Obama’s use of the law.</p>
<p>U.S. Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., has filed legislation that would curb its use in the future. Companion legislation has been filed in the House by U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei, R-Nev.</p>
<p>Zinke told the committee he opposes the transfer or sale of public lands to states or commercial interests, a position that is shared by Trump. But Zinke also said he favors using resources available on some public lands, like coal and timber.</p>
<p>The at-large House member from Montana, Zinke voted with fellow Republicans on the first day of the 115th Congress to approve a rules package that would make it easier to transfer federal lands to states.</p>
<p>But Zinke, a hunter and angler, characterized that vote as symbolic, “a shot over the bow,” to the current administration, and noted he has voted 17 times against proposed land transfers from the federal government to states and other interests.</p>
<p>The hearing is the first of two planned this week by the committee on Trump’s selections to head departments under the Senate Energy and Natural Resource Committees purview.</p>
<p>Former Gov. Rick Perry, chosen to head the Energy Department, is scheduled to appear before the panel on Thursday.</p>
<p>Trump doesn’t take office until Friday. But the Republican-led Senate, which confirms presidential nominations, is moving ahead with hearings on his Cabinet picks.</p>
<p>Zinke was quetioned on a number of issues. He di sagreed with Trump on climate change, telling the panel that there is a correlation between rising temperatures and human activity. Trump has claimed it “a hoax.”</p>
<p>Zinke pledged to work with the Senate on the Colorado River Compact, the law that governs the allocation of water rights among states in the Colorado River Basin.</p>
<p>He also said that Native American tribal leaders would be consulted on new policies on land use issues in Nevada.</p>
<p>And he vowed to review current Bureau of Land Management policies on wild horse populations, which he called “a disaster.”</p>
<p>Zinke is supported by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the Public Lands Council, which said ranchers have become marginalized in the planned use process of federally controlled land.</p>
<p>Environmentalists, however, remain skeptical that Zinke would veer from positions on protecting federal lands to reduce coal extraction and continued use of energy sources linked to climate change.</p>
<p>Despite differences, Zinke, a former U.S. Navy SEAL, is expected to garner Democratic support in the Senate.</p>
<p>If he is confirmed as secretary, U.S. Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., said she would continue to advocate for an Interior Department that is committed to a multi-use philosophy “that does not jeopardize conservation efforts and public stewardship of federal lands.”</p>
<p>“I will work with Rep. Zinke to ensure that Gold Butte and Nevada’s other public lands receive the protections and support to which they are entitled,” she said.</p>
<p>The Antiquities Act of 1906 gave presidential authority to designate public lands as national monuments.</p>
<p>The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld previous actions by presidents, despite controversy over the use of the Antiquities Act to set aside public lands for conservation and to save artifacts.</p>
<p>No national monument declaration has been overturned by another president. Any repeal would take congressional action.</p>
<p>Zinke told the committee Tuesday that while states should have a say in designations, there is nothing in the law that gives presidential authority to rescind a previous designation.</p>
<p>Contact Gary Martin at [email protected] or at 202-662-7390. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/garymartindc" type="external">@garymartindc</a> on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | washington montana congressman ryan zinke presidentelect donald trumps pick head interior department told senate hearing tuesday would review recent controversial presidential declaration create national monuments nevada utah zinke pledged visit nevada speak officials silver state making recommendation whether incoming administration try rescind president barack obamas declaration designate gold butte region bears ears utah monuments make recommendation president im going talk zinke said questioning us sen catherine cortez masto dnev obama used antiquities act 1906 dec 28 create gold butte national monument 300000 acres southeast las vegas 2015 obama created basin range national monument 704000 acres remote lincoln nye counties vast majority nevadans support designations cortez masto told zinke confirmation hearing senate energy natural resources committee republicans committee however pressed zinke push rollback obama executive orders presidential actions federal lands sen mike lee rutah said bears ears designation placing 13 million acres protection would profound economic impact one poorest regions state national monument declarations obama prevents commercial use prohibits drilling logging private use resources zinke said confirmed one goals interior department secretary would restore trust working rather local communities states zinke montana native said believes public lands need protection wilderness designations lands best suited multiple use said decisions lands best achieved approval consent congress lawmakers grilled zinke 55 wide range issues mostly land use western states federal government manages maintains nearly 30 percent acreage nevada cortez masto said federal government oversees 85 percent land although democrats cheered presidents use antiquities act protect public lands commercial use republicans congress criticized obamas use law us sen dean heller rnev filed legislation would curb use future companion legislation filed house us rep mark amodei rnev zinke told committee opposes transfer sale public lands states commercial interests position shared trump zinke also said favors using resources available public lands like coal timber atlarge house member montana zinke voted fellow republicans first day 115th congress approve rules package would make easier transfer federal lands states zinke hunter angler characterized vote symbolic shot bow current administration noted voted 17 times proposed land transfers federal government states interests hearing first two planned week committee trumps selections head departments senate energy natural resource committees purview former gov rick perry chosen head energy department scheduled appear panel thursday trump doesnt take office friday republicanled senate confirms presidential nominations moving ahead hearings cabinet picks zinke quetioned number issues di sagreed trump climate change telling panel correlation rising temperatures human activity trump claimed hoax zinke pledged work senate colorado river compact law governs allocation water rights among states colorado river basin also said native american tribal leaders would consulted new policies land use issues nevada vowed review current bureau land management policies wild horse populations called disaster zinke supported national cattlemens beef association public lands council said ranchers become marginalized planned use process federally controlled land environmentalists however remain skeptical zinke would veer positions protecting federal lands reduce coal extraction continued use energy sources linked climate change despite differences zinke former us navy seal expected garner democratic support senate confirmed secretary us rep dina titus dnev said would continue advocate interior department committed multiuse philosophy jeopardize conservation efforts public stewardship federal lands work rep zinke ensure gold butte nevadas public lands receive protections support entitled said antiquities act 1906 gave presidential authority designate public lands national monuments us supreme court upheld previous actions presidents despite controversy use antiquities act set aside public lands conservation save artifacts national monument declaration overturned another president repeal would take congressional action zinke told committee tuesday states say designations nothing law gives presidential authority rescind previous designation contact gary martin gmartinreviewjournalcom 2026627390 follow garymartindc twitter | 598 |
<p>U.S. researchers are getting ready to recruit more than 1 million people for an unprecedented study to learn how our genes, environments and lifestyles interact.</p>
<p>Today, health care is based on averages, what worked best in short studies of a few hundred or thousand patients. The massive “All of Us” project instead will push what’s called precision medicine, using traits that make us unique to forecast health and treat disease.</p>
<p>The goal is to end cookie-cutter health care.</p>
<p>A pilot is under way now. If all goes well, the National Institutes of Health plans to open enrollment early next year.</p>
<p>Participants will get DNA tests, and report on their diet, sleep, exercise and numerous other health-affecting factors. It’s a commitment: The study aims to run for at least 10 years</p>
<p>The pilot testing now under way involves more than 2,500 people who already have enrolled and given blood samples. More than 50 sites around the country — large medical centers, community health centers and other providers like the San Diego Blood Bank and, soon, select Walgreens pharmacies — are enrolling patients or customers in this invitation-only pilot phase.</p>
<p>If the pilot goes well, NIH plans to open the study next spring to just about any U.S. adult who’s interested, with sign-up as easy as going online.</p>
<p>The goal is to enroll a highly diverse population, people from all walks of life — specifically recruiting minorities who have been under-represented in scientific research.</p>
<p>And unusual for observational research, volunteers will receive results of their genetic and other tests, information they can share with their own doctors.</p>
<p>“Anything to get more information I can pass on to my children, I’m all for it,” said Erricka Hager, 29, as she signed up last month at the University of Pittsburgh, the project’s first pilot site. A usually healthy mother of two, she hopes the study can reveal why she experienced high blood pressure and gestational diabetes during pregnancy.</p>
<p>_____</p>
<p>Heading the giant All Of Us project is a former Intel Corp. executive who brings a special passion: How to widen access to the precision medicine that saved his life.</p>
<p>In college, Eric Dishman developed a form of kidney cancer so rare that doctors had no idea how to treat him, and predicted he had months to live. Only two studies of that particular cancer had ever been done, on people in their 70s and 80s.</p>
<p>“They didn’t know anything about me because they’d never seen a 19-year-old with this disease,” said Dishman.</p>
<p>Yet he survived for two decades, trying one treatment after another. Then, as he was running out of options, a chance encounter with a genetics researcher led to mapping Dishman’s DNA — and the stunning discovery that his kidney cancer was genetically more like pancreatic cancer. A pancreatic cancer drug attacked his tumors so he could get a kidney transplant.</p>
<p>“I’m healthier now at 49 than I was at 19,” said Dishman. “I was lucky twice over really,” to be offered an uncommon kind of testing and that it found something treatable.</p>
<p>Precision medicine is used most widely in cancer, as more drugs are developed that target tumors with specific molecular characteristics. Beyond cancer, one of the University of Pittsburgh’s hospitals tests every patient receiving a heart stent — looking for a genetic variant that tells if they’ll respond well to a particular blood thinner or will need an alternative.</p>
<p>The aim is to expand precision medicine.</p>
<p>“Why me?” is the question cancer patients always ask — why they got sick and not someone else with similar health risks, said Dr. Mounzer Agha, an oncologist at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.</p>
<p>“Unfortunately I don’t have answers for them today,” said Agha, who says it will take the million-person study to finally get some answers. “It’s going to help them understand what are the factors that led to their disease, and it’s going to help us understand how to treat it better.”</p>
<p>And NIH Director Francis S. Collins expects surprises. Maybe, he speculates, Type 2 diabetes will turn out to be a collection of genetic subtypes that require varied treatments.</p>
<p>“This looks at individual responses to treatment in a way we couldn’t do previously with smaller studies,” he said.</p>
<p>_____</p>
<p>The study starts simply: Volunteers get some standard health checks — weight, blood pressure and heart rate. They then answer periodic questionnaires about their health, background and habits, and turn over electronic health records. They give a blood sample that, if they agree, will undergo DNA testing sometime next year.</p>
<p>Eventually, researchers will ask some participants to wear sensors that may go beyond today’s Fitbit-style health trackers, such as devices that measure blood pressure while people move around all day, or measure environmental exposures, Collins said.</p>
<p>In Pittsburgh, the Rev. Paul Abernathy made a health change after signing up for the pilot study: Surprised to learn his BMI was too high despite regular weight-lifting, he began running.</p>
<p>“I’m praying I have the discipline to continue that, certainly in midst of a busy schedule,” said Abernathy, who directs the nonprofit Focus Pittsburgh that aids the poor and trauma victims.</p>
<p>“We have a chance really to influence history, to influence the future of our children and our children’s children,” added Abernathy, who hopes the study will help explain racial disparities such as lower life expectancies between African-Americans and whites who live in the same areas.</p>
<p>At NIH, Collins plans to enroll, too. He’s had his DNA mapped before but can’t pass up what he’s calling a one-in-a-million experience to be part of a monumental study rather than the scientist on the other side.</p>
<p>“I’m curious about what this might teach me about myself. I’m pretty healthy right now. I’d like to stay that way.”</p>
<p>This Associated Press series was produced in partnership with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.</p> | false | 1 | us researchers getting ready recruit 1 million people unprecedented study learn genes environments lifestyles interact today health care based averages worked best short studies hundred thousand patients massive us project instead push whats called precision medicine using traits make us unique forecast health treat disease goal end cookiecutter health care pilot way goes well national institutes health plans open enrollment early next year participants get dna tests report diet sleep exercise numerous healthaffecting factors commitment study aims run least 10 years pilot testing way involves 2500 people already enrolled given blood samples 50 sites around country large medical centers community health centers providers like san diego blood bank soon select walgreens pharmacies enrolling patients customers invitationonly pilot phase pilot goes well nih plans open study next spring us adult whos interested signup easy going online goal enroll highly diverse population people walks life specifically recruiting minorities underrepresented scientific research unusual observational research volunteers receive results genetic tests information share doctors anything get information pass children im said erricka hager 29 signed last month university pittsburgh projects first pilot site usually healthy mother two hopes study reveal experienced high blood pressure gestational diabetes pregnancy _____ heading giant us project former intel corp executive brings special passion widen access precision medicine saved life college eric dishman developed form kidney cancer rare doctors idea treat predicted months live two studies particular cancer ever done people 70s 80s didnt know anything theyd never seen 19yearold disease said dishman yet survived two decades trying one treatment another running options chance encounter genetics researcher led mapping dishmans dna stunning discovery kidney cancer genetically like pancreatic cancer pancreatic cancer drug attacked tumors could get kidney transplant im healthier 49 19 said dishman lucky twice really offered uncommon kind testing found something treatable precision medicine used widely cancer drugs developed target tumors specific molecular characteristics beyond cancer one university pittsburghs hospitals tests every patient receiving heart stent looking genetic variant tells theyll respond well particular blood thinner need alternative aim expand precision medicine question cancer patients always ask got sick someone else similar health risks said dr mounzer agha oncologist university pittsburgh medical center unfortunately dont answers today said agha says take millionperson study finally get answers going help understand factors led disease going help us understand treat better nih director francis collins expects surprises maybe speculates type 2 diabetes turn collection genetic subtypes require varied treatments looks individual responses treatment way couldnt previously smaller studies said _____ study starts simply volunteers get standard health checks weight blood pressure heart rate answer periodic questionnaires health background habits turn electronic health records give blood sample agree undergo dna testing sometime next year eventually researchers ask participants wear sensors may go beyond todays fitbitstyle health trackers devices measure blood pressure people move around day measure environmental exposures collins said pittsburgh rev paul abernathy made health change signing pilot study surprised learn bmi high despite regular weightlifting began running im praying discipline continue certainly midst busy schedule said abernathy directs nonprofit focus pittsburgh aids poor trauma victims chance really influence history influence future children childrens children added abernathy hopes study help explain racial disparities lower life expectancies africanamericans whites live areas nih collins plans enroll hes dna mapped cant pass hes calling oneinamillion experience part monumental study rather scientist side im curious might teach im pretty healthy right id like stay way associated press series produced partnership howard hughes medical institutes department science education ap solely responsible content | 577 |
<p>U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller is bearing down on former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort as he directs a wide-ranging probe into Russian interference in last year’s presidential election.</p>
<p>Mueller’s team of investigators has sent subpoenas in recent weeks from a Washington grand jury to global banks for account information and records of transactions involving Manafort and some of his companies, as well as those of a long-time business partner, Rick Gates, according to people familiar with the matter.</p>
<p>The special counsel has also reached out to other business associates, including Manafort’s son-in-law and a Ukrainian oligarch, according to one of the people. Those efforts were characterized as an apparent attempt to gain information that could be used to squeeze Manafort, or force him to be more helpful to prosecutors.</p>
<p>Manafort’s spokesman confirmed that FBI agents raided the political consultant’s home in Virginia two weeks ago to secure documents related to the investigation. That raid was initially reported by the Washington Post.</p>
<p>As prosecutors gather many years of information about his financial affairs, Manafort could be dragged deeper into any number of legal disputes. He has a history of doing business with oligarchs and politicians in Ukraine and Russia that predates his political work for Trump, with payments routed through foreign banks and investments in U.S. real estate.</p>
<p>Investigations</p>
<p>Part of the reason Manafort is getting intense early scrutiny is that Mueller is drawing on investigations that were well underway, including one by federal prosecutors in Manhattan, when he was appointed in May.</p>
<p>With prosecutors combing through his financial life, the 68-year-old has been toeing a fine line, cooperating with congressional requests for information about the campaign, and insisting he has nothing to hide from Mueller’s team of prosecutors who are delving into his past. Privately, his supporters question Mueller’s work to unearth conduct with no apparent connection to the 2016 election.</p>
<p>Manafort’s spokesman, Jason Maloni, declared last month that Manafort was not a “cooperating witness” — a legal term for someone who agrees to provide evidence and testimony to prosecutors. When reached Wednesday, he only addressed the revelation of the&#160;Federal Bureau of Investigation raid, saying, “Mr. Manafort has consistently cooperated with law enforcement and other serious inquiries and did so on this occasion as well.”</p>
<p>As a practical matter, the blitz of recent subpoenas to global banks poses a challenge to Manafort’s ability to continue his day-to-day business activities as a consultant and investor, said one of the people familiar with the matter.</p>
<p>Broad Probe</p>
<p>Of course, the Manafort inquiry is just one thread of Mueller’s multifaceted effort, which includes the purchase of Trump real estate properties by wealthy Russians going back a decade, the foreign ties of Michael Flynn, who was briefly the administration’s National Security Adviser, and the dismissal of FBI chief James Comey by the President.</p>
<p>Federal prosecutors in Manhattan were investigating Manafort earlier this year, examining allegations that he laundered money from eastern Europe into New York properties, according to two people familiar with the earlier inquiry. The Southern District of New York handed off their work to the special counsel’s team once Mueller was appointed, the people said.</p>
<p>Along with the real-estate inquiry, the special counsel has taken over a review of Manafort’s late filings to comply with the foreign-agent registration act, known as FARA, according to one of the people.</p>
<p>A spokesman for Mueller’s office, Joshua Stueve, declined to comment.</p>
<p>The 6 a.m. raid on Manafort’s Virginia home last month seemingly caught his legal team by surprise. It came the day after he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, and after he had provided his notes to the committee.</p>
<p>Russian Meeting</p>
<p>In fact, Manafort had alerted authorities to a controversial meeting on June 9, 2016, involving Trump’s son Donald Jr., other campaign representatives and a Russian lawyer promising damaging information on Hillary Clinton, according to people familiar with the matter. The president and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, were dragged into the matter as details repeatedly emerged that contradicted the initial accounts of that meeting.</p>
<p>Manafort’s business associates also risk being engulfed by the probe.</p>
<p>Jeffrey Yohai, who is the estranged husband of Manafort’s daughter, is under investigation by FBI agents working with prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles, according to people familiar with their work.</p>
<p>With cash infusions from Manafort, Yohai formed real-estate partnerships that took in investor money in New York and Los Angeles. Some of the partnerships subsequently declared bankruptcy, court filings show. U.S. authorities are now looking into claims by an investor that Yohai operated a Ponzi scheme, the people explained. Yohai is contesting a civil lawsuit over one of the soured deals, having won an initial round challenging the jurisdiction.</p>
<p>Yohai’s lawyer, Aaron May, declined to comment.</p>
<p>How a Grand Jury Fits in the Trump-Russia Probe: QuickTake Q&amp;A</p>
<p>Rick Gates’s relationship with Manafort dates to at least 2006, when the younger man joined Manafort Davis, a consulting firm that re-packaged a pro-Russian Ukrainian politician as a leader friendly to the West. Eventually, Gates helped manage a Manafort-directed private equity fund called Pericles, which was supposed to invest in Ukraine.</p>
<p>Michael Dry, a lawyer for Gates, also declined to comment.</p>
<p>Dmitry Firtash, a Ukrainian oligarch, invested $25 million in a real-estate venture started by Manafort a decade ago that subsequently attracted the attention of investigators. Now in Austria, Firtash has been charged in an unrelated case with paying bribes in India in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. He is facing a Justice Department request for extradition to the U.S. in that matter.</p>
<p>Firtash’s attorney, Dan Webb, said, “My client is not in any way cooperating with the special counsel office on Paul Manafort or any other issue. Because of the indictment pending in Chicago, I will not make any other comment.”</p>
<p>$25 Million</p>
<p>The inquiry by the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan initially focused on a Manafort-backed business called CMZ Ventures, which sought to develop a luxury skyscraper on Park Avenue in 2008. The partnership received $25 million from Firtash, according to court records filed in a New York federal lawsuit. But the money was never invested in a project, and the firm was shuttered in 2009.</p>
<p>The plaintiffs in that CMZ civil suit, including the former prime minister of Ukraine, Yulia Tymoshenko, alleged the real purpose of the firm was to launder money through the U.S. financial system that Firtash had obtained improperly by skimming sales of natural gas to Ukraine.</p>
<p>In court papers, lawyers for CMZ Ventures and fellow defendants argued that U.S. laws didn’t apply to gas transactions abroad and that the New York court had no jurisdiction in the matter. A federal judge agreed, dismissing the lawsuit in 2015.</p>
<p>By the time Mueller inherited the New York investigation, it extended well beyond the Manafort-Firtash relationship, according to a person briefed on the special counsel’s probe.</p>
<p>Those circling Manafort include various congressional committees, the New York Attorney General and the Manhattan District Attorney. The New York authorities are examining an unusual combination of mortgages and loans assembled by Manafort.</p>
<p>Even the National Enquirer, which veered away from celebrity news to endorse Trump during the campaign, took a swing at Manafort. The tabloid published a story Wednesday with embarrassing details about his personal life.</p> | false | 1 | us special counsel robert mueller bearing former trump campaign chairman paul manafort directs wideranging probe russian interference last years presidential election muellers team investigators sent subpoenas recent weeks washington grand jury global banks account information records transactions involving manafort companies well longtime business partner rick gates according people familiar matter special counsel also reached business associates including manaforts soninlaw ukrainian oligarch according one people efforts characterized apparent attempt gain information could used squeeze manafort force helpful prosecutors manaforts spokesman confirmed fbi agents raided political consultants home virginia two weeks ago secure documents related investigation raid initially reported washington post prosecutors gather many years information financial affairs manafort could dragged deeper number legal disputes history business oligarchs politicians ukraine russia predates political work trump payments routed foreign banks investments us real estate investigations part reason manafort getting intense early scrutiny mueller drawing investigations well underway including one federal prosecutors manhattan appointed may prosecutors combing financial life 68yearold toeing fine line cooperating congressional requests information campaign insisting nothing hide muellers team prosecutors delving past privately supporters question muellers work unearth conduct apparent connection 2016 election manaforts spokesman jason maloni declared last month manafort cooperating witness legal term someone agrees provide evidence testimony prosecutors reached wednesday addressed revelation the160federal bureau investigation raid saying mr manafort consistently cooperated law enforcement serious inquiries occasion well practical matter blitz recent subpoenas global banks poses challenge manaforts ability continue daytoday business activities consultant investor said one people familiar matter broad probe course manafort inquiry one thread muellers multifaceted effort includes purchase trump real estate properties wealthy russians going back decade foreign ties michael flynn briefly administrations national security adviser dismissal fbi chief james comey president federal prosecutors manhattan investigating manafort earlier year examining allegations laundered money eastern europe new york properties according two people familiar earlier inquiry southern district new york handed work special counsels team mueller appointed people said along realestate inquiry special counsel taken review manaforts late filings comply foreignagent registration act known fara according one people spokesman muellers office joshua stueve declined comment 6 raid manaforts virginia home last month seemingly caught legal team surprise came day testified senate intelligence committee provided notes committee russian meeting fact manafort alerted authorities controversial meeting june 9 2016 involving trumps son donald jr campaign representatives russian lawyer promising damaging information hillary clinton according people familiar matter president soninlaw jared kushner dragged matter details repeatedly emerged contradicted initial accounts meeting manaforts business associates also risk engulfed probe jeffrey yohai estranged husband manaforts daughter investigation fbi agents working prosecutors us attorneys office los angeles according people familiar work cash infusions manafort yohai formed realestate partnerships took investor money new york los angeles partnerships subsequently declared bankruptcy court filings show us authorities looking claims investor yohai operated ponzi scheme people explained yohai contesting civil lawsuit one soured deals initial round challenging jurisdiction yohais lawyer aaron may declined comment grand jury fits trumprussia probe quicktake qampa rick gatess relationship manafort dates least 2006 younger man joined manafort davis consulting firm repackaged prorussian ukrainian politician leader friendly west eventually gates helped manage manafortdirected private equity fund called pericles supposed invest ukraine michael dry lawyer gates also declined comment dmitry firtash ukrainian oligarch invested 25 million realestate venture started manafort decade ago subsequently attracted attention investigators austria firtash charged unrelated case paying bribes india violation foreign corrupt practices act facing justice department request extradition us matter firtashs attorney dan webb said client way cooperating special counsel office paul manafort issue indictment pending chicago make comment 25 million inquiry us attorney manhattan initially focused manafortbacked business called cmz ventures sought develop luxury skyscraper park avenue 2008 partnership received 25 million firtash according court records filed new york federal lawsuit money never invested project firm shuttered 2009 plaintiffs cmz civil suit including former prime minister ukraine yulia tymoshenko alleged real purpose firm launder money us financial system firtash obtained improperly skimming sales natural gas ukraine court papers lawyers cmz ventures fellow defendants argued us laws didnt apply gas transactions abroad new york court jurisdiction matter federal judge agreed dismissing lawsuit 2015 time mueller inherited new york investigation extended well beyond manafortfirtash relationship according person briefed special counsels probe circling manafort include various congressional committees new york attorney general manhattan district attorney new york authorities examining unusual combination mortgages loans assembled manafort even national enquirer veered away celebrity news endorse trump campaign took swing manafort tabloid published story wednesday embarrassing details personal life | 737 |
<p>Obamacare—or at least the version of it that the president and his advisers currently think they can get away with putting into place—has been upending arrangements and reshuffling the deck in the health system since the beginning of the year. That’s when the new insurance rules, subsidies, and optional state Medicaid expansions went into effect. The law’s defenders say the changes that have been set in motion are irreversible, in large part because several million people are now covered by insurance plans sold through the exchanges, and a few million more are enrolled in Medicaid as a result of Obamacare. President Obama has stated repeatedly that these developments should effectively shut the door on further debate over the matter.</p>
<p>Of course, the president does not get to decide when public debates begin or end, and the public seems to be in no mood to declare the Obamacare case closed. Polling has consistently shown that more Americans oppose the law than support it, and that the opposition is far more intense than the support. The law is built on a foundation of dramatically expanded government power over the nation’s health system, which strikes many voters as a dangerous step toward more bureaucracy, less choice, higher costs, and lower quality care. The beginning of the law’s implementation does not appear to have eased these fears, and in some cases has exacerbated them.</p>
<p>But opponents of Obamacare must also reckon with the reality that the goal of repealing the law and replacing it with real, market-based health reform to bring down costs and enable more people to get covered is no longer aimed at a system that exists only in theory. When President Obama won reelection in 2012, it became inevitable that some version of the law would get implemented starting this year. And it was also a pretty good bet that, despite the law’s internal contradictions and problems, it would not, as some had surmised, collapse on the launch pad. Massive federal spending authority can prop up many a teetering edifice. The surprise is not that some 6 million people or so eligible for nearly free insurance under Obamacare took advantage of the offer; the surprise is that many millions more who were eligible declined to take it.</p>
<p>Some of the law’s opponents are reacting to these developments with something close to resignation. One prominent proposal would leave much of Obamacare’s government-centric architecture in place on the theory that it can be reformed and made to serve genuine market-oriented purposes. The law’s state and federal “exchanges,” which are the focal points of Obamacare’s expanded federal control over the health system, would be enlarged under this plan with millions of new enrollees from Medicaid. Future Medicare beneficiaries would also be forced to get their coverage through this mechanism.</p>
<p>It is true that exchanges are not, by definition, anti-market. Indeed, in concept, they could facilitate transparency and thus modestly improve consumer choice. But the Obamacare exchanges were built to assert increasing federal regulatory control over the nation’s health system. It is very rare for deregulation efforts to remove all such authority from an agency of government. Even if a deregulation effort partially succeeds in the short run, over the long run, federal regulatory agencies gain power by cleverly creating vested interests in the protection and expansion of that power. It is a very risky bet to place the future of American health care at the mercy of a new and improved system of Obamacare exchanges.</p>
<p>And there is no need to do so. The reality of Obamacare implementation in 2014 does not mean the law is no longer replaceable with something better. It still can be displaced by an appealing conservative alternative if a newly elected president chooses to make repeal and replace a top priority in 2017. But plans to replace Obamacare must now take into account the changes that the law has brought about this year, and stands to deliver over the next few years.</p>
<p>The president and the law’s supporters may pay a heavy political price this November for breaking their repeated promises not to needlessly disrupt pre-Obama-care insurance arrangements or doctor-patient relationships. The law’s opponents must avoid making the same mistake in their plans to replace Obamacare: They should refrain both from promising that all disruption can be avoided and from causing avoidable disruption. A replacement will need to include a transition—a bridge from Obamacare’s broken architecture to a working health financing system.</p>
<p>The nature of such a bridge depends in part on the particulars of the alternative. The best of the replacement plans so far proposed by conservatives are those that address the problems that existed in the health system before Obamacare was enacted without the horrendously misguided government-centered architecture of Obamacare that has made those problems worse. For instance, the reform plan introduced by Republican senators Richard Burr, Tom Coburn, and Orrin Hatch would dramatically expand insurance coverage, control costs with a functioning marketplace, and allow people with expensive health conditions to get affordable and stable insurance—without the high costs and overbearing federal regulatory control of Obamacare. The reform plan developed by the 2017 Project—an organization dedicated to developing a conservative reform agenda—has many key features in common with the Burr-Coburn-Hatch plan, and would also broaden insurance coverage and provide stable insurance for the sick without Obamacare’s excesses. We assume that some synthesis of these plans will form the starting point for replacing Obamacare.</p>
<p>The transition from Obamacare to programs like these would be a move from a more prescribed and regulated to a less prescribed and regulated health system, and therefore would increase rather than reduce the range of options available to Americans. This would make such a transition dramatically different from, and far easier than, the transition to Obamacare that we are now witnessing. Adding options, rather than subtracting them, can make it possible to enable even those people who are most entangled in Obamacare’s new mechanisms to gradually make their way into the new and more functional market-based alternative.</p>
<p>Indeed, for most Americans the transition would not be much of an issue and the new system would offer major benefits. About 160 million Americans receive health coverage through their employers, and in these early stages of Obamacare implementation, that system has remained largely as it was.</p>
<p>The repeal and replacement of Obamacare would reduce some burdens now faced by the employer system—by lifting the threat of the employer mandate and reducing tax and regulatory pressures that have undermined employment. And it would relieve employers of the coming “Cadillac” tax, scheduled to take effect in 2018, and offer a more plausible and less painful way to inject some cost discipline into employer coverage.</p>
<p>The Cadillac tax is a 40 percent excise tax on employer-plan premiums in excess of an upper threshold, set at $27,500 for family coverage in 2018 (the tax also applies to expensive policies sold directly by insurers to consumers). It requires employers to pay the same tax for high-paid and low-paid workers, and since employers would pass on the cost in the form of compensation adjustments, it would particularly harm lower-paid employees of firms with generous plans. A better approach, included in both the Burr-Coburn-Hatch plan and in the 2017 Project proposal, is to place an upper limit on the amount of employer-paid premiums that is tax-free income to workers. Premium costs paid by firms above the threshold would then be taxable income for employees, but higher-salaried employees would pay more because their salaries put them in higher marginal income-tax brackets. Most Americans would never confront the tax, and those who did would be far better positioned to deal with it, or to change their coverage to avoid it.</p>
<p>The transition from Obamacare’s crude regulatory distortions of the insurance market to a system that creates protections for people with preexisting conditions without outlawing insurance could also be made quite smooth for the same reason: People would find themselves with more options and no less protection.</p>
<p>Obamacare outlaws using health status in setting premiums and bans exclusions of pre-existing conditions, which provides an incentive to consumers to delay insurance enrollment until they need it. The law tries to counteract this perverse incentive by imposing a new tax on the uninsured—the so-called individual mandate. The emerging alternative plans take a different approach: They require that anyone who has stayed continuously insured be shielded from higher premiums based on their health status. This would include anyone who needed to move from an employer plan to the individual insurance market. The replacements would thus eliminate the individual mandate immediately, but the protection for those who stay insured would provide at least as strong an incentive to stay covered as the mandate while enabling the creation of a competitive market in coverage.</p>
<p>Some other insurance rules in Obamacare would need to be addressed with explicit transition provisions. For instance, Obamacare limits the allowable premium difference between older and younger consumers in the individual market to a 3 to 1 ratio, which is much narrower than the practice in many states before Obamacare was enacted. If this provision were to be repealed, as it ought to be along with the rest of the law, premiums would likely rise for older insurance enrollees and fall for younger consumers. To address this, a replacement plan should explicitly require states to provide for a brief transition period (of, say, three or four years) from Obamacare rules to the new system. A transition of this length would minimize disruption for consumers.</p>
<p>The challenges of transition are of course greater in the case of the two populations that receive direct benefits under Obamacare—those covered under the Medicaid expansion in their states and those who receive premium subsidies for the purchase of coverage through the exchanges. These individuals are most directly and materially entangled in Obamacare’s architecture, and smoothing for them the transition to a better system would require some special care.</p>
<p>The emerging alternative to Obamacare would help those who do not have access to an employer plan by providing them with tax credits for purchasing health insurance. The value of these tax credits would be roughly equal to the value of the tax preference for employer-paid plans, and thus would undo the unfairness of providing a tax benefit just to those in employer plans (the Burr-Coburn-Hatch plan limits the credits to households with incomes below three times the federal poverty line). Medicaid would then be transformed into a flexible, state-administered program of additional premium and cost-sharing support for low-income families. States would use the funding to supplement the federal tax credits and allow program participants to use the combined support to pick a coverage option from among competing insurance plans.</p>
<p>In both the case of Medicaid-eligible individuals and people without access to employer coverage, therefore, the conservative alternative to Obamacare would provide subsidized access to coverage, though through a different mechanism intended to help people enter a robust and competitive market in coverage that enables them to choose from among affordable options and allows their choices to make the underlying health system more efficient and accessible. This means that people receiving coverage under Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion and those receiving subsidies through the Obamacare exchanges would have to be given a bridge to the new system with as little disruption as possible.</p>
<p>The best way to transition those in the Medicaid program is through a grandfathering exemption. No one enrolled in Medicaid would be pushed out of the program. People could stay enrolled as long as they remained eligible under the old Obamacare rules, and as long as their states elected to keep the old program structure in place for them. But all new applicants would go into the reformed Medicaid program, and all participants in the old program could voluntarily elect to switch into the reformed Medicaid program.</p>
<p>A great many Medicaid beneficiaries would choose to make that transition as they would be given new choices and the ability to enroll in the same types of mainstream insurance plans available to the middle class—often with significantly greater access to care than they now have in Medicaid. The states would also have an incentive to make it more appealing, smoother, and easier for people to choose the new Medicaid alternative, since the new system would be significantly less costly for state governments. Given these incentives, and the fact that turnover in Medicaid has always been very high, the full transition to the new Medicaid alternative could occur fairly rapidly, yet could be experienced by the people affected as a choice, not a disruption.</p>
<p>The transition to the new health insurance tax credits for those currently receiving subsidized coverage in Obamacare’s exchanges would not be as straightforward, but could follow the same general principle. Current enrollees (say, through the beginning of the year in which the alternative is enacted) in plans bought through the Obamacare exchanges could stay in those plans and continue to receive premium credits based on the Obamacare rules, though those credits would not grow year over year as they do under Obamacare. New applicants would instead receive the new tax credit and select from insurance plans in the new, more functional market.</p>
<p>The limited population of existing, subsidized enrollees could choose at any time to transition to new coverage using the new tax credits instead of their Obamacare plans. The new system would be able to offer them lower-cost plans (including catastrophic coverage that could be purchased for a premium equal to the value of the tax credit, and therefore involve no out-of-pocket premium costs at all), and the credits would help offset their costs if they chose more comprehensive options. Some individuals would find themselves better off remaining in their Obamacare-purchased coverage for a time, and they could do so, but the new system would grow more attractive each year as it brought down costs while the relative value of the Obamacare subsidies declined.</p>
<p>Under the emerging plans to replace Obamacare, HealthCare.gov and the state-based exchange websites would not be necessary, though states could choose to keep theirs or build other exchange mechanisms if they wanted. But the federal tax credits would not be tied to purchasing plans through an exchange, and they would not be used to enforce federal insurance rules.</p>
<p>Of course, not all of Obamacare would require transition rules. The tax increases, the Independent Payment Advisory Board, the blunt and ill-advised Medicare cuts, the various intrusions by the federal government into the practice of medicine, the strict and counterproductive definition of insurance, and much else could be safely repealed, effective immediately, and the only consequence would be a better health care system.</p>
<p>But the insurance provisions of Obamacare have now moved millions of people into new coverage arrangements. Granted, many of those who have switched to new insurance plans did so because they concluded they had no other choice, and they would welcome a law that freed them up to get the kind of insurance they would prefer. For these people, the transition could be swift. But Obamacare also provides massive new subsidies to a relatively small portion of the population, and undoing those arrangements abruptly would be both unfair and unwise. Obamacare’s opponents should not make the same mistake its champions made in designing and implementing it.</p>
<p>Building in an adequate transition will not undermine the ultimate effectiveness of an Obamacare replacement plan. The goal is a functioning marketplace where consumers decide how to allocate resources, where all Americans have access to stable insurance, where quality care and medical innovation are rewarded, and where federal support for insurance enrollment is affordable for taxpayers. These are goals that are critically important for the long-term strength and vitality of the country, and they are goals that are more likely to be reached if Obamacare’s opponents wisely design short-term transition provisions to defuse opposition to a full replacement plan.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Yuval Levin, also a fellow at EPPC, is the editor of National Affairs and a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard.</p> | false | 1 | obamacareor least version president advisers currently think get away putting placehas upending arrangements reshuffling deck health system since beginning year thats new insurance rules subsidies optional state medicaid expansions went effect laws defenders say changes set motion irreversible large part several million people covered insurance plans sold exchanges million enrolled medicaid result obamacare president obama stated repeatedly developments effectively shut door debate matter course president get decide public debates begin end public seems mood declare obamacare case closed polling consistently shown americans oppose law support opposition far intense support law built foundation dramatically expanded government power nations health system strikes many voters dangerous step toward bureaucracy less choice higher costs lower quality care beginning laws implementation appear eased fears cases exacerbated opponents obamacare must also reckon reality goal repealing law replacing real marketbased health reform bring costs enable people get covered longer aimed system exists theory president obama reelection 2012 became inevitable version law would get implemented starting year also pretty good bet despite laws internal contradictions problems would surmised collapse launch pad massive federal spending authority prop many teetering edifice surprise 6 million people eligible nearly free insurance obamacare took advantage offer surprise many millions eligible declined take laws opponents reacting developments something close resignation one prominent proposal would leave much obamacares governmentcentric architecture place theory reformed made serve genuine marketoriented purposes laws state federal exchanges focal points obamacares expanded federal control health system would enlarged plan millions new enrollees medicaid future medicare beneficiaries would also forced get coverage mechanism true exchanges definition antimarket indeed concept could facilitate transparency thus modestly improve consumer choice obamacare exchanges built assert increasing federal regulatory control nations health system rare deregulation efforts remove authority agency government even deregulation effort partially succeeds short run long run federal regulatory agencies gain power cleverly creating vested interests protection expansion power risky bet place future american health care mercy new improved system obamacare exchanges need reality obamacare implementation 2014 mean law longer replaceable something better still displaced appealing conservative alternative newly elected president chooses make repeal replace top priority 2017 plans replace obamacare must take account changes law brought year stands deliver next years president laws supporters may pay heavy political price november breaking repeated promises needlessly disrupt preobamacare insurance arrangements doctorpatient relationships laws opponents must avoid making mistake plans replace obamacare refrain promising disruption avoided causing avoidable disruption replacement need include transitiona bridge obamacares broken architecture working health financing system nature bridge depends part particulars alternative best replacement plans far proposed conservatives address problems existed health system obamacare enacted without horrendously misguided governmentcentered architecture obamacare made problems worse instance reform plan introduced republican senators richard burr tom coburn orrin hatch would dramatically expand insurance coverage control costs functioning marketplace allow people expensive health conditions get affordable stable insurancewithout high costs overbearing federal regulatory control obamacare reform plan developed 2017 projectan organization dedicated developing conservative reform agendahas many key features common burrcoburnhatch plan would also broaden insurance coverage provide stable insurance sick without obamacares excesses assume synthesis plans form starting point replacing obamacare transition obamacare programs like would move prescribed regulated less prescribed regulated health system therefore would increase rather reduce range options available americans would make transition dramatically different far easier transition obamacare witnessing adding options rather subtracting make possible enable even people entangled obamacares new mechanisms gradually make way new functional marketbased alternative indeed americans transition would much issue new system would offer major benefits 160 million americans receive health coverage employers early stages obamacare implementation system remained largely repeal replacement obamacare would reduce burdens faced employer systemby lifting threat employer mandate reducing tax regulatory pressures undermined employment would relieve employers coming cadillac tax scheduled take effect 2018 offer plausible less painful way inject cost discipline employer coverage cadillac tax 40 percent excise tax employerplan premiums excess upper threshold set 27500 family coverage 2018 tax also applies expensive policies sold directly insurers consumers requires employers pay tax highpaid lowpaid workers since employers would pass cost form compensation adjustments would particularly harm lowerpaid employees firms generous plans better approach included burrcoburnhatch plan 2017 project proposal place upper limit amount employerpaid premiums taxfree income workers premium costs paid firms threshold would taxable income employees highersalaried employees would pay salaries put higher marginal incometax brackets americans would never confront tax would far better positioned deal change coverage avoid transition obamacares crude regulatory distortions insurance market system creates protections people preexisting conditions without outlawing insurance could also made quite smooth reason people would find options less protection obamacare outlaws using health status setting premiums bans exclusions preexisting conditions provides incentive consumers delay insurance enrollment need law tries counteract perverse incentive imposing new tax uninsuredthe socalled individual mandate emerging alternative plans take different approach require anyone stayed continuously insured shielded higher premiums based health status would include anyone needed move employer plan individual insurance market replacements would thus eliminate individual mandate immediately protection stay insured would provide least strong incentive stay covered mandate enabling creation competitive market coverage insurance rules obamacare would need addressed explicit transition provisions instance obamacare limits allowable premium difference older younger consumers individual market 3 1 ratio much narrower practice many states obamacare enacted provision repealed ought along rest law premiums would likely rise older insurance enrollees fall younger consumers address replacement plan explicitly require states provide brief transition period say three four years obamacare rules new system transition length would minimize disruption consumers challenges transition course greater case two populations receive direct benefits obamacarethose covered medicaid expansion states receive premium subsidies purchase coverage exchanges individuals directly materially entangled obamacares architecture smoothing transition better system would require special care emerging alternative obamacare would help access employer plan providing tax credits purchasing health insurance value tax credits would roughly equal value tax preference employerpaid plans thus would undo unfairness providing tax benefit employer plans burrcoburnhatch plan limits credits households incomes three times federal poverty line medicaid would transformed flexible stateadministered program additional premium costsharing support lowincome families states would use funding supplement federal tax credits allow program participants use combined support pick coverage option among competing insurance plans case medicaideligible individuals people without access employer coverage therefore conservative alternative obamacare would provide subsidized access coverage though different mechanism intended help people enter robust competitive market coverage enables choose among affordable options allows choices make underlying health system efficient accessible means people receiving coverage obamacares medicaid expansion receiving subsidies obamacare exchanges would given bridge new system little disruption possible best way transition medicaid program grandfathering exemption one enrolled medicaid would pushed program people could stay enrolled long remained eligible old obamacare rules long states elected keep old program structure place new applicants would go reformed medicaid program participants old program could voluntarily elect switch reformed medicaid program great many medicaid beneficiaries would choose make transition would given new choices ability enroll types mainstream insurance plans available middle classoften significantly greater access care medicaid states would also incentive make appealing smoother easier people choose new medicaid alternative since new system would significantly less costly state governments given incentives fact turnover medicaid always high full transition new medicaid alternative could occur fairly rapidly yet could experienced people affected choice disruption transition new health insurance tax credits currently receiving subsidized coverage obamacares exchanges would straightforward could follow general principle current enrollees say beginning year alternative enacted plans bought obamacare exchanges could stay plans continue receive premium credits based obamacare rules though credits would grow year year obamacare new applicants would instead receive new tax credit select insurance plans new functional market limited population existing subsidized enrollees could choose time transition new coverage using new tax credits instead obamacare plans new system would able offer lowercost plans including catastrophic coverage could purchased premium equal value tax credit therefore involve outofpocket premium costs credits would help offset costs chose comprehensive options individuals would find better remaining obamacarepurchased coverage time could new system would grow attractive year brought costs relative value obamacare subsidies declined emerging plans replace obamacare healthcaregov statebased exchange websites would necessary though states could choose keep build exchange mechanisms wanted federal tax credits would tied purchasing plans exchange would used enforce federal insurance rules course obamacare would require transition rules tax increases independent payment advisory board blunt illadvised medicare cuts various intrusions federal government practice medicine strict counterproductive definition insurance much else could safely repealed effective immediately consequence would better health care system insurance provisions obamacare moved millions people new coverage arrangements granted many switched new insurance plans concluded choice would welcome law freed get kind insurance would prefer people transition could swift obamacare also provides massive new subsidies relatively small portion population undoing arrangements abruptly would unfair unwise obamacares opponents make mistake champions made designing implementing building adequate transition undermine ultimate effectiveness obamacare replacement plan goal functioning marketplace consumers decide allocate resources americans access stable insurance quality care medical innovation rewarded federal support insurance enrollment affordable taxpayers goals critically important longterm strength vitality country goals likely reached obamacares opponents wisely design shortterm transition provisions defuse opposition full replacement plan james c capretta senior fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow american enterprise institute yuval levin also fellow eppc editor national affairs contributing editor weekly standard | 1,525 |
<p>Clearly, sanctions can satisfy various political, economic, military and strategic goals, but could they ever be morally justified?</p>
<p>While the U.S.-instigated Western economic sanctions directed at Russia are in many ways peculiar, the standard reasoning applies when we consider their normative status. In every case, at the time of initial implementation of sanctions, whether they are unilateral or with U.N. blessing, strong moralistic language is employed to produce the semblance of justification. Clearly, sanctions can satisfy various political, economic, military and strategic goals, but could they ever be morally justified?</p>
<p>Sanctions, particularly when they are comprehensive and thoroughly enforced, embodying the quarantining of a nation, may properly be seen as a form of siege, and thus an act of war. Such were, for example, the sanctions leveled against Yugoslavia in the 1990s. UN Security Council Resolution 757 of 30 May 1992 had imposed a universal, binding blockage on all trade, international financial transactions, and all scientific, cultural and sports exchanges. It will be difficult to find moral justification for placing an entire nation in such a predicament. The case of Russia is different, but some of the same arguments apply; in particular the aspect of international economic sanctions that involves continuous escalation of demands on the targeted country. While this practice is an element of the very nature of the exercise of sanctioning countries this, at the same time, makes unavailable any moral justification for keeping sanctions in place.</p>
<p>Economic sanctions are envisaged as a sort of punishment, based on what should be an institutional decision not unlike a court ruling. Hence, the conditions for their lifting should be clearly stated and once those are met sanctions should be lifted. But this is generally not what happens, and perhaps is precluded by the very nature of international sanctioning. As a result of this logic of escalation, economic sanctions cannot be properly articulated in any law-like system. Economic sanctions have much more in common with war than legal punishment, and in fact represent a form of siege. As such, they cannot be ended simply on the basis of their initial rationale, for the very process of sanctions implementation opens up possibilities for setting new goals and a continuous redefinition of the goal that sanctions are seen to have.</p>
<p>Normatively speaking, the lifting of sanctions should occur as soon as designated goals are achieved, but what may be put forward as a goal in this sort of case? Clearly, only something which is perceived as achievable. This is a matter of rationality, for if the demand is issued for more than can be achieved, the credibility of the sanctioning side diminishes, which puts in question concessions that might have otherwise been obtainable. Effectiveness of the outcome is of crucial importance. The outcome is precisely what confirms the power and authority to issue a demand for anything in the first place. Without this power, we would be dealing with something entirely different, such as wishes, desires, visions, descriptions of ideals, interpretations of the way things ought to be, and so on. Yet there would be no sanctions.</p>
<p>It is a matter of rationality that this power will make demands focused on the maximum it perceives as obtainable at a time. This is what underlies the fact that, once implemented, sanctions exhibit continuously changing conditions for lifting them. Thus, the constant amendments of the conditions required for lifting the sanctions are not due to initial deceitfulness or hypocrisy on the part of the sanctioner. Rather, the policy shifts that accompany the imposition of sanctions should be seen as a consequence of the (perceived, even if delusional) power discrepancy, with the sanctioner having the ability to take more and more from the situation. In this respect, the case of the Western sanctions against Russia is substantially different.</p>
<p>Sanctions are a process when the satisfaction of one goal opens up the possibility for setting another that could not, until then, have been imposed as a goal. However, when the first goal is achieved, then the opportunity for some other goal generally arises. This occurs even though up until that time there is no pre-set (or already conceived) second goal, because it would have been irrational, since conditions for its satisfaction were simply not apparent. Given that such conditions inevitably present themselves, it would be utterly irrational to abstain from pursuing the new goal for it would look like giving up when one is already halfway there. It makes no difference that the point which the sanctioner has now reached was initially perceived as the end of the road: it now becomes apparent that one is just halfway there! Thus the cycle starts all over again, with the possibility that the new opportunity will present itself, the opportunity to achieve some third goal, then the fourth and so on. This continues as long as the following two conditions remain in effect: that new opportunities continuously present themselves (which will generally be the case) while the power and will to exploit those opportunities remain in the hands of the sanctioner.</p>
<p>How long will this keep happening? This question is unanswerable in advance, for it is an empirical matter. Theoretically, opportunities will present themselves until they are all exhausted. And as long as they are not exhausted it will be irrational to abandon setting up new goals and to stop issuing new demands. For, the reason to adopt the second goal is the same that presented itself as a reason for the first goal. It would be absurd to abandon the second goal, for this would in some sense mean giving up the first goal as well. If the reason for putting forward the first goal was sufficient to adopt it as a goal, and conditions have not changed dramatically, in particular the ability to issue demands, then what was once a sufficient reason continues its influence with full force.</p>
<p>Admittedly, once a goal has been achieved, a goal that was put forward as something which was wanted, and not simply desired, then the opportunity to really want something else (which might have earlier been simply in the domain of a mere wish) presents itself as a real possibility. And it will always turn out to be unthinkable to just give it up simply because it was not put forward as a goal at some previous time, at the time when this could not have even been entertained as a feasible goal. For this new possibility opened up only after accomplishing the first task. All the while, it may not even be known in advance what the new goal might be. This is a feature of the empirical situation: the openness and lack of certainty about the future. It is irrational not to want something which is perceived as good, achievable, and in some sense significant, simply because something else has been achieved which was at some prior occasion perceived as the sole achievable thing. And if something is desired and achievable, what is there to prevent it from happening? What principle could be applied here in order to draw the line in advance, other than the one that requires that, following the goal initially set, all opportunities that present themselves also be exhaustively pursued?</p>
<p>This is the reason why sanctions cannot be halted once implemented, or put differently why it is much easier to set them in motion than to stop them. And since there is no internal barrier, which would be there from the outset, and no such barrier can be introduced later that was not there earlier (for example, with respect to those who are treated exploitatively or paternalistically), then there is no possibility to halt the onslaught of sanctions until all opportunities are exhausted. The conditions are just as in war: there is no end until final victory. There is no pre-established procedure or defined end point; neither of these can be expressed in legal terms, only political. This is where it becomes perfectly apparent that sanctions have much more in common with war than with some court procedure. It is only rational to press all the way to final victory, or in any case to some point, which is not the state of initially defined demands, but the state defined in terms of what is seen as the desirable end result.</p>
<p>On the basis of this logic of escalation of demands in the process of sanctioning, a lesson can be drawn for either side. The party that is doing the sanctioning will pursue in a perfectly rational way the issuing of ever-new demands as long as it is getting something in return—that is, managing to obtain any concessions in the first place. On the other side, the sanctioned party, depending on its power, must resist any temptation to give in on any demand as doing so will only serve to unleash the sequence of escalation of demands; and secondly, again depending on its power, should immediately engage in the process of counter-sanctioning. The logic of counter-sanctioning is, of course, the same: given any opportunity for engaging in the process of escalations of the counter-demands it is perfectly rational to escalate.</p>
<p>Russia seems to have perfectly understood the logic of escalation on both sides of the sanctions divide, and has decided to give in to no demand issued from the West while at the same time Russia engages in sophisticated and painful counter-sanctioning of the weaker component of the sanctioner’s side, the E.U., with an eye to escalation. In this situation Russia can even afford to de-escalate in the cases of well behaved and unwilling would be sanctioners like Greece or Hungary.</p>
<p>Finally, let us ask how long can this last? This can end only with the final victory of one side or the other, like in any war.</p>
<p>This article is based on an article coauthored with Jovan Babic, “Economic sanctions, Morality, and Escalation of Demands on Yugoslavia” International Peacekeeping 9:4, 119-126.</p> | false | 1 | clearly sanctions satisfy various political economic military strategic goals could ever morally justified usinstigated western economic sanctions directed russia many ways peculiar standard reasoning applies consider normative status every case time initial implementation sanctions whether unilateral un blessing strong moralistic language employed produce semblance justification clearly sanctions satisfy various political economic military strategic goals could ever morally justified sanctions particularly comprehensive thoroughly enforced embodying quarantining nation may properly seen form siege thus act war example sanctions leveled yugoslavia 1990s un security council resolution 757 30 may 1992 imposed universal binding blockage trade international financial transactions scientific cultural sports exchanges difficult find moral justification placing entire nation predicament case russia different arguments apply particular aspect international economic sanctions involves continuous escalation demands targeted country practice element nature exercise sanctioning countries time makes unavailable moral justification keeping sanctions place economic sanctions envisaged sort punishment based institutional decision unlike court ruling hence conditions lifting clearly stated met sanctions lifted generally happens perhaps precluded nature international sanctioning result logic escalation economic sanctions properly articulated lawlike system economic sanctions much common war legal punishment fact represent form siege ended simply basis initial rationale process sanctions implementation opens possibilities setting new goals continuous redefinition goal sanctions seen normatively speaking lifting sanctions occur soon designated goals achieved may put forward goal sort case clearly something perceived achievable matter rationality demand issued achieved credibility sanctioning side diminishes puts question concessions might otherwise obtainable effectiveness outcome crucial importance outcome precisely confirms power authority issue demand anything first place without power would dealing something entirely different wishes desires visions descriptions ideals interpretations way things ought yet would sanctions matter rationality power make demands focused maximum perceives obtainable time underlies fact implemented sanctions exhibit continuously changing conditions lifting thus constant amendments conditions required lifting sanctions due initial deceitfulness hypocrisy part sanctioner rather policy shifts accompany imposition sanctions seen consequence perceived even delusional power discrepancy sanctioner ability take situation respect case western sanctions russia substantially different sanctions process satisfaction one goal opens possibility setting another could imposed goal however first goal achieved opportunity goal generally arises occurs even though time preset already conceived second goal would irrational since conditions satisfaction simply apparent given conditions inevitably present would utterly irrational abstain pursuing new goal would look like giving one already halfway makes difference point sanctioner reached initially perceived end road becomes apparent one halfway thus cycle starts possibility new opportunity present opportunity achieve third goal fourth continues long following two conditions remain effect new opportunities continuously present generally case power exploit opportunities remain hands sanctioner long keep happening question unanswerable advance empirical matter theoretically opportunities present exhausted long exhausted irrational abandon setting new goals stop issuing new demands reason adopt second goal presented reason first goal would absurd abandon second goal would sense mean giving first goal well reason putting forward first goal sufficient adopt goal conditions changed dramatically particular ability issue demands sufficient reason continues influence full force admittedly goal achieved goal put forward something wanted simply desired opportunity really want something else might earlier simply domain mere wish presents real possibility always turn unthinkable give simply put forward goal previous time time could even entertained feasible goal new possibility opened accomplishing first task may even known advance new goal might feature empirical situation openness lack certainty future irrational want something perceived good achievable sense significant simply something else achieved prior occasion perceived sole achievable thing something desired achievable prevent happening principle could applied order draw line advance one requires following goal initially set opportunities present also exhaustively pursued reason sanctions halted implemented put differently much easier set motion stop since internal barrier would outset barrier introduced later earlier example respect treated exploitatively paternalistically possibility halt onslaught sanctions opportunities exhausted conditions war end final victory preestablished procedure defined end point neither expressed legal terms political becomes perfectly apparent sanctions much common war court procedure rational press way final victory case point state initially defined demands state defined terms seen desirable end result basis logic escalation demands process sanctioning lesson drawn either side party sanctioning pursue perfectly rational way issuing evernew demands long getting something returnthat managing obtain concessions first place side sanctioned party depending power must resist temptation give demand serve unleash sequence escalation demands secondly depending power immediately engage process countersanctioning logic countersanctioning course given opportunity engaging process escalations counterdemands perfectly rational escalate russia seems perfectly understood logic escalation sides sanctions divide decided give demand issued west time russia engages sophisticated painful countersanctioning weaker component sanctioners side eu eye escalation situation russia even afford deescalate cases well behaved unwilling would sanctioners like greece hungary finally let us ask long last end final victory one side like war article based article coauthored jovan babic economic sanctions morality escalation demands yugoslavia international peacekeeping 94 119126 | 792 |
<p>The following text is a conversation between EPPC Hertog Fellow Yuval Levin and Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review Online. The introductory text is Ms. Lopez’s.</p>
<p>Yuval Levin looks at our fractured republic and sees signs of hope.</p>
<p>In his new book, <a href="" type="internal">The Fractured Republic: Renewing America’s Social Contract in the Age of Individualism</a>, Levin writes with deep regard for subsidiarity and civil society and urges conservatives and all people of good will to seek renewal. We talk about it here. – KJL</p>
<p>KATHRYN JEAN LOPEZ:&#160;So just who fractured the republic?</p>
<p>YUVAL LEVIN:&#160;We all did, really, for some good reasons and some bad ones. The book traces a set of trends that have transformed our society since the middle of the 20th century — trends propelled by a spirit of individualism, that have meant that what was an intensely, unusually consolidated society in the wake of the Second World War has become a much more fragmented, decentralized society. It’s a process that has taken the form of economic liberalization in some respects, of cultural liberalization in some respects, of a kind of loosening of the tight reins of conformity and cohesion that characterized our country in the first half of the 20th century. Its results have been mixed: It has brought us greater dynamism but also less stability, more personal freedom but also more moral chaos and social disorder, more prosperity but less security, more diversity but less cohesion. So a lot of what we dislike most about our contemporary circumstances is really the flip-side of the coin of what we like best. That’s why the challenge of addressing America’s 21st-century social and economic problems is so difficult, and why it demands a degree of serious engagement with contemporary realities that our politics has just failed to achieve — that the Left and the Right have both failed to achieve.</p>
<p>The book suggests some ways we might do better, and argues that for all our troubles it might actually be conservatives who are best suited to helping the country do better, if only we can see our way past the frustrations of the moment.</p>
<p>LOPEZ: The first sentence of your book declares, “Life in America is always getting better and worse at the same time.” Is anything getting better these days?</p>
<p>LEVIN: Oh sure. This is not the easiest time to find rays of hope, needless to say. Our politics is cratering, and our culture seems to have lost its mind a bit. Everyone is angry. But in a free society, in which people can adapt to difficulties and adjust in light of failures and try their hands at all kinds of responses, seasons of calamity are often followed by seasons of renewal. I think a lot of the good that’s happening right now is taking the form of those kinds of adaptive responses — of people looking at the options they’re being given by our politics, or our culture, or our education system, or our economy and saying, “This isn’t good enough so let’s try for something better.”</p>
<p>I can see, for instance, a real flowering of bold ideas among cultural conservatives looking for ways to strengthen their communities, and a revitalizing generational transition in those communities that looks like it will do us all a lot of good. I see a rising generation of political leaders, at least on the right (which I know better), who are at home in the 21st century, and can see how to apply enduring American principles to our challenging circumstances to help the country recover. We won’t have one of them as a Republican presidential candidate this time, unfortunately, but you can increasingly see them in Congress and in the states. So some of the good things happening in our country are happening right where we are used to bad news. And there are more examples of that — from sharply declining teen-pregnancy rates to reduced abortion rates to more mundane but important improvements in our standards of living — from cleaner water and air to low gas prices.</p>
<p>Other good things are less surprising. We are on the whole, as a nation, healthier and wealthier than ever. We live at the cutting edge of technological progress in a variety of ways.</p>
<p>So don’t get me wrong, things are also getting worse in other important ways. Those are often front and center. But in a society this complex and free, the good and the bad are always coming at us, and I do think we now tend to blind ourselves to the good too much, and that leaves us too gloomy and makes it more difficult than it has to be to find ways to address our problems.</p>
<p>LOPEZ: You write,</p>
<p>Each side wants desperately to recover its lost ideal, believes the bulk of the country does, too, and is endlessly frustrated by the political resistance that holds it back. The broader public, meanwhile, finds in the resulting political debates little evidence of real engagement with contemporary problems and few attractive solutions. In the absence of real relief from their resulting frustration, a growing number of voters opt for leaders who simply embody or articulation that frustration.</p>
<p>Is that the explanation for Donald Trump? Does electing him make things better or worse? Is there any way to tell?</p>
<p>LEVIN: I think that’s part of what is behind the frustration and dissatisfaction that have driven some Republicans to Trump this year. That frustration and dissatisfaction is justified, but the turn to Trump is not. A plurality of the Republican primary electorate made a horrendous error in judgment this year, and I don’t think it does any good to pretend otherwise or to make excuses for it. They have opted for a candidate who is — as a matter of character, temperament, experience, and worldview — patently unfit for the job he is seeking, and who would exacerbate the very problems that have driven people to him. The Democrats are also picking an unacceptable nominee, as is their wont, and so this election looks to be a disaster. I take that, and I take Trump, to be in part a symptom of the trends and patterns I describe in the book. A symptom, not a cure. I think this election is marking the end of a phase of American politics, not the beginning of a new one — the end of the baby boomer arc in our politics. I’m relatively hopeful about what will follow it. But I’m not hopeful about this election.</p>
<p>LOPEZ: How do conservatives exaggerate the Left’s dominance?</p>
<p>LEVIN: When it comes to cultural issues in particular, I think conservatives sometimes incline too much to despair and to panic, and in the process we tend to exaggerate the importance of the institutions dominated by the Left. I don’t mean to say they’re not important, and I don’t mean to downplay the dangers posed by an aggressive social liberalism that has given up on pluralism and works to root out religious and moral traditionalists from our society. Such people exist. But they are a small minority of activists on the left, and the institutions they operate in are weaker than they used to be. The appropriate response to them would involve recognizing that social conservatives are a minority too, and that this is an unusually good time to be a minority in America. So organize in and around these institutions, build up lively and attractive subcultures both within them and in place of them. Use the resources that 21st-century America gives us to build alternative channels of persuasion and appeal — to appeal both to the next generation within our communities and to our neighbors.</p>
<p>Where we really need to fervently resist is where the Left is trying to close off the space for that kind of subcultural conservatism: The struggles for religious liberty and for freedom of association and expression — these are fights for our lives. But they are winnable fights, and if we persist and make our case and help our fellow citizens see the ugly bullying of the Left, we can ultimately prevail. There are other fights — fights for dominance of mainstream institutions — which we are not going to be able to win in the foreseeable future. We have to distinguish among these, to understand ourselves as a minority and therefore to approach society persuasively rather than possessively, and to be much clearer and more creative about how we help people understand what we have to offer and why they should find it appealing.</p>
<p>But most fundamentally of all, I think we exaggerate the Left’s dominance because we forget that its vision of the good life is deeply inadequate, and its failings will drive people to seek out a deeper truth. The permanence of the human longings for transcendence and for truth means that the endless parade of temptations and distractions modern life throws up to flatten our souls will make room for an endless series of opportunities for the truth to recapture our imagination and prove itself indispensable. Traditionalists should work to build room for their ways of living in the modern world, confident that their instruction and example will make that world better, and that people will be drawn to the spark. Don’t despair.</p>
<p>LOPEZ: For those who have no particular interest in religion, what’s your pitch for why “our free society requires a flourishing private culture of moral formation for liberty, which in turn requires that we prize and defend the institutions that engage in such formation at a personal level”?</p>
<p>LEVIN: In laying out why I think a certain kind of conservative disposition is what 21st-century America requires, I suggest that part of what this would mean would be a recovery of a fuller case for freedom than the one we normally hear in our politics today. This would be a more classical idea of freedom — freedom not just from coercion, but also from our own unbounded passions and failings and vices. Using our freedom well requires that we be formed, morally formed by a culture, for that kind of ordered freedom. And that formation, in a free society, can only really happen in the institutions that occupy the middle space between the individual and the state: families, communities, churches and synagogues, schools, and more. That’s a key reason why conservatives so emphasize that middle space, and it’s a key reason why protecting that space is so essential to a society like ours.</p>
<p>It’s true of course that our religions, especially Judaism and Christianity, define freedom in this fuller way. But the Western tradition of philosophy does too. Socrates himself explicitly does that in Plato’s Republic, and that understanding of freedom is implicit in the long tradition that follows him. So I don’t think seeing freedom in this fuller way requires religion — though I’m quite sure it doesn’t hurt.</p>
<p>— Kathryn Jean Lopez is a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and editor-at-large of National Review Online. She is co-author of the updated <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1612788815/ref=nosim/nationalreviewon" type="external">How to Defend the Faith without Raising Your Voice</a>. Yuval Levin is the Hertog Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | following text conversation eppc hertog fellow yuval levin kathryn jean lopez national review online introductory text ms lopezs yuval levin looks fractured republic sees signs hope new book fractured republic renewing americas social contract age individualism levin writes deep regard subsidiarity civil society urges conservatives people good seek renewal talk kjl kathryn jean lopez160so fractured republic yuval levin160we really good reasons bad ones book traces set trends transformed society since middle 20th century trends propelled spirit individualism meant intensely unusually consolidated society wake second world war become much fragmented decentralized society process taken form economic liberalization respects cultural liberalization respects kind loosening tight reins conformity cohesion characterized country first half 20th century results mixed brought us greater dynamism also less stability personal freedom also moral chaos social disorder prosperity less security diversity less cohesion lot dislike contemporary circumstances really flipside coin like best thats challenge addressing americas 21stcentury social economic problems difficult demands degree serious engagement contemporary realities politics failed achieve left right failed achieve book suggests ways might better argues troubles might actually conservatives best suited helping country better see way past frustrations moment lopez first sentence book declares life america always getting better worse time anything getting better days levin oh sure easiest time find rays hope needless say politics cratering culture seems lost mind bit everyone angry free society people adapt difficulties adjust light failures try hands kinds responses seasons calamity often followed seasons renewal think lot good thats happening right taking form kinds adaptive responses people looking options theyre given politics culture education system economy saying isnt good enough lets try something better see instance real flowering bold ideas among cultural conservatives looking ways strengthen communities revitalizing generational transition communities looks like us lot good see rising generation political leaders least right know better home 21st century see apply enduring american principles challenging circumstances help country recover wont one republican presidential candidate time unfortunately increasingly see congress states good things happening country happening right used bad news examples sharply declining teenpregnancy rates reduced abortion rates mundane important improvements standards living cleaner water air low gas prices good things less surprising whole nation healthier wealthier ever live cutting edge technological progress variety ways dont get wrong things also getting worse important ways often front center society complex free good bad always coming us think tend blind good much leaves us gloomy makes difficult find ways address problems lopez write side wants desperately recover lost ideal believes bulk country endlessly frustrated political resistance holds back broader public meanwhile finds resulting political debates little evidence real engagement contemporary problems attractive solutions absence real relief resulting frustration growing number voters opt leaders simply embody articulation frustration explanation donald trump electing make things better worse way tell levin think thats part behind frustration dissatisfaction driven republicans trump year frustration dissatisfaction justified turn trump plurality republican primary electorate made horrendous error judgment year dont think good pretend otherwise make excuses opted candidate matter character temperament experience worldview patently unfit job seeking would exacerbate problems driven people democrats also picking unacceptable nominee wont election looks disaster take take trump part symptom trends patterns describe book symptom cure think election marking end phase american politics beginning new one end baby boomer arc politics im relatively hopeful follow im hopeful election lopez conservatives exaggerate lefts dominance levin comes cultural issues particular think conservatives sometimes incline much despair panic process tend exaggerate importance institutions dominated left dont mean say theyre important dont mean downplay dangers posed aggressive social liberalism given pluralism works root religious moral traditionalists society people exist small minority activists left institutions operate weaker used appropriate response would involve recognizing social conservatives minority unusually good time minority america organize around institutions build lively attractive subcultures within place use resources 21stcentury america gives us build alternative channels persuasion appeal appeal next generation within communities neighbors really need fervently resist left trying close space kind subcultural conservatism struggles religious liberty freedom association expression fights lives winnable fights persist make case help fellow citizens see ugly bullying left ultimately prevail fights fights dominance mainstream institutions going able win foreseeable future distinguish among understand minority therefore approach society persuasively rather possessively much clearer creative help people understand offer find appealing fundamentally think exaggerate lefts dominance forget vision good life deeply inadequate failings drive people seek deeper truth permanence human longings transcendence truth means endless parade temptations distractions modern life throws flatten souls make room endless series opportunities truth recapture imagination prove indispensable traditionalists work build room ways living modern world confident instruction example make world better people drawn spark dont despair lopez particular interest religion whats pitch free society requires flourishing private culture moral formation liberty turn requires prize defend institutions engage formation personal level levin laying think certain kind conservative disposition 21stcentury america requires suggest part would mean would recovery fuller case freedom one normally hear politics today would classical idea freedom freedom coercion also unbounded passions failings vices using freedom well requires formed morally formed culture kind ordered freedom formation free society really happen institutions occupy middle space individual state families communities churches synagogues schools thats key reason conservatives emphasize middle space key reason protecting space essential society like true course religions especially judaism christianity define freedom fuller way western tradition philosophy socrates explicitly platos republic understanding freedom implicit long tradition follows dont think seeing freedom fuller way requires religion though im quite sure doesnt hurt kathryn jean lopez senior fellow national review institute editoratlarge national review online coauthor updated defend faith without raising voice yuval levin hertog fellow ethics public policy center | 927 |
<p>Faith, Politics &amp; Progressives: A Conversation with John Podesta</p>
<p>Tuesday, April 26, 2005</p>
<p>10:00 a.m.-noon</p>
<p>Pew Research Center</p>
<p>Washington, DC</p>
<p>Featured Speaker:</p>
<p>John Podesta, President and CEO, Center for American Progress; former Chief of Staff to President William J. Clinton</p>
<p>Moderator:</p>
<p>Michael Cromartie, Vice President, Ethics &amp; Public Policy Center</p>
<p>With Additional Comments By:</p>
<p>Luis Lugo, Director, Pew Forum on Religion &amp; Public Life</p>
<p>Andrew Kohut, Director, Pew Research Center</p>
<p>Event Transcript</p>
<p>MICHAEL CROMARTIE: Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. This is the second Pew Forum Lunch, which will be an ongoing series that we’ll have almost once a month. Our last meeting was with Michael Gerson from the White House, and we’re delighted today that John Podesta could be with us. I immediately want to say that we’re very sorry that my colleague and fellow senior advisor to the Pew Forum, E.J. Dionne, is not able to be with us today.</p>
<p>Let me just tell you quickly our format here. After John Podesta speaks, we are going to open it up to you. This is a conversation, a dialogue, and I’m going to keep a running list of people who want to get in. So if you have something to add, just let me know and I’ll put you down and we’ll do this in order with great civility.</p>
<p>I’m a believer in not giving long introductions for people we all already know. And I know you’re here because you know who John Podesta is. You may not know that he is currently the president and chief executive officer of the Center for American Progress. As you know, John served as chief of staff to President Clinton from October 1998 to January 2001. And he’s very much involved these days in the topic that we’re discussing today – faith, politics and progressives. And so we couldn’t have a better person to address that subject than John Podesta. John, thank you so much for coming.</p>
<p>JOHN PODESTA: Thank you, Michael. Let me start by telling you how much I personally appreciate the tremendous contribution that the Pew Forum has made to America’s dialogue about the relationship between faith and politics. I don’t think there’s anybody who exemplifies that more than the work that E.J.’s done on the journalism side. We share a fondness for all things liberal Catholic.</p>
<p>I thought I’d begin with reflecting a little bit about what has gone on in the last couple of weeks, tell you what we’re doing, and then spend a couple of minutes talking personally about why those of us at the Center are engaged and involved with this. I think that the last few weeks really do underscore the vital importance of the discussion the Forum is engaged in. And hopefully the reporting you all do will amplify that as well. We’ve seen the passing of John Paul II and the ascension of Pope Benedict XVI. Millions of Americans, I think, have joined in an unprecedented conversation about the future of the Catholic Church and the role of the church in politics. I go to Holy Trinity in Georgetown, and I know that was the great topic of discussion this last week.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, last Sunday we also saw the majority leader of the United States Senate join forces with leaders of the Christian right in an effort to use religion to promote his party’s political doctrine. I think it’s kind of tempting to look at these events, particularly then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter in the U.S. election and the majority leader’s engagement and involvement and his use of religion. Some people suggest that it might have something to do with his presidential campaign.</p>
<p>It’s tempting to look at that and believe, as I think many opinion leaders do, that whatever common ground there is between the walls of faith and politics, it’s generally on the right. I think that enhanced the belief that American politics is polarized into two warring factions: a religious right that promotes government intervention in all areas of private life, so long as it doesn’t interfere with the free market, and a secular left, which would be content to do the opposite. I think that’s a simplistic assessment and it may explain why it’s so widely held, because it is so simplistic. But obviously, I think, as particularly people here know, the reality of this is far more complex.</p>
<p>At the very same time that Senator Frist was preparing to argue that confirming President Bush’s judicial nominees is fundamental to religious freedom, millions of Jewish families were preparing to observe Passover, the holiday that reminds all of us that the quest for justice and human dignity is fundamental to the Abrahamic tradition. It’s a moral tradition that I think has led millions of Jews and Protestants, Catholics and Muslims, and other Americans of faith to a far different path than the one trod by the political right – by figures like Dr. Dobson and his political patrons.</p>
<p>Historically, whether we’re talking about Frederick Douglass or Dorothy Day or Rabbi Heschel or Dr. Martin Luther King, or the millions they helped to lead, there’s an America that expressed its faith by fighting for abolition and for women’s suffrage, by walking picket lines, by marching for civil rights, by protesting the war in Vietnam. The progressive religious tradition not only predates the Dobsons and the Robertsons, it certainly continues to this day and I think – and this is my plea to you today – that it is something that is highly under-reported in the coverage of religion in public life today.</p>
<p>But we do see it in local campaigns to win a living wage for low-income workers. The Center was involved with ACORN – and a broad religious coalition – in trying to raise the minimum wage in Florida, the ballot initiative that was successful in the 2004 election. We see it in efforts to protect voting rights, we see it in the campaigns to provide debt relief to the most impoverished countries on earth, we see it in the movement to promote peaceful conflict resolution both at home and abroad. But I would argue that where we need to see much more of this and much more of this conversation is right here in this city – in the media and in every forum where the spiritual dimension of public policy is considered.</p>
<p>I think the tragedy of Terri Schiavo, where conservative politicians – in my view – exploited one family’s personal anguish to curry the favor of the religious right, is one instance where America would have benefited more from a visible religious center. As Rabbi Steven Jacobs of Los Angeles asks, where is the morality in Tom DeLay’s fighting to keep Mrs. Schiavo on life support while at the very same time he was fighting to slash funding for Medicaid, the federal program that was paying for her hospice care?</p>
<p>Is this broader and, I think, more textured understanding of morality out of sync with the beliefs shared by the American people? I actually would argue to the contrary, and I think the Washington Post-ABC News poll that came out this morning reflects that. In the aftermath of a November election, conventional wisdom held that moral values won the election for conservatives and they were now in ascendancy while progressives were doomed or just off the field. As my friend Jim Wallis says, it’s amazing what one faulty exit poll question can do. But it sparked an important debate, which we’re engaged in here even today.</p>
<p>But after the hype of the facts of that exit poll question subsided and the factual analysis began, we know that a far different story emerged. It’s clear that President Bush motivated his base around opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion. He was on solid footing with the conservative wing of the religious community. I think it did fire up his organizational base, if you will, the people who were pounding the pavement in Ohio, where Jen Palmieri, our press secretary, was. But I don’t think it won the hearts and minds of a new silent majority, which is waiting in the wings – Americans who believe that you don’t need to be conservative in order to be religious.</p>
<p>We conducted a poll with a couple of organizations we had worked with over the course of that year – Pax Christi, a liberal Catholic organization, and a group called Res Publica – that Zogby did after the election, and what we found in that national poll was that 54 percent of the electorate is a coalition of religious moderates. So-called religious progressives and other non-traditional voters made up 54 percent of the overall electorate. I understand that the new Pew study is coming out in a few weeks that really begins to micro-analyze the electorate, and we’ll see what that looks like.</p>
<p>We asked the question, What were the most important moral values facing the country? And I think that was perhaps where the most interesting result was: 64 percent said that greed and materialism and poverty and economic justice were the most important moral questions facing the United States; 27 percent said abortion and gay marriage, with abortion accounting for the vast majority of that. The truth is that many people of faith are worried about the coarsening of our culture, but they’re also worried about their children’s schools, about the quality of air we breathe, about the water they drink, about the increase in poverty. They’re concerned about terrorism and war. These are not Americans who hear their faith or their politics in the voices of Pat Robertson and James Dobson and others on the religious right – and maybe I should add Bill Frist and Tom DeLay to that mix. In fact, these Americans resent the efforts of conservatives to squeeze religion into a narrow, rigid mold – a personal piety that excludes much of God’s creation and many of God’s children. Clearly, many would identify with that progressive religious tradition that I was speaking about earlier, where historically social change has come from in this country.</p>
<p>And we at the Center – let me talk a little bit about what we’re up to – are committed to helping them show that it does. This has been a project that began really when we formed the Center, when we opened our doors in October of 2003. I talked Melody Barnes, who is sitting over here – some of you know her from her work on Capitol Hill – into joining us, and people ask me, why did we get into this? Melody comes from a Protestant tradition and I come from a Catholic tradition. I think we began it because we were mad, quite frankly. We were mad that we thought there was a complete distortion of the role of religion in public life; that to be religious was to be conservative. And that wasn’t the tradition we came from and our faith meant a lot to us and we thought that it probably meant a lot to a lot of other people whose voices weren’t being represented. And we made this part of the central work of the Center, as I said, from the very beginning. I’m going to talk about some of the specific things we did – some of you are familiar with them if you’ve been to our events – and then talk more generally about how we view this, and then I’ll stop and take questions.</p>
<p>We began last June when we brought together more than 400 clergy, advocates and scholars who attended our first faith and policy conference. It was dedicated to a faith agenda aimed at bringing people together, not stigmatizing them, not dividing them. It crossed sectarian lines because our faith is offended. And people from all those traditions, I think, shared this. Our faith is offended when our nation allows 1 in 6 children to live in poverty – we’re 45 million Americans; 19 million lack health insurance – when disease, hunger, poverty and war ravage 2 billion people on the planet, when our leaders deny the damage that their policies are plainly doing to God’s earth and our own society. I don’t think we had all the answers at that conference, but we started with the belief that whether you’re a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim or a Buddhist, you loved your neighbor and you recognized your responsibility to your community and to the nation. The people who came together, I think, truly believed that progressive governance is not only more fair and effective, but it is the right thing to do in a profoundly moral sense.</p>
<p>We have proceeded from that in two fashions. One is that we try to have a commitment to making clear and making sure that this is a piece of our policy work, that the values agenda, if you will, that I think is reflected by that silent majority of religious moderates and religious progressives is part of the work we do. We try to frame up policy choices and governmental choices in terms that people who come from different faith traditions are familiar with.</p>
<p>To give you a specific example – but we do this, I think, across the board – we put out recently a universal health care proposal that is a practical proposal that can get to a universal coverage, make the right kinds of investments in the health care system, build on existing systems, and create a kind of cost-effective health care platform. But we didn’t just argue it on economic terms; we tried to bring the religious voices to bear. We held a forum where we had Frank Griswold, the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church; a conservative Jewish theologian from Northwestern; and a Catholic theologian from Georgetown to try to put the commitment to health care for every person living in America in a profoundly moral context. We thought that was important and sort of a missing element – reflecting backwards – a missing element of what we tried to do in 1993 and 1994 in the Clinton administration.</p>
<p>When we launched that effort at the Press Club, Bill Byron, the former President of Catholic University and a great Jesuit who has written widely on this topic, came in support of that effort. I think it is important to reach people at that level, not just to argue about the economics, the costs of health insurance, the effect on GM, but the effect really in people’s hearts and the way they perceive the work of the government. So whether it’s Social Security or health care, I think we have a commitment to try to lift that policy work up and try to frame it in an agenda that appeals to and resonates with people from a moral perspective.</p>
<p>Another important thing that we did was we didn’t try to teach politicians how to talk the Bible, but we did try to bring the voices of the progressive religious community into the public debate. One of the people who attended our conference and who has become quite prominent in the media these days was Jim Wallis. We had Jim Forbes, Bob Edgar, Sue Thislewaite; we had a range of religious voices that we tried to lift up, to give them the support that they needed. We did a day of media training with that group, and I always kid them that you’d think if they’re a bunch of people that got paid to talk for a living, it would be a bunch of ministers, priests, rabbis and nuns.</p>
<p>And yet I think they were intimidated quite frankly by the television format – one that had been mastered so mightily by the right. Now they’re used to kind of talking to an audience that can’t leave – (chuckles) – and they’re used to talking to a 20-minute sound bite – yeah, in 20 minutes we’ll have the sound bites – but I think they appreciated that. I think it was helpful and I think Jim appreciated it as he went off to the environs of “Jon Stewart” as well as “Meet The Press.” And I raise that only because I think that there are a lot of ways in which we can value their voices, lift them up, make them part of the progressive dialogue, bring them back into the coalition for progressive change, but also feature them and highlight them and what they have to teach us. And we’re committed to that as well.</p>
<p>And we try to educate the media and opinion leaders about what we believe; I guess that’s what I’m doing here this morning. Melody is convening a series of national conversations in towns and cities across America, trying again to bring the religious community together with the policy community to talk about social change. She did the first forum in Denver recently. We’re talking about doing that in places across the country. We obviously need to do more than just remind people of the history of progressive social change. We have to provide a forum for a new generation of religious activists. So people sometimes ask if what we want to achieve on the left is what religious conservatives have already created on the right. I think we can probably do better than Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, Tom DeLay and the others. What we’re about, I think, is renewing and restoring a progressive religious tradition that for most of our history helped make ours a more benevolent, a more compassionate, a more caring society.</p>
<p>I’m Catholic, as I said earlier. I attend Mass, I take communion. It’s a source of strength for me. I think it’s really what makes me a progressive. And while – and I’ll close with this – like many Catholics, there are issues where I disagree with my church, I could not help but be touched by what I think really all Americans experienced recently – the life and works of John Paul II. He once observed that America today has what he called a heightened responsibility to be for the world an example of the genuinely free, democratic, just and humane society. That is as clear and precise a statement of what faith has to say to politics, I think, as anything I could come up with. Those moral values not only help define me as a Catholic and as an American; they’re the reason why in this time of conservative power, and particularly at a time when I see a conservative abuse of power, I’m standing my ground as a progressive and I am willing to get engaged in this fight and this debate for the direction of our country. Thank you.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Thank you John, thank you very much.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: John, some conservatives would argue that what they’re fighting is really a defensive battle, that there’s an ACLU-driven agenda to take expressions of faith out of the public square – a court takes out “under God” in the pledge of allegiance, for instance, and forces the removal of the Ten Commandments from a public space. I wonder if you could address that, but also, more importantly, this whole question of expressions of faith in the public square, which it doesn’t seem like Democrats are comfortable talking about yet.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, I’d say a couple of things. I was looking at a piece from the L.A. Times this morning that Peter Wallsten did on Janice Rogers Brown as one of the nominees. She gave a speech in Connecticut over the weekend, where she said that people of faith are embroiled in a war against secular humanists – this country’s been so bitterly divided – it’s not a shady war, but it’s a war – these are perilous times for people of faith.</p>
<p>I think it’s hard to look at America and think that this is a true statement of where we’re at. Particularly if you look at this in comparison to other areas in the world. We have a very strong faith tradition. It’s respected here. Most people proclaim a belief in God. They’re free to worship where they want to. I think that in the Clinton administration, we tried to do as much as possible to enable people to cut through some of the weeds, particularly in the educational arena, about where expressions of faith could take place to create a space where religious free exercise wasn’t being hobbled.</p>
<p>But on notion that the judiciary is to blame – you know, I could quote Dr. Dobson on his view of the court’s majority, which doesn’t care about the sanctity of life as a judicial tyranny to people of faith. I mean, who are we talking about? Bill Rehnquist? You know, seven of the nine justices were appointed by Republicans. So I think, what are we talking about? I think that people need to challenge that notion. It’s their view, but I don’t think it does reflect the reality in American life today. And I think from the perspective of the way Progressives or Democrats talk about religion, my advice is that the most important thing is to try to be authentic.</p>
<p>If you come from a faith tradition and you’re comfortable expressing it, then you ought to go out there and do it, and I think people will respect you for it. And I don’t think that the secular elements, if you will, or the non-believing elements of the broad Progressive coalition will think less of one for that. But I think there has been a little bit in the political world. There’s been a bit of silencing, and I think that needs to be matched through active engagement.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: Should “under God” be in the Pledge of Allegiance?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I’ve lived with “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. I know it was added, but I think it was added in ’54 when I went to school, and I said it every day. I don’t think you’re going to look at me and think it did much harm to me, so I think – you know, I’ll come back to it. We’ve got 45 million people uninsured. We’ve got peoples’ incomes collapsing. We’ve got the middle class under tremendous siege. We’ve got health insurance costs going up by 60 percent over the last four years. I’m happy to have “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, but let’s get down and talk about what the real moral challenges facing this country are. And I think we’ve got to broaden that debate.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: I spent a lot of time on the road with John Kerry last year and heard a lot of things that you’ve been talking about. I mean, every week – more than every week – “faith without works is dead,” “a lot of good works the government can do,” etc. And the stereotype of the Democratic Party is so deep that it never broke through and part of it was that we didn’t write about it very much. And I’m wondering, is it enough to elevate progressive, religious voices? I mean, maybe the most valuable service a Democrat could do for the party is to re-educate political consultants about, you know – (laughter) – what should be the spine of the campaign or how best to communicate the character of the candidate.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, I leave that to Governor Dean. There are people who are working on this, both David Price and Rosa DeLauro in the Congress, Senator Durbin and even Governor Dean, who’s talked about this recently. I think their focus is, How do we change the political dynamic? How do we make people comfortable from a record point of view, from a candidate point of view? I have no argument with that, but I think if you do that without fundamentally doing also what we’re doing, my sense is, you may have only some short-term political success. But unless you can also fire up and re-power these important, progressive religious voices and create networks across the country, focus them on actions that are in support of the kind of economic and health care policies that I think are fundamental to social justice and opportunity in this society, then I think maybe what they’re doing is necessary, but I don’t think it’s sufficient.</p>
<p>We’re a think tank, we’re a secular institution. But our job is to try to act in partnership with progressive, religious institutions and progressive, religious leaders to really challenge the American public about what the moral questions facing this country are. And my guess is, if you did a poll – I don’t know if it’s in the Post poll; I didn’t look deeply into it – but the Pledge of Allegiance would come a long way down after health care, how we’re treating children in this country, what we’re doing about the war in Iraq, what we’re doing about HIV/AIDS in the world. I just think it’s going to come down to this.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: I just wanted to build on that last comment for a second because I think there are a lot of people – and I was one of them – who hit the Kerry campaign last year for not talking about religion unless it was in front of black audiences. That’s when we saw it covered. And certainly those speeches were more explicitly religious than his comments other places. But now that I’ve gone back and looked over a lot of his speeches, I realize that it did come up a lot – the “faith without works” comments and references to his background in Catholicism.</p>
<p>I wonder if there is a double standard in place in terms of how religion’s covered for Republicans and Democrats – so that often you’ll see religion covered when Bush mentions it because it’s just seen as part of who he is and part of his political and personal personality. Whereas with a Democrat, it either goes unreported or it’s seen as possibly fake, probably pandering, and so that’s kind of the frame in which it’s seen. And certainly that reflects to some degree a reality within the two different parties. But, it’s not as extreme as is reflected in the coverage. And I guess I’m just wondering why is it that things like that would go uncovered with the Democratic candidate and not necessarily –</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: That’s like an open mike question. (Laughter.) You know, I think it’s absolutely a fair observation. If you reflect back just on the 2004 campaign and Senator Kerry, there are two different succinct phases in the Kerry campaign, in my view. I think the first six months was probably when you were writing about this. I know it’s when I was squawking about it. I think during the first six months of 2004 John Kerry looked back on the Kennedy election in 1960 and drew the wrong lesson. Kennedy was being challenged for being a tool of the Catholic hierarchy. Kerry was being challenged for exactly the opposite perspective, that he wasn’t truly a person of faith, interestingly by the same people who challenged Kennedy. (Laughter.) You know, I carry some of these ethnic, Catholic prejudices with me, so to speak – (laughter.)</p>
<p>So, interestingly, I think Kerry was sort of being challenged from 180-degree different perspective. And he gave the same answer for six months that Kennedy gave, when Kennedy gave his Houston speech. And I think it wasn’t really until the summer – partly probably because of public rattling by people like you, and people like me, and private council by Mike McCurry and others – that that shifted.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: It shifted in the summer after the Ratszinger memo came out, when he started to be challenged, when it became a possibility that he would not receive communion when he went to church. I agree with you, but it felt like you were hearing it wrong after that.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I think, again, Catholics now are doubly disabled, once the question of abortion and communion and the relationship with the church becomes a kind of central, defining outlet to Catholic Democrats. Nobody seems to worry about Pataki and some of the others. Secondly, I grew up when the Mass was still in Latin, as John Kerry did. It’s not like it’s a church which is expressive from a kind of cultural perspective. It’s a sacramental church. You know, we not only get to speak in English and respond a little bit to the priests, but it is not like the seven Protestant traditions of moral expression.</p>
<p>And so Kerry was, I think genuinely, sort of reflecting who he was and where he was. It wasn’t normal for him to talk about his faith. That’s sort of understandable growing up in a northern Catholic faith tradition. But I think that this challenge was coming. It was partly a deep fault within the Catholic Church and the Catholic hierarchy itself. But I think it was engineered by a relatively sophisticated campaign to make this an issue, largely led – you’ll forgive me if I see conspiracy theories here – largely led by Deal Hudson and others who were in close contact with the White House.</p>
<p>So I think these vectors were coming in on him – and I think his response by the end was appropriate. But I think he was kind of slow to make the turn into the political headwind that was coming at him. And probably Swift Boat mattered more. He was kind of slow to make the turn on that headwind as well, but I think this was also something of a factor.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: This is somewhat of a follow-up on the previous two questions. You said you got involved in this because you were mad. I would be interested to know whom you were mad at.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I was a little bit mad at you guys – (laughter). I was mad at the world. I mean, I thought that a real distortion was going on. That the common wisdom in reporting was that to be religious was to be conservative. And I think that it seemed ahistoric to me, if that’s a word. It seemed wrong and I knew it didn’t feel like what I was experiencing every week when I went to church – and I go to a very religious church.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: Don’t you think it’s a little telling, though, that 25 years after the rise of the Moral Majority and Pat Robertson in 1988, you’re conducting media training sessions on how to act on TV for people in the Progressive tradition?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I think that it is what it is. I think if you think about the big national media in the coverage of the civil rights movement, and you think about the structure of the media currently today, we live in a different media environment. It isn’t to say that there weren’t extremely conservative status quo elements, particularly in the southern media back then. But we do live in a different media environment. They were quicker to make the turn into the new media environment. I don’t think that our gang, if you will, really saw that as their mission.</p>
<p>I think that they were doing important work at the grassroots level, but as a result, many of the things that they were fighting for in the grassroots movement inside churches, inside synagogues, inside mosques, was being overwhelmed by public policy that was undermining all the important work that they were trying to do. So it was important to get back out and compete for that space. I saw the piece in the metro section of the Post on the new dean who’s just been installed at the National Cathedral, who’s kind of making these same points and trying to root that church in the community and in the larger dialogue in this city.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: Looking back over the issue set that you were describing here, and your argument that a new, more left-leaning religious-political movement could be built around it, you mentioned voting rights, debt-relief, health care and education. And it seems as if there’s a sort of asymmetrical warfare going on here because for the religious right, the issues are, you either ban abortion or you don’t; you either give school vouchers or you don’t; you either ban gay marriage or you don’t. Whereas if you put 100 people in a room and ask them how to fix health care, you’re going to get 100 different answers. And the same is true with education and debt-relief. Are these realistically ever going to be the kinds of issues that you can build a political movement around in terms of good and evil on one solution versus another?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, that’s a good question, but I guess my fundamental view is, we have a history of kind of complex social problems in which there was change in movement as a result of people trying to do that. And that is the history of the civil rights movement. You know, the Voting Rights Act is a complicated piece of legislation, and so was the 1964 Civil Rights Act.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: But they have a simpler sort of job here on the right, because the issues that they have coalesced around are ones in which the lines are so much brighter.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Maybe so. But that doesn’t mean that you abandon the field. Think of what happened during the millennium, when the religious community came together – left and right – around debt-relief: people got that; they got it and they drove it down into individual congregations and people mobilized. They changed the political dynamic, and something got done. You know, if we were sitting here in 1996, people would have said, “Are you kidding me – you really think that people are going to care about debt-relief in Africa?” And yet people were mobilized around it, and something good happened as a result of it. And I think fundamentally the reflection of values that I’m describing fits more comfortably with a majority of people in this country. It’s more a part of where we’ve come from. It’s more a part of the American experience.</p>
<p>What is important is to focus the energy that people have down at the congregational level on important social challenges. And does it take a national politician who can frame that and create a narrative around it and say that there are things we can do about it? Of course it does. And am I ready to assume that we will have such a person? Not yet. (Chuckles.) But I think you can only try to create the space for which that kind of political change happens.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: In response to an earlier question, I wonder if one of the possible problems is that when you’re thinking about a James Dobson or a Pat Robertson or probably a host of unnamed conservative Christians, there is the sense that they can actually move voters; that if they talk, action will follow. And I wonder if you can respond to that. I think media training is important, but to what extent do you think you have to focus not just on communications but actually building a grassroots movement not necessarily organized around issues, but organized to support your guy?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I think that at some level I object to and reject the notion of turning churches into kind of the precinct houses for the party. I don’t think the public particularly responds to that, and I’m not sure it’s the right organizing model. So I actually think that it’s much more critical to do the higher organizing and the strategic organizing church by church, synagogue by synagogue, mosque by mosque. There are some places where that works – it works on voter registration, voter education, etc., but I think that can’t be just in support of a candidate. Maybe Dobson could do it. I don’t think it’s right. I don’t think it’s appropriate.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: To what extent do you think that’s then a handicap?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I think it’s more of a handicap that we have gotten A, an agenda that’s not inspiring, and B, one that is not framed in big values that people understand. So the fact that we haven’t quite employed the tactics of the RNC seems to me tertiary in that regard.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Also you’d want to add, wouldn’t you, that you don’t have a radio program like Dobson does that goes out to 10 million people? When Dobson says something in the morning, the Senate switchboard literally blows a fuse. And maybe you don’t have that radio network coming at your think tank?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: (Chuckles.) Maybe we’ll put it over at Sojourners. What do you think?</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: To follow up on that earlier question, I think the difference, John, between the abolition movement or the civil rights movement is that they predated political interest in their topics, and the idea of someone in Washington elevating abolition would have been a big surprise to the cats in Boston, or someone in Washington elevating civil rights would have been a big surprise to the ministers in Montgomery. Do you have this thing upside down – are you trying to elevate the movement that doesn’t exist? If you look at population numbers, progressive religious congregations are doing this, and conservative are doing that.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: If it sounded like that’s what I was suggesting, then maybe there’s a fair point there. I don’t think it was what I was suggesting. At the end of the day, it’s those religious institutions and religious leaders that are going to make this happen or are not going to make it happen. We’re a secular institution. I think we can help them. We can add value on the public policy side. But we don’t lead that movement. We don’t pretend to lead that movement, and it’s the strength of those religious leaders themselves that will create the movement. But what I disagree with – the description that you just made – is the notion that there’s nothing going on. I think there’s a lot going on on the ground level, and I think it needs nurturing, it needs push, it needs a little bit of help. I think that’s where we’re coming from.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: Among voters, those who go to church the most often tend to vote Republican; those who go the least tend to vote Democratic. And among those two groups, the regular church-goers tend to see morality and faith in terms of absolutes, black and white: abortion is wrong for everyone. And those on your side, who tend to go to church less, seem to see morality as more of a personal cafeteria kind of thing: abortion may be wrong for me, but it’s okay for my next-door neighbor. Can you ever reach over to the other side and get those moral absolutists and vice versa? Could they ever get your side over to theirs?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I’m going to answer the second part of that question first. The number that surprised me in today’s poll was this number on the support of the filibuster: 66 are opposed; 26 support. Do you think three months ago – before Schiavo, before DeLay, before Bill Frist, before Justice Sunday, as they like to call it – do you think that number would have been the same? I don’t. I think that they are in danger of presenting a kind of a face to the American public that really has driven religious moderates and people who are church-attending away from this kind of radical version of what they are selling both from a religious perspective and a policy perspective.</p>
<p>To answer the first part of the question, I think there is a core of people who are never going to subscribe to a progressive version of politics in this country. But that is 20 percent of the electorate, not 49 or 50 percent of the electorate. And I think you can dialogue with people and create a bigger tent. I think you can capture votes and convince people of progressive policy solutions, and candidates who express a progressive vision of America, if you talk to them respectfully.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: On the poll numbers, could we ask Andrew Kohut to make some comments?</p>
<p>ANDREW KOHUT: John, I didn’t see all of the Post poll. What was the 66 percent that you were referring to?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Sixty-six percent opposed changing set rules to make it easier for Republicans to confront President Bush’s leadership.</p>
<p>MR. KOHUT: Well, I don’t know whether that number would have been any different pre-Schiavo. I think there probably is some backlash; it’s probably in the center. But I have been listening to this conversation, and one thing that hasn’t been talked about is that there are two sets of Democrats; there are two classes of Democrats that all Democratic candidates have to speak to. And the Democratic candidates cannot speak with the same ease and facility and straightforwardness that Republicans do because when core Democrats – many of who are secular – hear the kind of address to the religious wing of the Democratic Party, it makes them uneasy. In fact, the complaints of Democrats these days is that their party doesn’t stand up for its principles to a much greater extent than is the case for Republicans.</p>
<p>And the Democrats have a terrific problem here. There may be a third wing – progressive religious people on the Democratic side who can be brought along or who can be addressed – but the major issue is the two, if not three wings of the Democratic Party. All of this is by way of a commercial – (laughter) – for the Pew typology survey, our latest version, which looks at the value differences between the parties and will be released in this very room in about three weeks. And I look forward to seeing all of you there.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: Before you respond, Luis Lugo would like to follow up.</p>
<p>MR. LUGO: On this question of a backlash, the Post poll also asks the question, “Do you think a political leader should or should not rely on his or her religious beliefs in making policy decisions?” And as you recall from our survey of almost two years ago, we asked a similar kind of question and in fact it was on George Bush specifically. And there was overwhelming support for bringing religion to bear on the policy process. If there was a complaint among Democrats on that one, it was that he didn’t rely on his religion enough, particularly among African Americans. Only 15 percent of Democrats at that point thought he was relying on his religion too much.</p>
<p>In this poll, it shows a clear partisan divide with Republicans 62 to 35 that politicians should bring religion to bear in their decisionmaking; Democrats almost the reverse: 27 to 65 percent. So there now seems to be a partisan divide our polling did not detect. There were some differences, but on the margin two years ago. And if this poll is to be believed, that is clearly opening up into a partisan divide. It’s hard to imagine that the Terri Schiavo case, Tom DeLay, Justice Sunday and those kinds of issues have not generated some kind of backlash, at least among Democrats, on this one.</p>
<p>MR. KOHUT: There may well be and we know over this period of time that there has been a good deal of political polarization. Just in a few years, we have seen members of both parties go to the positions of their parties to a greater extent. But I would also caution that in questions like this you have to look at the wording very carefully. They are very sensitive, so I’m going to say, perhaps, but I would really like to look at the question we asked a few years ago more closely.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: In this poll, Independents generally are tracking as Democrats here.</p>
<p>MR. KOHUT: Well, I think that is one of the issues for the Democratic Party – that there is a lot of unease in the center of the electorate with the influence that religious conservatives have in the Republican Party, and people in the center worry about their choices, and I think the Schiavo case has brought that home. Obviously Schiavo worried a lot of people left, right, and center, but the center is the problem for the Republican Party.</p>
<p>MR. LUGO: Well, my question to John based on this poll is whether it makes your job more difficult. If you now have a Democratic backlash against bringing religion into politics, period, why would the Democratic Party be more receptive to your efforts to bring progressive religious voices into the mix?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: That thought crossed my mind this morning when I read that poll. (Laughter.) But you know, I think there are two sides to this: there is the challenge for Democratic candidates, and there is the role of progressive religious voices in the public square. On the candidate side, I think if you’re authentic and it’s part of who you are and you express your conviction in those terms, then I think that the secular wing of the Democratic Party is unlikely to have a problem with you expressing a moral vision of the country that at least in policy terms they generally agree with. Maybe on some of the particular issues it’s a more challenging job to blend those things.</p>
<p>But on the progressive-religious-voice perspective, I think it would be a terrible mistake to read this poll and decide that things are flowing towards a more liberal America, a more progressive America – that the overreaction and the abuse of power by the current crowd means we don’t have to do anything. I think that would be a terrible strategic decision because quite frankly, I come back to where I was at the beginning: we need them out there making the case and I think that that is where the passion lies. I may be over influenced by the faith tradition I come from, but you need to stoke that up and I think that will in the end be why we end up with a more just and a more decent country. So that is what I believe.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: This question goes back to what you were talking about earlier in terms of Kennedy’s Catholicism in 1960. We have, of course, had another Catholic candidate this past summer; you watched that election, obviously. The question I have is, it a more complicated task for a Catholic to run for president in this country than for a Protestant?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, I think that 2004 would certainly indicate that it is, in part because I think it raises the salience of the abortion question in a way that I don’t think was raised with Al Gore in 2000, if my memory serves me. Of course, Bill Clinton had a somewhat different attitude, a different way of speaking about it. And we’re seeing it in the Casey race in Pennsylvania, and potentially in that Senate race in Rhode Island – that if a Catholic runs now, the abortion question becomes front and center.</p>
<p>And so I think that makes the political task slightly more complicated. On the other hand, it seems to me that it is part of our public dialogue; you need to have an answer for it. I think that the fact that the press is going to lift it up and make it a bigger central issue that they want to chew on sort of goes with the territory. I think a test that a Catholic politician or a non-Catholic politician might bring to bear on this question is what set of policies are going to reduce abortion in this country. That is a commitment that a political leader trying to appeal to the center of the electorate might find some resonance with the public on.</p>
<p>Glen Stassen, for those of you who don’t know, is an evangelical theologian in San Diego. He has made the argument that the rate of abortion under Bill Clinton went down by about 25 percent. It’s going back up under Bush; it went up under Reagan. So I think that one has to have a dialogue with the American public about this, but I think it is somewhat more complicated for a Catholic because that is the first question out of all of your mouths.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: It’s kind of a complicated question, but would it be more complicated whether you’re a Democrat taking the views on abortion that John Kerry did or, say, Jeb Bush – (chuckles) – and the abuse that he might have if he were running for president? Would it be, in other words, complicated on the Republican side as well?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I don’t know. That is a question probably for the people around the table. My guess is the issues with Jeb Bush, if he were going to run, would end up being end-of-life, not abortion, and whether he is in sync with the American public I think. So that is a different question.</p>
<p>Republicans like to pretend they have a big tent, but I don’t see Rudy Giuliani being the nominee in the party. I think it’s really complicated for a pro-choice Republican to run and get the nomination in the Republican Party – and that goes as well for a pro-choice Catholic nominee to run. Pataki’s stock is down, and Giuliani’s numbers look good going in, but I think he would have a very complicated task to try to get the nomination, given his views on abortion inside the Republican Party.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: On the abortion issue, at the outset you invoked some of the great luminaries of the past – Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King. But they were civil rights leaders who used the language of the Bible to make the case for emancipation. The people doing that today are on the National Right to Life Committee, and they use moral arguments on why they think abortion is wrong and they talk about and protecting the least defensive; they talk about God’s will and when life begins. And you may not agree with much of what they say – or you may agree with some of it – but they use these arguments.</p>
<p>Your side uses political arguments – slogans, really: a woman’s right to choose, turning back the clock. And it’s almost as though, from where I sit, your party won’t engage them on their level; you sort of dismiss them. So my thought is, if you don’t have a moral argument for abortion, maybe you ought to have one. What do you think?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, I think that Senator Clinton’s speech tried to get at this in terms of both saying that there are conflicting moral values, that you have respect for the other side’s argument; and trying to frame this in terms that are morally significant for people, including the difficult circumstances women find themselves in and women being moral agents in terms of exercising their judgment and choice about this. But I think that the other side wants to have that discussion and dialogue, and they use the language of the Bible, but they use only the blunt instrument of the criminal law to execute it.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: How about the bishops then? I’m talking about the other side of you on this issue – the Democrats. There are a lot of people that you respect making the argument that there is nothing magical about the birth canal and that Democrats have gotten themselves in a narrow point. And I was going to mention Hillary’s speech. The fact that it made news underscores what I’m saying, it doesn’t mitigate against it. That was a newsworthy speech.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Yeah, it was newsworthy speech.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: Because a Democrat said it. Should we say more of that? Should your party have a language on this?</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: That is the purpose of your think tank, isn’t it?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I think that we are trying to really move the debate and dialogue forward on this. I guess I don’t know that I have a better answer than to say, yes, I think that it is an important discussion. And I would argue perhaps from the same place that the Catholic bishops begin, that access to contraception is a good thing. They argue it’s a bad thing. (Chuckles.) We’re certainly not at the same end goal. But I think that actually having a real dialogue and a real discussion about this would be healthy for the party. Maybe we’ll see that happen in the context of this Senate race in Pennsylvania.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: You sort of dismissed the cultural coarseness question – games, Internet, movies – stuff that people are actually pretty upset about in their own houses. The party seems kind of quiet on this one, too. You don’t have the same sort of base issues that you have with some of these other things we have been talking about, but –</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Yeah, I think that is a mistake. But I mean, do I have to own the party? (Chuckles.)</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: No, but you have to explain it for us. It’s hard to know who to talk to. (Laughter.)</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I think that is a mistake; I think people expect political leaders to be on their side in trying to raise their kids and I think that there is some –</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: But you just don’t hear them on it.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: We’re working out some ideas on that front as well, though we’re not ready to unveil. But I think that maybe it’s for lack of ideas about what to do about it. Other people have suggested that it’s more complicated than that or it’s financial at its base, etc. – and that’s probably true in both parties. But I think that there would be a lot of resonance for political leadership that really went out and talked about it.</p>
<p>I want to reflect on what I view as a policy choice that spoke to this question but didn’t end up working, and that was the V-chip. At the end of the day, nobody knows that they have a V-chip in their television; nobody uses it – but I do think that in the dialogue there was an expression of something that resonated with people. And one might argue that wasn’t exactly the right solution, but I think the fact that Al Gore or Clinton was willing to take that on was not just politically smart, I think it was responding to a role. The hard part of this question is what government solutions lend themselves, and what language people are comfortable with. But I think political leadership associating itself with the challenges that parents have in raising their kids is a good political strategy, and I hope there is more of it.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: I want to offer a theory purporting to explain the poll that we have been talking about. It’s a fairly simplistic theory, but it’s that when Republicans communicate with Christian conservatives and their religious base without making too much noise in the rest of the society, they do really well. That is what they did between 2000 and 2004. When they get a little careless and make too much noise in the electorate at large, as at the 1992 Republican Convention and in the last several weeks, they upset a lot of people in the center. When they do that, it doesn’t make a whole lot of difference what Democrats are saying or doing: they will pick up the residual support of people who think Republicans are going too far.</p>
<p>So what really matters is how careful Republicans are being in doing the subliminal work on the religious side that they did in the last four years. And when they stop doing that and start talking to too many people, then they are in trouble no matter what Democrats are doing on the issue. Does that make any sense?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: The first half certainly makes sense – (chuckles) – and I haven’t thought about it exactly in those terms, but I think it’s a very strong analysis of what we have just seen over the course of this spring. If Democrats draw the conclusion that it doesn’t matter what they do – which I believe is a dangerous conclusion to draw – that would be a bad assumption and one that I would urge them not to make. So I disagree with the last half of the formulation, but I completely agree with the first half.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: John, for years the problem for the Republicans, of course, was that Christian conservatives didn’t participate in the electoral process – they just didn’t vote. Then they became inspired to participate and the Republicans began winning more elections. You’re talking about framing a number of issues in this sort of moral way – debt relief, environment, healthcare education. What evidence do you have that there is a great mass of religious progressives out there who care about these issues who aren’t already voting for you?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, the question of whether they are or aren’t there voting – you know, I don’t run the Democratic Party – (chuckles). So I don’t enter the debate through that prism. If you follow Jim Wallis around the country, see him fill up churches, see the kind of reaction he gets, or if you follow Jim Forbes around the country and see the kind of reaction he gets, there are plenty of people out there who I believe are religious progressives and would make the call to, you know, a higher purpose.</p>
<p>They need leadership. I don’t know whether they are already voting and they are already voting for us. But I think that will change the agenda in this country and it might change it for the better and that is why we are trying to do what we can to support the work. But I think whether or not this is a kind of a micro-analytic reaction to what exurban voters are hungry for in Ohio – it’s just not the way we enter the problem. So maybe that is not a helpful comment to you; it’s just kind of where I see things.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: I just wanted to suggest another answer, which is that it’s possible we’re talking about two things here as well – that one is an agenda of issues that will appeal to voters who aren’t currently voting for Democrats, and maybe that is finding a new way to talk about abortion, maybe it is the coarseness of the culture, maybe there are things like that that will attract moderate religious people. Another is a way to talk about core Democratic principles in moral terms that changes the image of the party in general, and I think there is where you’re also going to have possibly an opportunity for Democrats to reach out to voters, not necessarily by saying, “This is an issue that polls well with these religious centrists,” but by saying, “We talk about these things in very secular terms; maybe if we start articulating a moral basis for some of these issues, that will change the image of the party as a whole.”</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, it might give them a stronger sense that they actually believe in something. (Chuckles.) That would be a good thing.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: To a great extent, everybody in this room remembers Marilyn Quayle at the convention saying that this is us versus them. I’m wondering whether or not the division that we’re talking about here carries on down through younger generations. I know that when you poll college students on gay marriage, you find that it’s markedly different and maybe that is just college students and not young people. I’m curious to know whether young conservatives feel as strongly about abortion and gay marriage or whether they are more libertarian, and how religion plays a role in their lives.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, younger voters are becoming increasingly tolerant, I think, particularly on gay issues; not just college students but younger voters in general. I think it’s a little more complicated on the abortion question. I actually don’t know the answer to that question about whether you have got a small, isolated core of voters who are really the most religious among the young people, and then everybody else, or if even people who are religious are more tolerant. But the trend among younger voters is certainly for greater tolerance, particularly on issues of sexuality.</p>
<p>MR. KOHUT: There is an extraordinary generational difference on acceptance of homosexuality generally and gay marriage specifically. But there are still Republican-Democratic differences between young people on questions about homosexuality and other issues. Homosexuality is obviously the one that most stands out as having a generational effect, but it doesn’t wipe away the partisan differences all together by any means.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: And the same thing would be true on religious attendance to the extent that –</p>
<p>MR. KOHUT: Yeah, but that is more life cyclical than it is generational. I mean, younger people attend church less often. They attend more often as they get older, but the differences on homosexuality are generational, not life cyclical.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: I lost a lot of my hair in 1988 following around a Democratic politician who spent a great deal of his time in churches. When he was in churches, he moderated his message; it was much more conservative. He did three and four churches a night. He got a lot of delegates, obviously, and his name was Jesse Jackson. He was able to talk in churches in very moral terms and then go out and talk on the street in terms that weren’t moral at all. He was able to do that with remarkable flexibility. I’m not saying that he is the model, but it’s not like it hasn’t been done since, you know, Jimmy Carter.</p>
<p>But it surprised me that when you said you weren’t so sure you wanted to organize churches that – the Republicans it seems to me, whether you’re talking about faith-based or this Ratzinger –</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I didn’t say I was against organizing churches.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: It was tertiary, I think you said, in its importance. But it doesn’t matter. (Laughter.) My point is that it wasn’t high on your list. But I guess the thought was that between the Ratzinger letter and the faith-based initiatives and a number of other things that have gone on, I guess if Karl Rove were listening to this conversation he would say, “Wow, what a bunch of worriers. You know, they are all worried about the lines they might cross and the things they might do.” And it just strikes me that at some point you have got to go where the votes are.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I remember using the term “tertiary.” I don’t remember using it in that answer, but it seems to me that there is an appropriate role for organizing in churches, which I think I said was the most important thing. But I think that you asked me the question of whether we should organize on behalf of candidates inside churches, and I think that is where you cross the line, and I think that is what the RNC was trying to do in getting the voter lists in Pennsylvania. I think that is crossing the line. But so be it. You know, maybe other people in the party don’t believe that. I think that is bad for religion in this country and I think it will ultimately be bad for politics in this country to sort of make them the political clubhouses for the Democratic Party. That’s just not right.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: Just to follow up on that, groups like Focus on the Family are cause-oriented groups. But then when a candidate does run, there is this network already in place that hops, too, and so they are not being organized around individuals; I’m not even sure it’s legal for them to do that, but they are advocating on the filibuster stuff and gay marriage, and all kinds of things. So what is to stop Democrats from having philosophical, issue-oriented advocacy that is religiously oriented and having the same kind of network to be able to mobilize in an election that actually involves candidates.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I think that that’s the right model. I think that is what I was suggesting – that there needs to be mobilization at the church level around issues. I think Gary Bauer would probably say the same thing. That isn’t a kind of secret way of, you know, keeping your tax status and being for Bush. That’s a fundamental way of pushing your agenda forward, changing what the issue structure in the American debate is. And, you know, they do it, and I don’t actually know all that Gary Bauer does, but it’s hard for me to criticize him on the question of fighting for space and organizing on those terms.</p>
<p>I object to his policy views, of course. And I don’t know exactly all that they do out there, so maybe they do stuff that I would object to. But the notion of organizing seems to me exactly what Martin Luther King and all the people I mentioned did. They organized. They organized down to the congregational level, and they organized passionately because they believed in the issues and the agenda for the country. And I guess the question is, is it then okay to go ahead and take that organizational structure – go in and get those church lists, organize the voters, make those churches part of an integral structure, make it political?</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: I simply wanted to address this gay-marriage issue that keeps coming up. As I listened to the candidates in the last election, the Democrats and Republicans were saying the same thing: they were against it; everybody was against it. So why did it become a voting issue and is there anything that progressives can do about that in the future?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I said what I thought at the beginning, which is I think that it helped Republicans fire up their organizational base and the people who were their ground troops, so I think it had a political impact. The one straw in the argument that this really ended up being the fulcrum around which this election hinged was the increase in African American votes in Ohio that Bush got. And the other one I concede is maybe the Senate race in Kentucky. But I think there’s precious little evidence that the fulcrum of this race was around gay marriage.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: I contend that it was in this sense: that your candidate was perceived as saying something he didn’t genuinely believe and that the party didn’t genuinely stand for, which was that he was against it. I think that resonated with middle America as him telling us something that’s not really true, that they really do think that it’s somewhere between a neutral to positive thing for society.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: That’s complicated –</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: But it is patronizing us by trying to get us to believe that he doesn’t believe in it.</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Well, you were out there reporting. At the end of the day it seems to me they ran a lot of advertising against the guy, that he was a flip-flopper and that he lied about his medals in Vietnam. It seems to me that if he had a character issue around being resolute, it really came from the power of all that advertising and Bush’s talking about it every day and framing it into debate more than it did around this. But what do I know? I just think you have precious little data – I mean, it’s an interesting theory; I think you have precious little data to indicate that it’s true.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: I have precious little data for most things I say, John. (Laughter.)</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: We have time for two more questions.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: When you talk about the mobilization, I just think about the comparison of the Justice Sunday event that went to all of these radio stations and TV stations, and then there were two conference calls with reporters that some of the progressive religious leaders had, but that couldn’t have gotten as much attention. So what kind of action steps do you recommend for the religious leaders to do this kind of mobilization you’re talking about?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: Again, I think some of that has to be done down at the congregational and at the ministerial level. Some of it has to be done at the media level. I don’t have a business plan for them, but it seems to me there’s an openness and there’s a space for people to occupy a media space that’s much broader with the voices that I’ve mentioned. You know, people said there was no hope that you could put progressives on talk radio. That proved not to be true.</p>
<p>I think progressive religious leaders would find an audience if they could figure out their business structure and their business plan to get into the mainstream media. The easiest entrée point, I think, now ends up being broadband based communications techniques, but that’s just because it’s less expensive to get into the business that way. But my guess is that if you were able to create a kind of a business opportunity you’d find an audience the way progressive talkers are beginning to find their audience.</p>
<p>Maureen Fiedler is on about 50 stations, and she has a more progressive religious program. That’s growing. She’s gotten on more stations. She’s a Catholic nun. I think that there’s a business opportunity there, if you will, but that’s not the business I’m in.</p>
<p>So I think you’ve got to do both. There is a lot of organizing done at the grassroots level by PICO and other organizations that work on social justice issues framed inside communities. I’d like to see more of that trickle up to a national dialogue.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: We have one more question.</p>
<p>JOURNALIST: John, in terms of trying to turn the religious progressives into a political movement, I’m wondering if you’re going to have to deal with some sort of a fervency gap. It seems to me that church attendance and church participation is more of a central organizing principle in the lives of the conservative Christians who have integrated themselves as the Republican base – more so than for even many progressives who feel that they really are strongly of moral faith. Is it going to be difficult to organize progressives with the language of religion and moral values the way you’re trying to?</p>
<p>MR. PODESTA: I think that’s a good question for the religious leaders I’ve talked about, for an Edgar or a Wallis. I think there’s an issue there. I think that that’s a kind of a factual statement, really – that’s just kind of the way it is. But the real question is whether leadership changes that, and I think it likely would. And, you know, at some level I do believe people are ready to be called. And I think that if you get the right kind of leadership, there will be a response to that. We’ve seen that over the history of this country, and I think it’s a moment right now where you see it again but you’ve got to get the voices out there. I think that people will respond to it.</p>
<p>I think you see evidence of that in the kinds of places that I’m talking about and services I’m talking about, the willingness for people to get engaged. I pull threads from my experience, but the work we did in Florida was important and I think people got mobilized, they got energized by it, and they felt like they accomplished something. And you know what? They did accomplish something. People who are getting that dollar an hour are going to lead better lives because they did it.</p>
<p>MR. CROMARTIE: John, it’s a testimony to your presentation that all these very busy journalists stayed here through the whole event. Please join me in thanking John for his time. (Applause.) They all usually run out about a quarter of. So thank you – we appreciate it very much.</p>
<p>Speakers at Pew Forum events are given an opportunity to review and approve their remarks. This transcript also has been edited for clarity, spelling and grammar.</p> | false | 1 | faith politics amp progressives conversation john podesta tuesday april 26 2005 1000 amnoon pew research center washington dc featured speaker john podesta president ceo center american progress former chief staff president william j clinton moderator michael cromartie vice president ethics amp public policy center additional comments luis lugo director pew forum religion amp public life andrew kohut director pew research center event transcript michael cromartie welcome ladies gentlemen second pew forum lunch ongoing series well almost month last meeting michael gerson white house delighted today john podesta could us immediately want say sorry colleague fellow senior advisor pew forum ej dionne able us today let tell quickly format john podesta speaks going open conversation dialogue im going keep running list people want get something add let know ill put well order great civility im believer giving long introductions people already know know youre know john podesta may know currently president chief executive officer center american progress know john served chief staff president clinton october 1998 january 2001 hes much involved days topic discussing today faith politics progressives couldnt better person address subject john podesta john thank much coming john podesta thank michael let start telling much personally appreciate tremendous contribution pew forum made americas dialogue relationship faith politics dont think theres anybody exemplifies work ejs done journalism side share fondness things liberal catholic thought id begin reflecting little bit gone last couple weeks tell spend couple minutes talking personally us center engaged involved think last weeks really underscore vital importance discussion forum engaged hopefully reporting amplify well weve seen passing john paul ii ascension pope benedict xvi millions americans think joined unprecedented conversation future catholic church role church politics go holy trinity georgetown know great topic discussion last week meanwhile last sunday also saw majority leader united states senate join forces leaders christian right effort use religion promote partys political doctrine think kind tempting look events particularly thencardinal ratzingers letter us election majority leaders engagement involvement use religion people suggest might something presidential campaign tempting look believe think many opinion leaders whatever common ground walls faith politics generally right think enhanced belief american politics polarized two warring factions religious right promotes government intervention areas private life long doesnt interfere free market secular left would content opposite think thats simplistic assessment may explain widely held simplistic obviously think particularly people know reality far complex time senator frist preparing argue confirming president bushs judicial nominees fundamental religious freedom millions jewish families preparing observe passover holiday reminds us quest justice human dignity fundamental abrahamic tradition moral tradition think led millions jews protestants catholics muslims americans faith far different path one trod political right figures like dr dobson political patrons historically whether talking frederick douglass dorothy day rabbi heschel dr martin luther king millions helped lead theres america expressed faith fighting abolition womens suffrage walking picket lines marching civil rights protesting war vietnam progressive religious tradition predates dobsons robertsons certainly continues day think plea today something highly underreported coverage religion public life today see local campaigns win living wage lowincome workers center involved acorn broad religious coalition trying raise minimum wage florida ballot initiative successful 2004 election see efforts protect voting rights see campaigns provide debt relief impoverished countries earth see movement promote peaceful conflict resolution home abroad would argue need see much much conversation right city media every forum spiritual dimension public policy considered think tragedy terri schiavo conservative politicians view exploited one familys personal anguish curry favor religious right one instance america would benefited visible religious center rabbi steven jacobs los angeles asks morality tom delays fighting keep mrs schiavo life support time fighting slash funding medicaid federal program paying hospice care broader think textured understanding morality sync beliefs shared american people actually would argue contrary think washington postabc news poll came morning reflects aftermath november election conventional wisdom held moral values election conservatives ascendancy progressives doomed field friend jim wallis says amazing one faulty exit poll question sparked important debate engaged even today hype facts exit poll question subsided factual analysis began know far different story emerged clear president bush motivated base around opposition samesex marriage abortion solid footing conservative wing religious community think fire organizational base people pounding pavement ohio jen palmieri press secretary dont think hearts minds new silent majority waiting wings americans believe dont need conservative order religious conducted poll couple organizations worked course year pax christi liberal catholic organization group called res publica zogby election found national poll 54 percent electorate coalition religious moderates socalled religious progressives nontraditional voters made 54 percent overall electorate understand new pew study coming weeks really begins microanalyze electorate well see looks like asked question important moral values facing country think perhaps interesting result 64 percent said greed materialism poverty economic justice important moral questions facing united states 27 percent said abortion gay marriage abortion accounting vast majority truth many people faith worried coarsening culture theyre also worried childrens schools quality air breathe water drink increase poverty theyre concerned terrorism war americans hear faith politics voices pat robertson james dobson others religious right maybe add bill frist tom delay mix fact americans resent efforts conservatives squeeze religion narrow rigid mold personal piety excludes much gods creation many gods children clearly many would identify progressive religious tradition speaking earlier historically social change come country center let talk little bit committed helping show project began really formed center opened doors october 2003 talked melody barnes sitting know work capitol hill joining us people ask get melody comes protestant tradition come catholic tradition think began mad quite frankly mad thought complete distortion role religion public life religious conservative wasnt tradition came faith meant lot us thought probably meant lot lot people whose voices werent represented made part central work center said beginning im going talk specific things familiar youve events talk generally view ill stop take questions began last june brought together 400 clergy advocates scholars attended first faith policy conference dedicated faith agenda aimed bringing people together stigmatizing dividing crossed sectarian lines faith offended people traditions think shared faith offended nation allows 1 6 children live poverty 45 million americans 19 million lack health insurance disease hunger poverty war ravage 2 billion people planet leaders deny damage policies plainly gods earth society dont think answers conference started belief whether youre christian jew muslim buddhist loved neighbor recognized responsibility community nation people came together think truly believed progressive governance fair effective right thing profoundly moral sense proceeded two fashions one try commitment making clear making sure piece policy work values agenda think reflected silent majority religious moderates religious progressives part work try frame policy choices governmental choices terms people come different faith traditions familiar give specific example think across board put recently universal health care proposal practical proposal get universal coverage make right kinds investments health care system build existing systems create kind costeffective health care platform didnt argue economic terms tried bring religious voices bear held forum frank griswold presiding bishop episcopal church conservative jewish theologian northwestern catholic theologian georgetown try put commitment health care every person living america profoundly moral context thought important sort missing element reflecting backwards missing element tried 1993 1994 clinton administration launched effort press club bill byron former president catholic university great jesuit written widely topic came support effort think important reach people level argue economics costs health insurance effect gm effect really peoples hearts way perceive work government whether social security health care think commitment try lift policy work try frame agenda appeals resonates people moral perspective another important thing didnt try teach politicians talk bible try bring voices progressive religious community public debate one people attended conference become quite prominent media days jim wallis jim forbes bob edgar sue thislewaite range religious voices tried lift give support needed day media training group always kid youd think theyre bunch people got paid talk living would bunch ministers priests rabbis nuns yet think intimidated quite frankly television format one mastered mightily right theyre used kind talking audience cant leave chuckles theyre used talking 20minute sound bite yeah 20 minutes well sound bites think appreciated think helpful think jim appreciated went environs jon stewart well meet press raise think lot ways value voices lift make part progressive dialogue bring back coalition progressive change also feature highlight teach us committed well try educate media opinion leaders believe guess thats im morning melody convening series national conversations towns cities across america trying bring religious community together policy community talk social change first forum denver recently talking places across country obviously need remind people history progressive social change provide forum new generation religious activists people sometimes ask want achieve left religious conservatives already created right think probably better jerry falwell ralph reed tom delay others think renewing restoring progressive religious tradition history helped make benevolent compassionate caring society im catholic said earlier attend mass take communion source strength think really makes progressive ill close like many catholics issues disagree church could help touched think really americans experienced recently life works john paul ii observed america today called heightened responsibility world example genuinely free democratic humane society clear precise statement faith say politics think anything could come moral values help define catholic american theyre reason time conservative power particularly time see conservative abuse power im standing ground progressive willing get engaged fight debate direction country thank mr cromartie thank john thank much journalist john conservatives would argue theyre fighting really defensive battle theres acludriven agenda take expressions faith public square court takes god pledge allegiance instance forces removal ten commandments public space wonder could address also importantly whole question expressions faith public square doesnt seem like democrats comfortable talking yet mr podesta well id say couple things looking piece la times morning peter wallsten janice rogers brown one nominees gave speech connecticut weekend said people faith embroiled war secular humanists countrys bitterly divided shady war war perilous times people faith think hard look america think true statement particularly look comparison areas world strong faith tradition respected people proclaim belief god theyre free worship want think clinton administration tried much possible enable people cut weeds particularly educational arena expressions faith could take place create space religious free exercise wasnt hobbled notion judiciary blame know could quote dr dobson view courts majority doesnt care sanctity life judicial tyranny people faith mean talking bill rehnquist know seven nine justices appointed republicans think talking think people need challenge notion view dont think reflect reality american life today think perspective way progressives democrats talk religion advice important thing try authentic come faith tradition youre comfortable expressing ought go think people respect dont think secular elements nonbelieving elements broad progressive coalition think less one think little bit political world theres bit silencing think needs matched active engagement journalist god pledge allegiance mr podesta ive lived god pledge allegiance know added think added 54 went school said every day dont think youre going look think much harm think know ill come back weve got 45 million people uninsured weve got peoples incomes collapsing weve got middle class tremendous siege weve got health insurance costs going 60 percent last four years im happy god pledge allegiance lets get talk real moral challenges facing country think weve got broaden debate journalist spent lot time road john kerry last year heard lot things youve talking mean every week every week faith without works dead lot good works government etc stereotype democratic party deep never broke part didnt write much im wondering enough elevate progressive religious voices mean maybe valuable service democrat could party reeducate political consultants know laughter spine campaign best communicate character candidate mr podesta well leave governor dean people working david price rosa delauro congress senator durbin even governor dean whos talked recently think focus change political dynamic make people comfortable record point view candidate point view argument think without fundamentally also sense may shortterm political success unless also fire repower important progressive religious voices create networks across country focus actions support kind economic health care policies think fundamental social justice opportunity society think maybe theyre necessary dont think sufficient think tank secular institution job try act partnership progressive religious institutions progressive religious leaders really challenge american public moral questions facing country guess poll dont know post poll didnt look deeply pledge allegiance would come long way health care treating children country war iraq hivaids world think going come journalist wanted build last comment second think lot people one hit kerry campaign last year talking religion unless front black audiences thats saw covered certainly speeches explicitly religious comments places ive gone back looked lot speeches realize come lot faith without works comments references background catholicism wonder double standard place terms religions covered republicans democrats often youll see religion covered bush mentions seen part part political personal personality whereas democrat either goes unreported seen possibly fake probably pandering thats kind frame seen certainly reflects degree reality within two different parties extreme reflected coverage guess im wondering things like would go uncovered democratic candidate necessarily mr podesta thats like open mike question laughter know think absolutely fair observation reflect back 2004 campaign senator kerry two different succinct phases kerry campaign view think first six months probably writing know squawking think first six months 2004 john kerry looked back kennedy election 1960 drew wrong lesson kennedy challenged tool catholic hierarchy kerry challenged exactly opposite perspective wasnt truly person faith interestingly people challenged kennedy laughter know carry ethnic catholic prejudices speak laughter interestingly think kerry sort challenged 180degree different perspective gave answer six months kennedy gave kennedy gave houston speech think wasnt really summer partly probably public rattling people like people like private council mike mccurry others shifted journalist shifted summer ratszinger memo came started challenged became possibility would receive communion went church agree felt like hearing wrong mr podesta think catholics doubly disabled question abortion communion relationship church becomes kind central defining outlet catholic democrats nobody seems worry pataki others secondly grew mass still latin john kerry like church expressive kind cultural perspective sacramental church know get speak english respond little bit priests like seven protestant traditions moral expression kerry think genuinely sort reflecting wasnt normal talk faith thats sort understandable growing northern catholic faith tradition think challenge coming partly deep fault within catholic church catholic hierarchy think engineered relatively sophisticated campaign make issue largely led youll forgive see conspiracy theories largely led deal hudson others close contact white house think vectors coming think response end appropriate think kind slow make turn political headwind coming probably swift boat mattered kind slow make turn headwind well think also something factor journalist somewhat followup previous two questions said got involved mad would interested know mad mr podesta little bit mad guys laughter mad world mean thought real distortion going common wisdom reporting religious conservative think seemed ahistoric thats word seemed wrong knew didnt feel like experiencing every week went church go religious church journalist dont think little telling though 25 years rise moral majority pat robertson 1988 youre conducting media training sessions act tv people progressive tradition mr podesta think think think big national media coverage civil rights movement think structure media currently today live different media environment isnt say werent extremely conservative status quo elements particularly southern media back live different media environment quicker make turn new media environment dont think gang really saw mission think important work grassroots level result many things fighting grassroots movement inside churches inside synagogues inside mosques overwhelmed public policy undermining important work trying important get back compete space saw piece metro section post new dean whos installed national cathedral whos kind making points trying root church community larger dialogue city journalist looking back issue set describing argument new leftleaning religiouspolitical movement could built around mentioned voting rights debtrelief health care education seems theres sort asymmetrical warfare going religious right issues either ban abortion dont either give school vouchers dont either ban gay marriage dont whereas put 100 people room ask fix health care youre going get 100 different answers true education debtrelief realistically ever going kinds issues build political movement around terms good evil one solution versus another mr podesta well thats good question guess fundamental view history kind complex social problems change movement result people trying history civil rights movement know voting rights act complicated piece legislation 1964 civil rights act journalist simpler sort job right issues coalesced around ones lines much brighter mr podesta maybe doesnt mean abandon field think happened millennium religious community came together left right around debtrelief people got got drove individual congregations people mobilized changed political dynamic something got done know sitting 1996 people would said kidding really think people going care debtrelief africa yet people mobilized around something good happened result think fundamentally reflection values im describing fits comfortably majority people country part weve come part american experience important focus energy people congregational level important social challenges take national politician frame create narrative around say things course ready assume person yet chuckles think try create space kind political change happens journalist response earlier question wonder one possible problems youre thinking james dobson pat robertson probably host unnamed conservative christians sense actually move voters talk action follow wonder respond think media training important extent think focus communications actually building grassroots movement necessarily organized around issues organized support guy mr podesta think level object reject notion turning churches kind precinct houses party dont think public particularly responds im sure right organizing model actually think much critical higher organizing strategic organizing church church synagogue synagogue mosque mosque places works works voter registration voter education etc think cant support candidate maybe dobson could dont think right dont think appropriate journalist extent think thats handicap mr podesta think handicap gotten agenda thats inspiring b one framed big values people understand fact havent quite employed tactics rnc seems tertiary regard mr cromartie also youd want add wouldnt dont radio program like dobson goes 10 million people dobson says something morning senate switchboard literally blows fuse maybe dont radio network coming think tank mr podesta chuckles maybe well put sojourners think journalist follow earlier question think difference john abolition movement civil rights movement predated political interest topics idea someone washington elevating abolition would big surprise cats boston someone washington elevating civil rights would big surprise ministers montgomery thing upside trying elevate movement doesnt exist look population numbers progressive religious congregations conservative mr podesta sounded like thats suggesting maybe theres fair point dont think suggesting end day religious institutions religious leaders going make happen going make happen secular institution think help add value public policy side dont lead movement dont pretend lead movement strength religious leaders create movement disagree description made notion theres nothing going think theres lot going ground level think needs nurturing needs push needs little bit help think thats coming journalist among voters go church often tend vote republican go least tend vote democratic among two groups regular churchgoers tend see morality faith terms absolutes black white abortion wrong everyone side tend go church less seem see morality personal cafeteria kind thing abortion may wrong okay nextdoor neighbor ever reach side get moral absolutists vice versa could ever get side mr podesta im going answer second part question first number surprised todays poll number support filibuster 66 opposed 26 support think three months ago schiavo delay bill frist justice sunday like call think number would dont think danger presenting kind face american public really driven religious moderates people churchattending away kind radical version selling religious perspective policy perspective answer first part question think core people never going subscribe progressive version politics country 20 percent electorate 49 50 percent electorate think dialogue people create bigger tent think capture votes convince people progressive policy solutions candidates express progressive vision america talk respectfully mr cromartie poll numbers could ask andrew kohut make comments andrew kohut john didnt see post poll 66 percent referring mr podesta sixtysix percent opposed changing set rules make easier republicans confront president bushs leadership mr kohut well dont know whether number would different preschiavo think probably backlash probably center listening conversation one thing hasnt talked two sets democrats two classes democrats democratic candidates speak democratic candidates speak ease facility straightforwardness republicans core democrats many secular hear kind address religious wing democratic party makes uneasy fact complaints democrats days party doesnt stand principles much greater extent case republicans democrats terrific problem may third wing progressive religious people democratic side brought along addressed major issue two three wings democratic party way commercial laughter pew typology survey latest version looks value differences parties released room three weeks look forward seeing mr cromartie respond luis lugo would like follow mr lugo question backlash post poll also asks question think political leader rely religious beliefs making policy decisions recall survey almost two years ago asked similar kind question fact george bush specifically overwhelming support bringing religion bear policy process complaint among democrats one didnt rely religion enough particularly among african americans 15 percent democrats point thought relying religion much poll shows clear partisan divide republicans 62 35 politicians bring religion bear decisionmaking democrats almost reverse 27 65 percent seems partisan divide polling detect differences margin two years ago poll believed clearly opening partisan divide hard imagine terri schiavo case tom delay justice sunday kinds issues generated kind backlash least among democrats one mr kohut may well know period time good deal political polarization years seen members parties go positions parties greater extent would also caution questions like look wording carefully sensitive im going say perhaps would really like look question asked years ago closely mr podesta poll independents generally tracking democrats mr kohut well think one issues democratic party lot unease center electorate influence religious conservatives republican party people center worry choices think schiavo case brought home obviously schiavo worried lot people left right center center problem republican party mr lugo well question john based poll whether makes job difficult democratic backlash bringing religion politics period would democratic party receptive efforts bring progressive religious voices mix mr podesta thought crossed mind morning read poll laughter know think two sides challenge democratic candidates role progressive religious voices public square candidate side think youre authentic part express conviction terms think secular wing democratic party unlikely problem expressing moral vision country least policy terms generally agree maybe particular issues challenging job blend things progressivereligiousvoice perspective think would terrible mistake read poll decide things flowing towards liberal america progressive america overreaction abuse power current crowd means dont anything think would terrible strategic decision quite frankly come back beginning need making case think passion lies may influenced faith tradition come need stoke think end end decent country believe journalist question goes back talking earlier terms kennedys catholicism 1960 course another catholic candidate past summer watched election obviously question complicated task catholic run president country protestant mr podesta well think 2004 would certainly indicate part think raises salience abortion question way dont think raised al gore 2000 memory serves course bill clinton somewhat different attitude different way speaking seeing casey race pennsylvania potentially senate race rhode island catholic runs abortion question becomes front center think makes political task slightly complicated hand seems part public dialogue need answer think fact press going lift make bigger central issue want chew sort goes territory think test catholic politician noncatholic politician might bring bear question set policies going reduce abortion country commitment political leader trying appeal center electorate might find resonance public glen stassen dont know evangelical theologian san diego made argument rate abortion bill clinton went 25 percent going back bush went reagan think one dialogue american public think somewhat complicated catholic first question mouths journalist kind complicated question would complicated whether youre democrat taking views abortion john kerry say jeb bush chuckles abuse might running president would words complicated republican side well mr podesta dont know question probably people around table guess issues jeb bush going run would end endoflife abortion whether sync american public think different question republicans like pretend big tent dont see rudy giuliani nominee party think really complicated prochoice republican run get nomination republican party goes well prochoice catholic nominee run patakis stock giulianis numbers look good going think would complicated task try get nomination given views abortion inside republican party journalist abortion issue outset invoked great luminaries past frederick douglass martin luther king civil rights leaders used language bible make case emancipation people today national right life committee use moral arguments think abortion wrong talk protecting least defensive talk gods life begins may agree much say may agree use arguments side uses political arguments slogans really womans right choose turning back clock almost though sit party wont engage level sort dismiss thought dont moral argument abortion maybe ought one think mr podesta well think senator clintons speech tried get terms saying conflicting moral values respect sides argument trying frame terms morally significant people including difficult circumstances women find women moral agents terms exercising judgment choice think side wants discussion dialogue use language bible use blunt instrument criminal law execute journalist bishops im talking side issue democrats lot people respect making argument nothing magical birth canal democrats gotten narrow point going mention hillarys speech fact made news underscores im saying doesnt mitigate newsworthy speech mr podesta yeah newsworthy speech journalist democrat said say party language mr cromartie purpose think tank isnt mr podesta think trying really move debate dialogue forward guess dont know better answer say yes think important discussion would argue perhaps place catholic bishops begin access contraception good thing argue bad thing chuckles certainly end goal think actually real dialogue real discussion would healthy party maybe well see happen context senate race pennsylvania journalist sort dismissed cultural coarseness question games internet movies stuff people actually pretty upset houses party seems kind quiet one dont sort base issues things talking mr podesta yeah think mistake mean party chuckles journalist explain us hard know talk laughter mr podesta think mistake think people expect political leaders side trying raise kids think journalist dont hear mr podesta working ideas front well though ready unveil think maybe lack ideas people suggested complicated financial base etc thats probably true parties think would lot resonance political leadership really went talked want reflect view policy choice spoke question didnt end working vchip end day nobody knows vchip television nobody uses think dialogue expression something resonated people one might argue wasnt exactly right solution think fact al gore clinton willing take politically smart think responding role hard part question government solutions lend language people comfortable think political leadership associating challenges parents raising kids good political strategy hope journalist want offer theory purporting explain poll talking fairly simplistic theory republicans communicate christian conservatives religious base without making much noise rest society really well 2000 2004 get little careless make much noise electorate large 1992 republican convention last several weeks upset lot people center doesnt make whole lot difference democrats saying pick residual support people think republicans going far really matters careful republicans subliminal work religious side last four years stop start talking many people trouble matter democrats issue make sense mr podesta first half certainly makes sense chuckles havent thought exactly terms think strong analysis seen course spring democrats draw conclusion doesnt matter believe dangerous conclusion draw would bad assumption one would urge make disagree last half formulation completely agree first half journalist john years problem republicans course christian conservatives didnt participate electoral process didnt vote became inspired participate republicans began winning elections youre talking framing number issues sort moral way debt relief environment healthcare education evidence great mass religious progressives care issues arent already voting mr podesta well question whether arent voting know dont run democratic party chuckles dont enter debate prism follow jim wallis around country see fill churches see kind reaction gets follow jim forbes around country see kind reaction gets plenty people believe religious progressives would make call know higher purpose need leadership dont know whether already voting already voting us think change agenda country might change better trying support work think whether kind microanalytic reaction exurban voters hungry ohio way enter problem maybe helpful comment kind see things journalist wanted suggest another answer possible talking two things well one agenda issues appeal voters arent currently voting democrats maybe finding new way talk abortion maybe coarseness culture maybe things like attract moderate religious people another way talk core democratic principles moral terms changes image party general think youre also going possibly opportunity democrats reach voters necessarily saying issue polls well religious centrists saying talk things secular terms maybe start articulating moral basis issues change image party whole mr podesta well might give stronger sense actually believe something chuckles would good thing journalist great extent everybody room remembers marilyn quayle convention saying us versus im wondering whether division talking carries younger generations know poll college students gay marriage find markedly different maybe college students young people im curious know whether young conservatives feel strongly abortion gay marriage whether libertarian religion plays role lives mr podesta well younger voters becoming increasingly tolerant think particularly gay issues college students younger voters general think little complicated abortion question actually dont know answer question whether got small isolated core voters really religious among young people everybody else even people religious tolerant trend among younger voters certainly greater tolerance particularly issues sexuality mr kohut extraordinary generational difference acceptance homosexuality generally gay marriage specifically still republicandemocratic differences young people questions homosexuality issues homosexuality obviously one stands generational effect doesnt wipe away partisan differences together means mr podesta thing would true religious attendance extent mr kohut yeah life cyclical generational mean younger people attend church less often attend often get older differences homosexuality generational life cyclical journalist lost lot hair 1988 following around democratic politician spent great deal time churches churches moderated message much conservative three four churches night got lot delegates obviously name jesse jackson able talk churches moral terms go talk street terms werent moral able remarkable flexibility im saying model like hasnt done since know jimmy carter surprised said werent sure wanted organize churches republicans seems whether youre talking faithbased ratzinger mr podesta didnt say organizing churches journalist tertiary think said importance doesnt matter laughter point wasnt high list guess thought ratzinger letter faithbased initiatives number things gone guess karl rove listening conversation would say wow bunch worriers know worried lines might cross things might strikes point got go votes mr podesta remember using term tertiary dont remember using answer seems appropriate role organizing churches think said important thing think asked question whether organize behalf candidates inside churches think cross line think rnc trying getting voter lists pennsylvania think crossing line know maybe people party dont believe think bad religion country think ultimately bad politics country sort make political clubhouses democratic party thats right journalist follow groups like focus family causeoriented groups candidate run network already place hops organized around individuals im even sure legal advocating filibuster stuff gay marriage kinds things stop democrats philosophical issueoriented advocacy religiously oriented kind network able mobilize election actually involves candidates mr podesta think thats right model think suggesting needs mobilization church level around issues think gary bauer would probably say thing isnt kind secret way know keeping tax status bush thats fundamental way pushing agenda forward changing issue structure american debate know dont actually know gary bauer hard criticize question fighting space organizing terms object policy views course dont know exactly maybe stuff would object notion organizing seems exactly martin luther king people mentioned organized organized congregational level organized passionately believed issues agenda country guess question okay go ahead take organizational structure go get church lists organize voters make churches part integral structure make political journalist simply wanted address gaymarriage issue keeps coming listened candidates last election democrats republicans saying thing everybody become voting issue anything progressives future mr podesta said thought beginning think helped republicans fire organizational base people ground troops think political impact one straw argument really ended fulcrum around election hinged increase african american votes ohio bush got one concede maybe senate race kentucky think theres precious little evidence fulcrum race around gay marriage journalist contend sense candidate perceived saying something didnt genuinely believe party didnt genuinely stand think resonated middle america telling us something thats really true really think somewhere neutral positive thing society mr podesta thats complicated journalist patronizing us trying get us believe doesnt believe mr podesta well reporting end day seems ran lot advertising guy flipflopper lied medals vietnam seems character issue around resolute really came power advertising bushs talking every day framing debate around know think precious little data mean interesting theory think precious little data indicate true journalist precious little data things say john laughter mr cromartie time two questions journalist talk mobilization think comparison justice sunday event went radio stations tv stations two conference calls reporters progressive religious leaders couldnt gotten much attention kind action steps recommend religious leaders kind mobilization youre talking mr podesta think done congregational ministerial level done media level dont business plan seems theres openness theres space people occupy media space thats much broader voices ive mentioned know people said hope could put progressives talk radio proved true think progressive religious leaders would find audience could figure business structure business plan get mainstream media easiest entrée point think ends broadband based communications techniques thats less expensive get business way guess able create kind business opportunity youd find audience way progressive talkers beginning find audience maureen fiedler 50 stations progressive religious program thats growing shes gotten stations shes catholic nun think theres business opportunity thats business im think youve got lot organizing done grassroots level pico organizations work social justice issues framed inside communities id like see trickle national dialogue mr cromartie one question journalist john terms trying turn religious progressives political movement im wondering youre going deal sort fervency gap seems church attendance church participation central organizing principle lives conservative christians integrated republican base even many progressives feel really strongly moral faith going difficult organize progressives language religion moral values way youre trying mr podesta think thats good question religious leaders ive talked edgar wallis think theres issue think thats kind factual statement really thats kind way real question whether leadership changes think likely would know level believe people ready called think get right kind leadership response weve seen history country think moment right see youve got get voices think people respond think see evidence kinds places im talking services im talking willingness people get engaged pull threads experience work florida important think people got mobilized got energized felt like accomplished something know accomplish something people getting dollar hour going lead better lives mr cromartie john testimony presentation busy journalists stayed whole event please join thanking john time applause usually run quarter thank appreciate much speakers pew forum events given opportunity review approve remarks transcript also edited clarity spelling grammar | 5,786 |
<p>Foreign governments and outside business interests prop up crooked regimes like South Sudan's for their own benefit.</p>
<p>The corrupt military commanders and politicians responsible for directing mass atrocities on both sides of South Sudan’s bloody civil war have managed to amass huge fortunes, despite only receiving modest government salaries, according to the new “ <a href="http://thesentry.org/warcrimesshouldntpay" type="external">War Crimes Shouldn’t Pay</a>” investigative report backed by actor George Clooney and former State Department official John Prendergast. Their Sentry initiative, a collaboration by the NGOs Enough Project and Not On Our Watch, claims the country’s leaders have plundered millions of dollars that should have been used to prop up the nation’s crumbling economy. Those leaders used the stolen money to invest in overseas property, stashing their funds in countries ranging from Kenya and Uganda to Australia.</p>
<p>The report alleges that President Salva Kiir, a group of senior military lieutenants, and opposition leader (and former Vice President) Riek Machar have all been busy profiteering while more than <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/09/south-sudan-up-to-53-million-people-face-summer-food-crisis" type="external">five million people</a> in the country face the imminent threat of starvation. The independent country of South Sudan, of course, is in the large part the result of a <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/07/us-played-key-role-in-southern-sudans-long-journey-to-independence/241660/" type="external">midwifing effort</a> by the last three U.S. presidents, who began covertly funneling military aid to rebels in southern Sudan while Bill Clinton was in office. George W. Bush brokered the peace deal between Sudan’s warring northern and southern factions in 2005, while Barack Obama ensured the 2011 independence referendum would go forward and dumped <a href="http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/02/25/unmade-in-the-usa-south-sudan-bush-obama/" type="external">hundreds of millions</a> in development funds into the newly-minted South Sudan once it had.</p>
<p>For most of the period since in 2011, Kiir and Machar have sat at the heads of competing kleptocratic networks <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-37338432" type="external">fighting each other</a> for control of the country and its natural resources. Most damningly, the report contends that South Sudanese leaders have been able to pilfer the young nation’s wealth thanks to the complicity of Western banks, lawyers, real estate firms, and other companies and institutions that have been happy to turn a blind eye to the rampant corruption in exchange for a coveted share of the new market. Like Iraq before it, this lauded American nation-building experiment appears to have gone horribly wrong.</p>
<p>Even though the South Sudanese government has dismissed the claims as “ <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3785910/South-Sudan-officials-rich-brutal-war-report.html" type="external">rubbish</a>” and slammed a press conference held by Clooney to launch the report as “misleading,” Clooney contends the evidence produced by the document’s authors, who spent two years following a trail of money linked to Kiir and Machar, is “irrefutable.” In one case, the investigators found that General Paul Malong Awan, the chief of general staff in the South Sudanese military and a commander directly implicated in atrocities against civilians, owns at least two luxurious villas in Uganda, as well as a $2 million mansion in a gated community in Nairobi. He has managed to acquire all of these properties all while earning an official salary of only $45,000 a year.</p>
<p>As well as foreign real estate, South Sudan’s corrupt elites have apparently spent misappropriated funds on large stakes in oil firms, private education for their children, and expensive cars. At the same time, they have ensured a steady flow of corruptly-obtained cash is available to fund their militias, which routinely <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/08/south-sudan-atrocities-160804192011477.html" type="external">slaughter innocent civilians</a>. Predatory soldiers also use rape as a psychological weapon against rival ethnic groups, with Salva Kiir’s government forces the primary culprits.</p>
<p>The results of the investigation come as the United Nations is considering imposing an arms embargo against the government and is now deploying <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/06/world/africa/south-sudan-un-peacekeepers.html?_r=0" type="external">4,000 additional peacekeepers</a>, even though the 14,000 already in the country have accomplished little. Tens of thousands of South Sudanese have already died since the war began. In perpetuating their war, South Sudan’s political and military leaders still enjoy easy access to Western aid and funds from outside business interests looking to buy influence in the oil-rich country.</p>
<p>This kind of corruption will come as little surprise to Africa watchers. Responding to the publication of the report, <a href="http://www.africanews.com/2016/09/15/the-track-record-of-corruption-in-south-sudan-is-extensive-us-reacts-to-sentry/" type="external">the U.S. Department of State said</a> that, while it does not provide aid to the South Sudanese government, it was aware of extensive corruption in the country. While the U.S. government might not be funding Salva Kiir’s forces directly, it has no problem doing business and greasing wheels with equally violent and underhanded regimes. Throughout Africa, corrupt and authoritarian leaders have exploited American and other outside interests for their own gain—even in the continent’s smallest countries.</p>
<p>Djibouti President Ismail Omar Guelleh, to take one of several examples, has turned his tiny nation into a military hub for foreign nations looking to secure their interests in the heart of one of the most unstable regions on the planet. Casting himself as a key ally to the United States and the other Western powers in their interminable War on Terror, he has allowed seven different nations to build military facilities and base troops on his country’s soil—with all the profits going to his inner circle. As in South Sudan, most people in Djibouti see <a href="http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/country/home/tags/djibouti" type="external">nothing but poverty</a> while the country’s elite siphon off funds that could be used for development. While nearly half of the rural population languishes in extreme poverty, Guelleh <a href="http://www.africanews.com/2016/04/09/djibouti-incumbent-omar-guelleh-reelected-for-fourth-term/" type="external">had himself re-elected</a> for a fourth presidential term earlier this year. Those who opposed him were met with <a href="http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/12/23/world/casualty-claims-conflict-violence-erupts-djibouti-one-side-says-19-killed-attack/" type="external">deadly force</a>.</p>
<p>Many, but not all, of these corrupt relationships can be traced back to the colonial era. Even though France might have the most notorious ( <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-14898197" type="external">and enduring</a>) system of military, political, and economic influence in its former colonies, U.S. aid is doing just as much to prop up dictatorships and buy influence in the region.</p>
<p>The Sentry report puts forward a number of proposals for curbing corruption in South Sudan, including taking proactive steps to stop money laundering, introducing smarter sanctions that target the country’s elite, and setting up a financial system that prevents kleptocrats from looting public resources. While all of these look in the right direction, none of them address the insidious influence of foreign governments and outside business interests who prop up crooked regimes for their own benefit.</p> | false | 1 | foreign governments outside business interests prop crooked regimes like south sudans benefit corrupt military commanders politicians responsible directing mass atrocities sides south sudans bloody civil war managed amass huge fortunes despite receiving modest government salaries according new war crimes shouldnt pay investigative report backed actor george clooney former state department official john prendergast sentry initiative collaboration ngos enough project watch claims countrys leaders plundered millions dollars used prop nations crumbling economy leaders used stolen money invest overseas property stashing funds countries ranging kenya uganda australia report alleges president salva kiir group senior military lieutenants opposition leader former vice president riek machar busy profiteering five million people country face imminent threat starvation independent country south sudan course large part result midwifing effort last three us presidents began covertly funneling military aid rebels southern sudan bill clinton office george w bush brokered peace deal sudans warring northern southern factions 2005 barack obama ensured 2011 independence referendum would go forward dumped hundreds millions development funds newlyminted south sudan period since 2011 kiir machar sat heads competing kleptocratic networks fighting control country natural resources damningly report contends south sudanese leaders able pilfer young nations wealth thanks complicity western banks lawyers real estate firms companies institutions happy turn blind eye rampant corruption exchange coveted share new market like iraq lauded american nationbuilding experiment appears gone horribly wrong even though south sudanese government dismissed claims rubbish slammed press conference held clooney launch report misleading clooney contends evidence produced documents authors spent two years following trail money linked kiir machar irrefutable one case investigators found general paul malong awan chief general staff south sudanese military commander directly implicated atrocities civilians owns least two luxurious villas uganda well 2 million mansion gated community nairobi managed acquire properties earning official salary 45000 year well foreign real estate south sudans corrupt elites apparently spent misappropriated funds large stakes oil firms private education children expensive cars time ensured steady flow corruptlyobtained cash available fund militias routinely slaughter innocent civilians predatory soldiers also use rape psychological weapon rival ethnic groups salva kiirs government forces primary culprits results investigation come united nations considering imposing arms embargo government deploying 4000 additional peacekeepers even though 14000 already country accomplished little tens thousands south sudanese already died since war began perpetuating war south sudans political military leaders still enjoy easy access western aid funds outside business interests looking buy influence oilrich country kind corruption come little surprise africa watchers responding publication report us department state said provide aid south sudanese government aware extensive corruption country us government might funding salva kiirs forces directly problem business greasing wheels equally violent underhanded regimes throughout africa corrupt authoritarian leaders exploited american outside interests gaineven continents smallest countries djibouti president ismail omar guelleh take one several examples turned tiny nation military hub foreign nations looking secure interests heart one unstable regions planet casting key ally united states western powers interminable war terror allowed seven different nations build military facilities base troops countrys soilwith profits going inner circle south sudan people djibouti see nothing poverty countrys elite siphon funds could used development nearly half rural population languishes extreme poverty guelleh reelected fourth presidential term earlier year opposed met deadly force many corrupt relationships traced back colonial era even though france might notorious enduring system military political economic influence former colonies us aid much prop dictatorships buy influence region sentry report puts forward number proposals curbing corruption south sudan including taking proactive steps stop money laundering introducing smarter sanctions target countrys elite setting financial system prevents kleptocrats looting public resources look right direction none address insidious influence foreign governments outside business interests prop crooked regimes benefit | 604 |
<p>The reaction in Israel to the conviction of an IDF soldier murdering a Palestinian man tells us exactly where Israelis stand on Palestinian human rights.</p>
<p>For some, the ‘manslaughter’ conviction—following the murder by Israeli army medic, Elor Azaria, of already incapacitated Palestinian man, Fattah al-Sharif—is finally settling a protracted debate regarding where Israelis stand on Palestinian human rights.</p>
<p>Nearly 70 percent of the Israeli public <a href="https://theintercept.com/2017/01/05/israelis-want-soldier-executed-wounded-palestinian-suspect-camera-go-free/" type="external">supports calls to pardon the convicted soldier</a>, who is largely perceived among Israelis as the “child of us all.”</p>
<p>Israeli leaders are also <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.762969" type="external">lining up to lend their support</a> to Azaria and his family. These sympathetic politicians include Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and ministers Naftali Bennett and Miri Regev, among others. Leading opposition leaders are also on board.</p>
<p>Pro-Israeli pundits, who never miss an opportunity to highlight Israel’s supposed moral ascendency took to social media, describing how the indictment further demonstrates that Israel is still a country of law and order.</p>
<p>They seem to conveniently overlook palpable facts. Reporting on the verdict, ‘ <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/conviction-expected-for-idf-soldier-who-killed-palestinian-attacker/" type="external">The Times of Israel’, for example, wrote</a> that “last time an IDF soldier was convicted of manslaughter was in 2005, for the killing of British civilian Tom Hurndall two years earlier.”</p>
<p>Between these dates, and years prior, thousands of Palestinians were killed in the Gaza Strip alone, mostly in the Israeli wars of 2008-9, 2012 and 2014. Although thousands of children and civilians were killed and wounded in Gaza and the rest of the Occupied Territories and, despite international outcries against Israel’s violations of international law, there is yet to be a single conviction in Israeli courts.</p>
<p>But why is it that some commentators suggest that the Azaria trial and the show of unity around his cause by Israeli society is an indication of some massive change underway in Israel?</p>
<p>Yoav Litvin, for example, <a href="http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/The-Mainstreaming-of-Israels-Genocide-of-Palestinians-20170108-0026.html" type="external">argues in ‘TeleSur</a>‘ that the “precedent set by this case will further solidify the complete dehumanization of Palestinians and pave the way for further ethnic cleansing and genocide in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.”</p>
<p>In an article, entitled: “Like Brexit and Trump, Azaria verdict exposes a moment of transition in Israel”, <a href="http://www.jonathan-cook.net/2017-01-10/elor-azaria-verdict-moment-transition-israel/" type="external">Jonathan Cook also eluded to a similar idea</a>. “The soldier’s trial, far from proof of the rule of law, was the last gasp of a dying order,” he wrote.</p>
<p>Neither Litvin nor Cook are suggesting that the supposed change in Israel is substantive but an important change, nonetheless.</p>
<p>But if the past and the present are one and the same, where is the ‘transition’, then?</p>
<p>The creation of Israel atop the ruins of Palestine, the ethnic cleansing that made Israel’s ‘independence’ possible, the subsequent wars, occupation and sieges are all devoid of any morality.</p>
<p>Indeed, Israel was established with the idea in mind that a “Jewish state” is possible without the ethnic cleansing and genocide of the Palestinian Arabs.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/01/the-ultimate-trial-of-israeli-society/" type="external">In a letter to his son</a> in 1937, David Ben Gurion, Israel’s first Prime Minister after the country’s establishment in 1948, wrote: “We must expel the Arabs and take their places and if we have to use force, to guarantee our own right to settle in those places ­ then we have force at our disposal.”</p>
<p>In the year that Israel was established, the United Nations <a href="http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/pdf/osapg_analysis_framework.pdf" type="external">defined genocide in Article 2</a> of the ‘Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide’, as follows:</p>
<p>“Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part..”</p>
<p>In other words, there is nothing new here since the ‘mainstreaming of genocide’ in Israel took place before and during the founding of the country, and ever since.</p>
<p>Fortunately, some Israeli leaders were quite candid about the crimes of that era.</p>
<p>“Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist,” former Israeli leaders, <a href="https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Moshe_Dayan" type="external">Moshe Dayan said while addressing the Technion</a> as reported in ‘Haaretz’ on April 4, 1969. “There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”</p>
<p>But throughout these years, Israel has managed to sustain a balancing act, generating two alternate realities: a material one, in which violence is meted out against Palestinians on a regular basis, and a perceptual one, that of a media image through which Israel is presented to the world as a ‘villa in the jungle’, governed by democratic laws, which makes it superior to its neighbors in every possible way.</p>
<p>Former Israeli President, Moshe Katsav, <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=kwjPBQAAQBAJ&amp;pg=PA117&amp;lpg=PA117&amp;dq=%22There+is+a+huge+gap+between+us+%28Jews%29+and+our+enemies%22&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=_EkBkqayP-&amp;sig=EMo5FLy-vv6QE9D2bcGdR9xlMEg&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiuwq_DksDRAhWIjVQKHUYPBZgQ6AEIRjAH#v=onepage&amp;q=%22There%20is%20a%20huge%20gap%20between%20us%20%28Jews%29%20and%20our%20enemies%22&amp;f=false" type="external">demonstrate the latter point</a> best. “There is a huge gap between us (Jews) and our enemies,” he was quoted in the ‘Jerusalem Post’ on May 10. 2001. “They are people who do not belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a different galaxy.”</p>
<p>In fact, Israeli commentators on the Left often reminisce about the ‘good old days’, before extremists ruled Israel and rightwing parties reigned supreme.</p>
<p>A particular memory that is often invoked was the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1982/09/26/world/israelis-at-huge-rally-in-tel-aviv-demand-begin-and-sharon-resign.html" type="external">mass protest in Tel Aviv</a> to the Israeli-engineered Sabra and Shatila massacres of Palestinian refugees in South Lebanon in 1982.</p>
<p>Protesters demanded the resignations of then-Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, and his Defense Minister, Ariel Sharon. Both men were accused of allowing the massacres of Palestinians by Christian Phalange to take place. An Israeli commission of investigation found Israel guilty of ‘indirect responsibility’, further contributing to the myth that Israel’s guilt lies in the fact that it allowed Christians to kill Muslims, as <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-11576714" type="external">Sharon complained</a> in his biography, years later.</p>
<p>At the time, it did not occur to Israeli protesters as odd the fact that Begin, himself, was the wanted <a href="http://www.wrmea.org/2006-may-june/hamas-a-pale-image-of-the-jewish-irgun-and-lehi-gangs.html" type="external">leader of a terrorist gang</a> before Israel’s founding and that Sharon was accused of orchestrated many other massacres.</p>
<p>Many in Israeli and western media spoke highly of the moral uprightness of Israeli society. Palestinians were baffled by Israel’s ability to carry out war crimes and to emerge in a positive light, regardless.</p>
<p>“Goyim kill Goyim and the Jews are blamed,” <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=rVuO2dxzM-YC&amp;pg=PA215&amp;lpg=PA215&amp;dq=%22Goyim+kill+goyim+and+the+Jews+are+blamed.%22&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=N4Wi59XscX&amp;sig=SEogYPFJgs7ZhNXUQLT_pxHTt3c&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwi3v9Dbo8DRAhUCrFQKHWAkASYQ6AEIIDAB#v=onepage&amp;q=%22Goyim%20kill%20goyim%20and%20the%20Jews%20are%20blamed.%22&amp;f=false" type="external">Begin had then complained</a> with a subtle reference to what he perceived as a form of anti-Semitism. Aside from Sabra and Shatila, tens of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians were killed in the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982.</p>
<p>Historical fact shows that Israel is not experiencing a real transition, but what is truly faltering is Israel’s balancing act: its ability to perpetrate individual and collective acts of violence and still paint an image of itself as law-abiding and democratic.</p>
<p>Zionist leaders of the past had played the game too well and for far too long, but things are finally being exposed for what they really are, thanks to the fact that Jewish settlers now rule the country, control the army, have growing influence over the media and, therefore, define the Israeli course and PR image.</p>
<p>“This new army (of settlers) is no longer even minimally restrained by concerns about the army’s ‘moral’ image or threats of international war crimes investigations,” wrote Cook.</p>
<p>And with that new-found ‘freedom’, the world is able to see Israel as it is. The balancing act is finally over.</p> | false | 1 | reaction israel conviction idf soldier murdering palestinian man tells us exactly israelis stand palestinian human rights manslaughter convictionfollowing murder israeli army medic elor azaria already incapacitated palestinian man fattah alsharifis finally settling protracted debate regarding israelis stand palestinian human rights nearly 70 percent israeli public supports calls pardon convicted soldier largely perceived among israelis child us israeli leaders also lining lend support azaria family sympathetic politicians include prime minister benjamin netanyahu ministers naftali bennett miri regev among others leading opposition leaders also board proisraeli pundits never miss opportunity highlight israels supposed moral ascendency took social media describing indictment demonstrates israel still country law order seem conveniently overlook palpable facts reporting verdict times israel example wrote last time idf soldier convicted manslaughter 2005 killing british civilian tom hurndall two years earlier dates years prior thousands palestinians killed gaza strip alone mostly israeli wars 20089 2012 2014 although thousands children civilians killed wounded gaza rest occupied territories despite international outcries israels violations international law yet single conviction israeli courts commentators suggest azaria trial show unity around cause israeli society indication massive change underway israel yoav litvin example argues telesur precedent set case solidify complete dehumanization palestinians pave way ethnic cleansing genocide occupied palestinian territories article entitled like brexit trump azaria verdict exposes moment transition israel jonathan cook also eluded similar idea soldiers trial far proof rule law last gasp dying order wrote neither litvin cook suggesting supposed change israel substantive important change nonetheless past present one transition creation israel atop ruins palestine ethnic cleansing made israels independence possible subsequent wars occupation sieges devoid morality indeed israel established idea mind jewish state possible without ethnic cleansing genocide palestinian arabs letter son 1937 david ben gurion israels first prime minister countrys establishment 1948 wrote must expel arabs take places use force guarantee right settle places force disposal year israel established united nations defined genocide article 2 convention prevention punishment crime genocide follows following acts committed intent destroy whole part national ethnical racial religious group killing members group causing serious bodily mental harm members group deliberately inflicting group conditions life calculated bring physical destruction whole part words nothing new since mainstreaming genocide israel took place founding country ever since fortunately israeli leaders quite candid crimes era jewish villages built place arab villages even know names arab villages blame geography books longer exist former israeli leaders moshe dayan said addressing technion reported haaretz april 4 1969 single place built country former arab population throughout years israel managed sustain balancing act generating two alternate realities material one violence meted palestinians regular basis perceptual one media image israel presented world villa jungle governed democratic laws makes superior neighbors every possible way former israeli president moshe katsav demonstrate latter point best huge gap us jews enemies quoted jerusalem post may 10 2001 people belong continent world actually belong different galaxy fact israeli commentators left often reminisce good old days extremists ruled israel rightwing parties reigned supreme particular memory often invoked mass protest tel aviv israeliengineered sabra shatila massacres palestinian refugees south lebanon 1982 protesters demanded resignations thenprime minister menachem begin defense minister ariel sharon men accused allowing massacres palestinians christian phalange take place israeli commission investigation found israel guilty indirect responsibility contributing myth israels guilt lies fact allowed christians kill muslims sharon complained biography years later time occur israeli protesters odd fact begin wanted leader terrorist gang israels founding sharon accused orchestrated many massacres many israeli western media spoke highly moral uprightness israeli society palestinians baffled israels ability carry war crimes emerge positive light regardless goyim kill goyim jews blamed begin complained subtle reference perceived form antisemitism aside sabra shatila tens thousands lebanese palestinians killed israeli invasion lebanon 1982 historical fact shows israel experiencing real transition truly faltering israels balancing act ability perpetrate individual collective acts violence still paint image lawabiding democratic zionist leaders past played game well far long things finally exposed really thanks fact jewish settlers rule country control army growing influence media therefore define israeli course pr image new army settlers longer even minimally restrained concerns armys moral image threats international war crimes investigations wrote cook newfound freedom world able see israel balancing act finally | 689 |
<p>PITTSBURGH STEELERS (2-1) AT BALTIMORE RAVENS (2-1)</p>
<p>GAME SNAPSHOT</p>
<p>KICKOFF: Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, M&amp;T Bank Stadium, TV: CBS, Ian Eagle, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dan_Fouts/" type="external">Dan Fouts</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Evan-Washburn/" type="external">Evan Washburn</a> (field reporter)</p>
<p>SERIES HISTORY: 43rd regular-season meeting. Steelers lead series, 22-20. The Steelers snapped a four-game losing streak against the Ravens with their 31-27 victory on Christmas Day last year, a win that clinched the AFC North. The Ravens are 12-9 all-time in games played in Baltimore and have won the past four at M&amp;T Bank Stadium. The last time the Steelers won there was 2012.</p>
<p>KEYS TO THE GAME: For the Steelers it’s simple: Get the running game back on track. The Steelers are 27th in the NFL in rushing and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/LeVeon-Bell/" type="external">Le’Veon Bell</a>, the highest-paid running back in the league, has yet to rush for 100 yards in a game. Coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Tomlin/" type="external">Mike Tomlin</a> doesn’t seem too concerned. He said falling behind against the Bears prevented the Steelers from running more than they did. Traditionally, the Ravens are strong against the run although they allowed 166 to the Jaguars last week in their 44-7 loss in London. If Bell gets going, look for QB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ben_Roethlisberger/" type="external">Ben Roethlisberger</a> to bounce back from a sub-par game against the Bears in which he was 22 for 39 for 235 yards passing. He missed several open receivers throughout the game.</p>
<p>It’s just as easy to identify what the Ravens must do if they want to beat their AFC North rival: Kick their offense into gear. Coming into the game, the Ravens are dead-last in the NFL in total offense (263 yards per game) and tied for 23rd in scoring (17 points per game). Ravens QB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Flacco/" type="external">Joe Flacco</a> is trying to recover from the worst game of his career. He completed 8 of 18 pass attempts for a career-worst 28 yards with two interceptions against the Jaguars. Flacco finished with a quarterback rating of 12.0. The Ravens secondary better quickly forget last week’s debacle against the Jaguars and QB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Blake-Bortles/" type="external">Blake Bortles</a>, who torched them for four touchdown passes. After getting 10 turnovers and eight sacks in the first two games, the Ravens were blanked in both categories against the Jaguars. That unit suffered another blow Wednesday when defensive end Brent Urban was placed on IR and lost for the season, the 16th Baltimore player to suffer that fate.</p>
<p>MATCHUPS TO WATCH:</p>
<p>–Steelers tight ends vs. Ravens linebackers. Jaguars tight end Marcedes Lewis caught three touchdown passes against the Ravens last week. The Steelers will try to take advantage of the Ravens linebackers with their trio of tight ends. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jesse_James/" type="external">Jesse James</a> caught two touchdowns in the opener against the Browns, but Vance McDonald and Xavier Grimble are better at stretching the field and winning matchups against linebackers.</p>
<p>–Ravens WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Wallace/" type="external">Mike Wallace</a> vs. Steelers CB Artie Burns. Wallace is one of the fastest receivers in the NFL and will test the second-year corner. In last year’s meeting in Baltimore, Wallace beat Burns for a 95-yard touchdown in the Ravens’ 21-14 win. If Burns wins this matchup Sunday the Steelers will have a big advantage because the Ravens aren’t blessed with talented receivers after Wallace.</p>
<p>FRIDAY INJURY REPORT</p>
<p>PITTSBURGH STEELERS</p>
<p>–Questionable: S Sean Davis (ankle), G Ramon Foster (thumb), T Marcus Gilbert (hamstring), LB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/James_Harrison/" type="external">James Harrison</a> (illness), S Michael Mitchell (hamstring)</p>
<p>BALTIMORE RAVENS</p>
<p>–Out: CB Jaylen Hill (thigh), DT <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brandon-Williams/" type="external">Brandon Williams</a> (foot), TE Maxx Williams (ankle)</p>
<p>–Questionable: TE Benjamin <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Watson/" type="external">Watson</a> (calf)</p>
<p>PLAYER SPOTLIGHT: Pittsburgh DE Cameron Heyward. With Ravens All-Pro guard Marshall Yanda out for the season, Heyward is going to have an opportunity to do some damage against a retooled Ravens line. Heyward had a great game against the Vikings, but he’ll be looking to rebound after a team-wide poor effort against the Bears.</p>
<p>FAST FACTS: QB Ben Roethlisberger has 13 touchdown passes with six interceptions for a 91.6 quarterback rating in the past seven meetings against the Ravens. RB Le’Veon Bell had 98 yards from scrimmage yards and ran for a touchdown last week. He averages 108.1 yards per game with five touchdowns in seven games against the Ravens. WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Antonio_Brown/" type="external">Antonio Brown</a> had 10 catches for 110 yards and a touchdown last week. He leads the NFL with 26 catches and 354 receiving yards. LB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ryan-Shazier/" type="external">Ryan Shazier</a> had 11 tackles, two forced fumbles and a fumble recovery in last week’s overtime loss to Chicago. He has three straight games with nine-plus tackles against the Ravens. … QB Joe Flacco has 10 touchdown passes with four interceptions in the past eight games against the Steelers. He is the all-time Baltimore leader with 2,957 completions, 33,005 passing yards and 185 passing touchdowns. RB Terrance West has rushed for a touchdown in two of the past three games against Pittsburgh. The Ravens are one of two teams (Washington is the other) with three players (West, Allen and Alex Collins) with 100-plus rushing rush yards. LB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/CJ-Mosley/" type="external">C.J. Mosley</a> recorded eight tackles last week. He had an interception and tackle for loss last time the two teams met. LB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Terrell_Suggs/" type="external">Terrell Suggs</a> has 8.5 sacks, three forced fumbles and an interception in 12 career home meetings against Pittsburgh. He 117.5 career sacks are the most in franchise history.</p>
<p>PREDICTION: The Ravens traveled across the Atlantic Ocean and were embarrassed by Blake Bortles and the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jacksonville-Jaguars/" type="external">Jacksonville Jaguars</a> in London while the Steelers were gashed by the Bears. Twelve of the past 18 matchups between Baltimore and Pittsburgh have been decided by three points or fewer. This one could also come down to the final possession. Playing in front of the home crowd should be a little more comforting for Joe Flacco.</p>
<p>OUR PICK: Ravens, 23-20</p>
<p>–Dennis Rudner</p> | false | 1 | pittsburgh steelers 21 baltimore ravens 21 game snapshot kickoff sunday 1 pm et mampt bank stadium tv cbs ian eagle dan fouts evan washburn field reporter series history 43rd regularseason meeting steelers lead series 2220 steelers snapped fourgame losing streak ravens 3127 victory christmas day last year win clinched afc north ravens 129 alltime games played baltimore past four mampt bank stadium last time steelers 2012 keys game steelers simple get running game back track steelers 27th nfl rushing leveon bell highestpaid running back league yet rush 100 yards game coach mike tomlin doesnt seem concerned said falling behind bears prevented steelers running traditionally ravens strong run although allowed 166 jaguars last week 447 loss london bell gets going look qb ben roethlisberger bounce back subpar game bears 22 39 235 yards passing missed several open receivers throughout game easy identify ravens must want beat afc north rival kick offense gear coming game ravens deadlast nfl total offense 263 yards per game tied 23rd scoring 17 points per game ravens qb joe flacco trying recover worst game career completed 8 18 pass attempts careerworst 28 yards two interceptions jaguars flacco finished quarterback rating 120 ravens secondary better quickly forget last weeks debacle jaguars qb blake bortles torched four touchdown passes getting 10 turnovers eight sacks first two games ravens blanked categories jaguars unit suffered another blow wednesday defensive end brent urban placed ir lost season 16th baltimore player suffer fate matchups watch steelers tight ends vs ravens linebackers jaguars tight end marcedes lewis caught three touchdown passes ravens last week steelers try take advantage ravens linebackers trio tight ends jesse james caught two touchdowns opener browns vance mcdonald xavier grimble better stretching field winning matchups linebackers ravens wr mike wallace vs steelers cb artie burns wallace one fastest receivers nfl test secondyear corner last years meeting baltimore wallace beat burns 95yard touchdown ravens 2114 win burns wins matchup sunday steelers big advantage ravens arent blessed talented receivers wallace friday injury report pittsburgh steelers questionable sean davis ankle g ramon foster thumb marcus gilbert hamstring lb james harrison illness michael mitchell hamstring baltimore ravens cb jaylen hill thigh dt brandon williams foot te maxx williams ankle questionable te benjamin watson calf player spotlight pittsburgh de cameron heyward ravens allpro guard marshall yanda season heyward going opportunity damage retooled ravens line heyward great game vikings hell looking rebound teamwide poor effort bears fast facts qb ben roethlisberger 13 touchdown passes six interceptions 916 quarterback rating past seven meetings ravens rb leveon bell 98 yards scrimmage yards ran touchdown last week averages 1081 yards per game five touchdowns seven games ravens wr antonio brown 10 catches 110 yards touchdown last week leads nfl 26 catches 354 receiving yards lb ryan shazier 11 tackles two forced fumbles fumble recovery last weeks overtime loss chicago three straight games nineplus tackles ravens qb joe flacco 10 touchdown passes four interceptions past eight games steelers alltime baltimore leader 2957 completions 33005 passing yards 185 passing touchdowns rb terrance west rushed touchdown two past three games pittsburgh ravens one two teams washington three players west allen alex collins 100plus rushing rush yards lb cj mosley recorded eight tackles last week interception tackle loss last time two teams met lb terrell suggs 85 sacks three forced fumbles interception 12 career home meetings pittsburgh 1175 career sacks franchise history prediction ravens traveled across atlantic ocean embarrassed blake bortles jacksonville jaguars london steelers gashed bears twelve past 18 matchups baltimore pittsburgh decided three points fewer one could also come final possession playing front home crowd little comforting joe flacco pick ravens 2320 dennis rudner | 603 |
<p>SPOILER ALERT: Do not keep reading if you have not seen Season 8, Episode 7 of “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/the-walking-dead/" type="external">The Walking Dead</a>,” titled “Time for After”</p>
<p>“ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/walking-dead-ratings-season8-episode-5-1202620811/" type="external">The Walking Dead</a>” is preparing to wind up the first half of Season 8, with this week’s episode focusing mostly on the Saviors, Eugene (Josh McDermitt) in particular. While his story in this episode is on point for the most part, it also features laughably bad sequences with Rick (Andrew Lincoln) and the Scavengers.</p>
<p>The episode begins with Rick right where we left him: tied up in a storage container as a prisoner of the Scavengers. Jadis (Pollyanna McIntosh) has it opened so she can take photos and have one of her people sketch him, because why not? Rick again says they can make a deal if she is willing to break her agreement with the Saviors. She refuses, instead telling Rick that she will sculpt him “after.” After what? Oh, just wait.</p>
<p>At the Sanctuary, Eugene confronts Dwight (Austin Amelio) about his role in assisting Rick and his allies. Eugene says he will keep the news to himself if Dwight agrees to cease helping the outsiders immediately. Dwight grabs Eugene by the front of his shirt and tells him that the Sanctuary is finished, as is Negan (Jeffrey Dean Morgan). He tells Eugene that all he has to do is continue to do nothing in order to stay safe. Eugene says he will refrain from revealing Dwight’s treachery so long as he does nothing to harm the people inside the Sanctuary.</p>
<p>Wandering the halls later on, Eugene is asked by Dr. Carson (R. Keith Harris) to stand watch over Gabriel (Seth Gilliam), who is still suffering from a debilitating ailment brought on by covering himself in zombie guts during his escape with Negan. Gabriel wakes up after Carson leaves and asks for Eugene’s help in getting Carson out of the Sanctuary in order to help Maggie and to do the right thing. Eugene says he has never been clear on an exact definition of what the right thing truly is, and that questioning that notion has been what’s kept him alive.</p>
<p>Back in his room, Eugene encounters one of Negan’s wives, Tanya (Chloe Aktas). She has come to collect on a bargain in which Eugene agreed to fix her boombox in return for a bottle of wine. Eugene tells her it is not fixed but asks for the wine anyway. He confesses that he has begun consuming alcohol on a regular basis to cope with his current situation. Tanya reminds Eugene that he had the chance to kill Negan but he chose to protect himself instead before handing over the bottle.</p>
<p>Outside the Sanctuary, Daryl (Norman Reedus) arrives behind the wheel of the garbage truck we saw him driving in the end of the last episode along with Michonne (Danai Gurira), Rosita (Christian Serratos), and Tara (Alanna Masterson). Daryl plans to ram the truck into the Sanctuary entrance, allowing the walkers inside. Morgan (Lennie James), who has been covering the Sanctuary with a team of snipers, says he will help. Rosita says she can’t take part, but Michonne says she has to see this through.</p>
<p>Negan summons Eugene and tells him he needs to come up with a plan to fix things quickly. He butters Eugene up, telling him his intelligence is a great strength. Negan then offers Eugene his hand, which Eugene goes to kiss like a subject showing obedience to a king. Negan stops him and says he was offering Eugene a handshake, something he does with very few people within the Sanctuary.</p>
<p>Eugene returns to his room and starts tinkering with the boombox. As he examines one of the speakers, he has an epiphany. He starts scouring the storeroom of the Sanctuary and finds the coffin that was used to transport Sasha. Inside, he finds the iPod she was given before going inside. He goes to the Sanctuary roof, where he has rigged the iPod and the speaker to a makeshift glider. He will use the noise it creates to lure the walkers away.</p>
<p>Daryl and Michonne prepare to drive the truck into the Sanctuary. But Michonne has a change of heart, saying that the plan has been working so far and this move is not worth the risk. Daryl says it is worth the risk for him, telling her she should get out of the truck.</p>
<p>Before he can launch, Dwight appears behind him with a gun. He says he will kill Eugene, but Eugene states that if Dwight doesn’t kill him, Negan certainly will for failing to free the Sanctuary. He then powers up the glider and sends it out over the walkers. Dwight, in a rage, shoots it down. As he does so, Daryl comes barrelling toward the Sanctuary in the truck, which he successfully smashes into the doors, allowing the walkers to flood inside.</p>
<p>Eugene rushes downstairs to see the Saviors trying to fight off the hoard of walkers. As he witnesses the carnage, he goes back to Gabriel, saying that he will never put himself at risk for anyone other than himself. He then goes to Negan and says he has a way to get rid of the walkers. He also tells Negan he has something even more pressing to share, but before he can say what it is, Dwight and the other Savior lieutenants arrive. Rather than expose Dwight, Eugene covers for him instead. In his room, he throws down some wine, which he promptly vomits right back up out of fear and stress.</p>
<p>Back at the junkyard, Jadis tells Rick that his time has come. They bring out the spiked walker and prepare to let it feast on Rick. But Rick manages to get free and fights off Jadis’ men. He grabs the pole being used to direct the walker and pulls the walker’s head clean off. He then grabs Jadis and puts her face to face with it, but does not kill her. When her people arrive armed to the teeth, Jadis tells them to stand down. She then agrees to fight alongside him yet again</p>
<p>Why, oh why, would they not simply shoot Rick or subdue him the second Jadis was free? The Scavengers have shown no loyalty to anyone so the move ultimately makes no sense.</p>
<p>The episode ends with Rick taking the Scavengers to the Sanctuary, where he sees the aftermath of Daryl’s actions.</p> | false | 1 | spoiler alert keep reading seen season 8 episode 7 walking dead titled time walking dead preparing wind first half season 8 weeks episode focusing mostly saviors eugene josh mcdermitt particular story episode point part also features laughably bad sequences rick andrew lincoln scavengers episode begins rick right left tied storage container prisoner scavengers jadis pollyanna mcintosh opened take photos one people sketch rick says make deal willing break agreement saviors refuses instead telling rick sculpt oh wait sanctuary eugene confronts dwight austin amelio role assisting rick allies eugene says keep news dwight agrees cease helping outsiders immediately dwight grabs eugene front shirt tells sanctuary finished negan jeffrey dean morgan tells eugene continue nothing order stay safe eugene says refrain revealing dwights treachery long nothing harm people inside sanctuary wandering halls later eugene asked dr carson r keith harris stand watch gabriel seth gilliam still suffering debilitating ailment brought covering zombie guts escape negan gabriel wakes carson leaves asks eugenes help getting carson sanctuary order help maggie right thing eugene says never clear exact definition right thing truly questioning notion whats kept alive back room eugene encounters one negans wives tanya chloe aktas come collect bargain eugene agreed fix boombox return bottle wine eugene tells fixed asks wine anyway confesses begun consuming alcohol regular basis cope current situation tanya reminds eugene chance kill negan chose protect instead handing bottle outside sanctuary daryl norman reedus arrives behind wheel garbage truck saw driving end last episode along michonne danai gurira rosita christian serratos tara alanna masterson daryl plans ram truck sanctuary entrance allowing walkers inside morgan lennie james covering sanctuary team snipers says help rosita says cant take part michonne says see negan summons eugene tells needs come plan fix things quickly butters eugene telling intelligence great strength negan offers eugene hand eugene goes kiss like subject showing obedience king negan stops says offering eugene handshake something people within sanctuary eugene returns room starts tinkering boombox examines one speakers epiphany starts scouring storeroom sanctuary finds coffin used transport sasha inside finds ipod given going inside goes sanctuary roof rigged ipod speaker makeshift glider use noise creates lure walkers away daryl michonne prepare drive truck sanctuary michonne change heart saying plan working far move worth risk daryl says worth risk telling get truck launch dwight appears behind gun says kill eugene eugene states dwight doesnt kill negan certainly failing free sanctuary powers glider sends walkers dwight rage shoots daryl comes barrelling toward sanctuary truck successfully smashes doors allowing walkers flood inside eugene rushes downstairs see saviors trying fight hoard walkers witnesses carnage goes back gabriel saying never put risk anyone goes negan says way get rid walkers also tells negan something even pressing share say dwight savior lieutenants arrive rather expose dwight eugene covers instead room throws wine promptly vomits right back fear stress back junkyard jadis tells rick time come bring spiked walker prepare let feast rick rick manages get free fights jadis men grabs pole used direct walker pulls walkers head clean grabs jadis puts face face kill people arrive armed teeth jadis tells stand agrees fight alongside yet oh would simply shoot rick subdue second jadis free scavengers shown loyalty anyone move ultimately makes sense episode ends rick taking scavengers sanctuary sees aftermath daryls actions | 544 |
<p><a href="" type="internal">At least 59 people were killed</a> and over 500 were injured after a gunman perched on the 32nd floor of a Las Vegas hotel-casino opened fire on Sunday night at the Route 91 music festival.</p>
<p>It was the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.</p>
<p>Officials are still working to identify the victims and notify their families. We will update this list as names are released.</p>
<p>Remembering the victims:</p>
<p>AUSTIN DAVIS</p>
<p>JENNIFER TOPAZ</p>
<p>CHRISTOPHER ROYBAL, 28</p>
<p>Roybal was a southern California native who had recently returned from Afghanistan. He was at the concert with his mother.</p>
<p>HANNAH AHLERS, 34</p>
<p>She leaves behind her husband and three children.</p>
<p>STACEE ETCHEBER, 50</p>
<p>Etcheber leaves behind two children aged 10 and 13.</p>
<p />
<p>JOHN PHIPPEN</p>
<p>Friends of Phippen created <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/for-the-children-of-john-phippen" type="external">a Go Fund Me page for his his five children.</a></p>
<p>"John has five children and one grandson of which he absolutely adored. His youngest daughter is only 14 and who lost her Mom only 3 short years ago. It is a tragedy to lose your father and mother both at such a young age," they wrote. "This is a man who loved his family and his friends as if they were family. It is unfortunate to say he left a lot behind."</p>
<p>ADRIAN MURFITT, 35</p>
<p>He was a commercial fisherman from Anchorage, Alaska.</p>
<p>His sister, Shannon Gothard, said the family heard from one of Murfitt's friends who was with him when hedied, though they haven't received official confirmation about his death. Asked if the family was holding out hope that he made it after all, she said, "No. No."</p>
<p>Gothard described her brother as a man with a hearty laugh, a former competitive hockey player who still dabbled in the game.</p>
<p>"His whole life was always around hockey," she said.</p>
<p>After graduating from high school, he became a fisherman, picking up odd jobs in the offseason.He had just come off an extremely successful fishing season when he made the trip to Las Vegas with some good friends, Gothard said.</p>
<p>Her brother "was happy to pay some things off and had made some really good money and decided to go out and celebrate and go to the concert and treat himself to something nice and fun," she said.</p>
<p>BAILEY SCHWEITZER, 20</p>
<p>Her father, Bakersfield Speedway owner Scott Schweitzer, <a href="http://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/bakersfield-woman-killed-in-vegas-mass-shooting" type="external">confirmed her death to Eyewitness News.</a></p>
<p>DENISE SALMON BURDITUS</p>
<p><a href="http://wjla.com/news/local/woman-from-west-virginia-among-las-vegas-massacre-victims" type="external">Denise Salmon Burditus</a>had attended the Route 91 Harvest Festival for the past three years. The West Virginia native was attending the festival with her husband, Tony. About a half hour before the shooting began, the couple snapped a photo together.</p>
<p><a href="http://wvmetronews.com/2017/10/02/west-virginian-is-among-first-las-vegas-shooting-victims-to-be-identified/" type="external">According to reports</a>, she died in her husband’s arms.</p>
<p>ANGIE GOMEZ</p>
<p>California’s Riverside Polytechnic High School <a href="https://www.facebook.com/RiversidePolyPTSA/photos/a.415559915219462.1073741828.397006753741445/1356357477806363/?type=3&amp;theater" type="external">wrote a post on Facebook</a> identifying Gomez as one of the victims. She graduated in 2015.</p>
<p>RACHEL PARKER, 33</p>
<p>Rachael Parker, a police records technician, was shot and ultimately died in the hospital, the Manhattan Beach Police Department said.</p>
<p>The Manhattan Beach Police Department <a href="http://www.nixle.us/9M6A7" type="external">released a statement identifying officer Rachel Parker</a> as one of the victims killed. She was off duty and attending the concert with another officer who was also shot but received minor injures.</p>
<p>NEYSA TONKS</p>
<p>Neysa Tonks was a mother of three from Salt Lake City, Utah.</p>
<p>SONNY MELTON, 29</p>
<p><a href="http://wjla.com/news/nation-world/tennessee-man-killed-in-country-music-festival-concert-in-las-vegas" type="external">Sonny Melton</a>, of Big Sandy, Tennessee, was one of at least 58 people killed when a gunman opened fire Sunday night on the crowd of 22,000.</p>
<p>Melton's wife, Heather Gulish Melton, said she is in complete disbelief.</p>
<p>"At this point, I'm in complete disbelief and despair. I don't know what to say. Sonny was the most kind-hearted, loving man I have ever met. He saved my life and lost his," Heather said in a statement to Fox 17 News.</p>
<p>A coworker said the Meltons were in Las Vegas celebrating their first wedding anniversary.</p>
<p>Melton worked as a nurse at Henry County Medical Center, where his wife also works as an Orthopedic Surgeon. Community members also tell Fox 17 that Heather is the team physician for the Henry County High School football team.</p>
<p>SANDY CASEY, 35</p>
<p>Sandy Casey, a middle school special education teacher from Manhattan Beach, California, was killed in Sunday night's attack, the school district said.</p>
<p>JENNY PARKS</p>
<p>Jenny Parks was a mother of two and a kindergarten teacher for the Lancaster School District in California. She was at the concert with her husband, Bobby Parks who was injured in the shooting. One of his co-workers created <a href="" type="external">a Go Fund Me page to raise money for the family.</a></p>
<p>JESSICA KLYMCHUK, 28</p>
<p>Klymchuk was a mother of four and teachers assistant from Alberta, Canada. A post on Klymchuk's Facebook page says she got engaged in April, and was in Vegas with her fiance. <a href="https://www.youcaring.com/paulineklymchuk-968914" type="external">According to a donation page</a> set up by her friends, she "passed away with her fiance Brent Irla by her side."</p>
<p>JORDAN MCLLDOON, 23</p>
<p>Mclldoon was just days away from his 24th birthday. British Columbia Premier John Horgan said in a statement Tuesday Jordan Mclldoon, a 23-year-old mechanic's apprentice from Maple, Ridge, British Columbia was among those killed.</p>
<p>"We only had one child," Al and Angela McIldoon, <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/2-canadians-among-59-killed-in-las-vegas-mass-shooting-1.4316485" type="external">told the CBC.</a>"We just don't know what to do."</p>
<p>Heather Gooze stayed by McIldoon's side for more than five hours after he succumbed to his gunshot wounds, even though she'd never met him. "I couldn't just leave him by himself," <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-monday-edition-1.4316671/i-just-couldn-t-leave-him-says-vegas-bartender-who-held-canadian-s-hand-as-he-died-1.4316986" type="external">Gooze told the CBC.</a> "I don't know, I just couldn't leave him."</p>
<p>SUSAN SMITH, 53</p>
<p>(Courtesy of the Simi Valley Unified School District)</p>
<p>Susan Smith was married with two adult children. She was a resident of Simi Valley, California, near Los Angeles and had worked for the local school district since 2001 as the office manager at Vista Elementary School.</p>
<p>"Susan was wonderful with the kids and the staff and was an integral part of the school community here," said Jake Finch, the public information officer for the district. "She was the hub of everything that happened at the school. If a kid is sick, she's the one calling the parents and no matter how chaotic things got here, she was always smiling."</p>
<p>LISA ROMERO, 48</p>
<p>Lisa Romero, a high school secretary from Gallup, New Mexico, was an "incredible loving and sincere friend, mentor and advocate for students," the Gallup-McKinley County Public Schools interim superintendent said Monday.</p>
<p>"Last night during the mass shooting in Las Vegas we lost one of our staff members," interim superintendent Mike Hyatt wrote to employees. "Lisa Romero, discipline secretary at Miyamura (High School), was a victim in the shooting. Our prayers go out to her family during this tragic time."</p>
<p>Survivors included Romero-Muniz's husband, children and grandchildren, Hyatt said.</p>
<p>JACK BEATON</p>
<p><a href="http://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/family-confirms-bakersfield-man-killed-in-vegas-mass-shooting" type="external">Jack Beaton</a>'s death was confirmed directly to KBAK/KBFX by his mother-in-law.</p>
<p>CHARLESTON HARTFIELD, 34</p>
<p /> | false | 1 | least 59 people killed 500 injured gunman perched 32nd floor las vegas hotelcasino opened fire sunday night route 91 music festival deadliest mass shooting modern us history officials still working identify victims notify families update list names released remembering victims austin davis jennifer topaz christopher roybal 28 roybal southern california native recently returned afghanistan concert mother hannah ahlers 34 leaves behind husband three children stacee etcheber 50 etcheber leaves behind two children aged 10 13 john phippen friends phippen created go fund page five children john five children one grandson absolutely adored youngest daughter 14 lost mom 3 short years ago tragedy lose father mother young age wrote man loved family friends family unfortunate say left lot behind adrian murfitt 35 commercial fisherman anchorage alaska sister shannon gothard said family heard one murfitts friends hedied though havent received official confirmation death asked family holding hope made said gothard described brother man hearty laugh former competitive hockey player still dabbled game whole life always around hockey said graduating high school became fisherman picking odd jobs offseasonhe come extremely successful fishing season made trip las vegas good friends gothard said brother happy pay things made really good money decided go celebrate go concert treat something nice fun said bailey schweitzer 20 father bakersfield speedway owner scott schweitzer confirmed death eyewitness news denise salmon burditus denise salmon burditushad attended route 91 harvest festival past three years west virginia native attending festival husband tony half hour shooting began couple snapped photo together according reports died husbands arms angie gomez californias riverside polytechnic high school wrote post facebook identifying gomez one victims graduated 2015 rachel parker 33 rachael parker police records technician shot ultimately died hospital manhattan beach police department said manhattan beach police department released statement identifying officer rachel parker one victims killed duty attending concert another officer also shot received minor injures neysa tonks neysa tonks mother three salt lake city utah sonny melton 29 sonny melton big sandy tennessee one least 58 people killed gunman opened fire sunday night crowd 22000 meltons wife heather gulish melton said complete disbelief point im complete disbelief despair dont know say sonny kindhearted loving man ever met saved life lost heather said statement fox 17 news coworker said meltons las vegas celebrating first wedding anniversary melton worked nurse henry county medical center wife also works orthopedic surgeon community members also tell fox 17 heather team physician henry county high school football team sandy casey 35 sandy casey middle school special education teacher manhattan beach california killed sunday nights attack school district said jenny parks jenny parks mother two kindergarten teacher lancaster school district california concert husband bobby parks injured shooting one coworkers created go fund page raise money family jessica klymchuk 28 klymchuk mother four teachers assistant alberta canada post klymchuks facebook page says got engaged april vegas fiance according donation page set friends passed away fiance brent irla side jordan mclldoon 23 mclldoon days away 24th birthday british columbia premier john horgan said statement tuesday jordan mclldoon 23yearold mechanics apprentice maple ridge british columbia among killed one child al angela mcildoon told cbcwe dont know heather gooze stayed mcildoons side five hours succumbed gunshot wounds even though shed never met couldnt leave gooze told cbc dont know couldnt leave susan smith 53 courtesy simi valley unified school district susan smith married two adult children resident simi valley california near los angeles worked local school district since 2001 office manager vista elementary school susan wonderful kids staff integral part school community said jake finch public information officer district hub everything happened school kid sick shes one calling parents matter chaotic things got always smiling lisa romero 48 lisa romero high school secretary gallup new mexico incredible loving sincere friend mentor advocate students gallupmckinley county public schools interim superintendent said monday last night mass shooting las vegas lost one staff members interim superintendent mike hyatt wrote employees lisa romero discipline secretary miyamura high school victim shooting prayers go family tragic time survivors included romeromunizs husband children grandchildren hyatt said jack beaton jack beatons death confirmed directly kbakkbfx motherinlaw charleston hartfield 34 | 684 |
<p>When veteran U.K. music executive Max Lousada officially took over as Warner Music Group’s CEO of recorded music in October, it meant that the direction of all three major U.S. music groups was now in the hands of Brits. While Lousada reports to WMG CEO Stephen Cooper, an American, the British exec is more involved with the creative guidance of the company, as are fellow Englishmen <a href="http://variety.com/t/lucian-grainge/" type="external">Lucian Grainge</a> and <a href="http://variety.com/t/rob-stringer/" type="external">Rob Stringer</a>, chairman and CEO at <a href="http://variety.com/t/universal-music-group/" type="external">Universal Music Group</a> and CEO of <a href="http://variety.com/t/sony-music/" type="external">Sony Music</a>, respectively. &#160;The milestone marked a culmination of sorts for the British Invasion of 1964, which saw the Beatles jump-start the U.S. record business, helping it become a $14 billion-a-year behemoth by the turn of the century. And while this year British musical exports have been overshadowed on the pop charts by those of Sweden, Latin America and Canada, the global success of acts like Ed Sheeran and perennial platinum-plus songstress Adele are reminders of how potent the U.K. talent pool can be.</p>
<p>Arguably, the country’s executives have fared even better: Grainge and Capitol Music Group chief <a href="http://variety.com/t/steve-barnett/" type="external">Steve Barnett</a> named fellow Brit Ashley Newton as group president early last year; RCA chairman and CEO <a href="http://variety.com/t/peter-edge/" type="external">Peter Edge</a> and Island Records president David Massey rose through the ranks, both in the States and in Britain, within the past decade. They join other U.K. music execs who succeeded in the States, such as Chris Blackwell (founder of Island Records), Richard Branson (Virgin), Chris Wright and Terry Ellis (Chrysalis), Martin Mills (Beggars Group) and <a href="http://variety.com/t/simon-cowell/" type="external">Simon Cowell</a> (Syco Records).</p>
<p>So what’s the secret? Edge points to Britain’s global gaze. “Pop music has always been part of the national discussion in the U.K., and England has always been a country that looked out on what was going on in the rest of the world,” he says.</p>
<p>Edge, pictured below with A$AP Ferg, relocated to the States in 1993 after running his own Chrysalis-affiliated Cooltempo label (which released such hiphop originals as Doug E. Fresh, EPMD and Eric B. &amp; Rakim in Britain). Stints at Warner Bros., Arista and Clive Davis’ J Records — where he signed the likes of Alicia Keys, Dido and Angie Stone — led to his current post at RCA, home to rising stars Khalid and SZA, who earned a combined nine nominations for the 2018 Grammys.</p>
<p>Edge’s experience working with U.S. hip-hop artists in the mid-’80s, a genre the major labels left wide-open for indies like his Cooltempo imprint, was one reason he was able to transition so seamlessly.&#160;“That was the music I championed,” he says. “Coming to America was a natural progression for me. …&#160;England has always been a country that looked out on what was going on in the rest of the world. The U.K. looked to American R&amp;B and soul music and made a version of it that metamorphosed into British rock.”</p>
<p />
<p>CREDIT: DeC/Invision/AP/REX/Shutterstock</p>
<p>Of course, it’s not only the U.K. which has taken advantage of the music business’ digital-inspired globalization.&#160; As one industry wag put it, “Isn’t the business being run by a Ukrainian, a Frenchman, a Japanese and a Swede?” referring to WMG’s Len Blavatnik, Vivendi’s CEO Arnaud de Puyfontaine, Sony’s Kaz Hirai and Spotify’s Daniel Ek.</p>
<p>Could it be the Brits’ ability to control budgets in an age of diminishing returns that has landed them in crucial executive roles? History is littered with instances of the Japanese tiring of the spendthrift ways of Walter Yetnikoff and Tommy Mottola, or BMG attempting to ease Clive Davis into an early retirement.</p>
<p>RCA’s Edge insists that’s no more than a stereotype, while Big Deal’s Kenny MacPherson points to the disaster of Guy Hands’ failed, go-for-broke Terra Firma takeover at EMI for exceptions to the rule. “There’s a sense that the American record executive is more willing to gamble, to ‘go for it,’” agrees Edge. “But it’s hard to generalize. I’ve known some British executives that spend like crazy – no names — and some American executives who have been frugal.&#160; Anyway, this is more than ever, a talent discovery business.”</p>
<p>So what is the throughline to the U.K. takeover of the American E-suite? With Grainge, Stringer and Edge all between the ages of 54 and 57, was there a band or a concert or a TV show they all saw that inspired them to go for a career in the music business? Ask this question, and you get different answers. Stringer credits his exposure to music to his hometown,&#160;Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire, an hour west of London. The town housed a rock club where many of the top British acts played regularly in the 1970s and 1980s, including The Clash, David Bowie, Genesis and The Police. The 1,200-capacity room, which was named Friars, Vale Hall, Maxwell Hall and the Civic at different stages of its existence, was a regular haunt for the future executive and where he experienced life-changing shows in his formative years.</p>
<p>Starting at the age of 16, Stringer (pictured below with Mark Ronson) worked at the venue, run by local Dave Stopps, during holiday. “Aylesbury was a market town of 30,000 people but we had a rock club that everyone played, Stringer has said. “Dave Stopps inspired a whole generation from the town.”</p>
<p />
<p>CREDIT: Richard Young/REX/Shutterstock</p>
<p>Others point to the Sex Pistols’ first TV appearance in 1976 on Granada Television’s “So It Goes” program,&#160;hosted by&#160; Tony Wilson, who would go on to found Factory Records and the Hacienda nightclub in Manchester. But most would agree that the biggest influence country-wide was radio — specifically the BBC, where programs weren’t restricted to specific formats and offered free-form playlists opening listeners to a wide swath of genres.</p>
<p>With the British today occupying the top creative slots at the three major U.S. music groups, it’s reminiscent of the original settlers landing at Plymouth Rock and holding forth.&#160;“The shock waves from Great Britain in the ‘60s are still being felt today in the record industry,” insists The Zombies’ Argent, but for Kenny MacPherson, that’s all in the rear-view mirror.</p>
<p>“I’ve now lived in America longer than I did in Britain, so my allegiances are split down the middle” he says, though he still speaks with that distinctive sing-song Scottish burr. “I’m always happy to see people do well from the country I came from, but I’ve been an American-phile for a while now. This country has been great to me and for me.&#160; I became an American citizen with pride. I love the U.S.A., warts and all.”</p>
<p>San Francisco-born Piero Giramonti, who spent time working for EMI Records in both London and Italy and is now co-GM for Harvest Records and Caroline Records Distribution, says the U.K. has always “punched above its weight” when it comes to the global music marketplace, and that technology may be leveling the playing field for execs making the trip across the Pond.</p>
<p>“Perhaps the problem was, coming to America in the past, you had to work for a while to develop relationships because this country is so vast,” he says. “In the digital era, the business has become much more seamlessly global. To a certain degree, those parochial, geographical barriers have been lifted.”</p>
<p>Back when the Zombies’ Rod Argent first heard Elvis Presley singing “Hound Dog” in the mid-’50s, the idea of Brits succeeding as musicians in America was a pipe dream. By the late 1960s, though, the Zombies could point to a string of hits in the U.S., particularly “She’s Not There.” “I always thought of American music — everything from Duke Ellington and Miles Davis to Ray Charles and Chuck Berry — as the real thing, while we were the imitators,” Argent says, noting that it wasn’t until the Beatles that British rock carved out its own niche. “By taking the music through that English filter, the Beatles proved to have an honest, intuitive, homespun take on American music.”</p>
<p>Taking that kind of success to another level, Zombies guitarist Paul Atkinson, who died in 2004, became a successful U.S. A&amp;R executive, signings acts like Mr. Mister and Bruce Hornsby (after he’d signed Abba to a music publishing deal when he worked for Dick James Music in London). “He was incredibly thorough,” says Argent of Atkinson. “He’d listen to every single demo he received.”</p>
<p>That may be another key to U.K. record executives’ success in the U.S. Opines British talent manager and veteran publicist Versa Manos, “It’s the work ethic.”</p>
<p>That’s certainly true of Martin Mills, whose Beggars Group empire includes the labels XL (Adele, Radiohead, Sampha), 4AD (The National, Bon Iver), Matador (Queens of the Stone Age, Spoon) and Rough Trade.</p>
<p>Yet Mills has chosen to keep his base in Britain even as his stateside operation has grown. “It matters less what country a CEO is employed in, or what nationality they are, than that they have a grasp of multi-territory overview and detail, and that they pay attention to and at least spend time in key markets,” he says. “The U.K. has always lived on its exports — it’s too small a market to exist on its own — hence the need to be outward looking. The U.S., on the other hand, has been large enough to exist on its own, hence a lesser historical imperative for global knowledge and experience, which has now become essential.”</p> | false | 1 | veteran uk music executive max lousada officially took warner music groups ceo recorded music october meant direction three major us music groups hands brits lousada reports wmg ceo stephen cooper american british exec involved creative guidance company fellow englishmen lucian grainge rob stringer chairman ceo universal music group ceo sony music respectively 160the milestone marked culmination sorts british invasion 1964 saw beatles jumpstart us record business helping become 14 billionayear behemoth turn century year british musical exports overshadowed pop charts sweden latin america canada global success acts like ed sheeran perennial platinumplus songstress adele reminders potent uk talent pool arguably countrys executives fared even better grainge capitol music group chief steve barnett named fellow brit ashley newton group president early last year rca chairman ceo peter edge island records president david massey rose ranks states britain within past decade join uk music execs succeeded states chris blackwell founder island records richard branson virgin chris wright terry ellis chrysalis martin mills beggars group simon cowell syco records whats secret edge points britains global gaze pop music always part national discussion uk england always country looked going rest world says edge pictured aap ferg relocated states 1993 running chrysalisaffiliated cooltempo label released hiphop originals doug e fresh epmd eric b amp rakim britain stints warner bros arista clive davis j records signed likes alicia keys dido angie stone led current post rca home rising stars khalid sza earned combined nine nominations 2018 grammys edges experience working us hiphop artists mid80s genre major labels left wideopen indies like cooltempo imprint one reason able transition seamlessly160that music championed says coming america natural progression 160england always country looked going rest world uk looked american rampb soul music made version metamorphosed british rock credit decinvisionaprexshutterstock course uk taken advantage music business digitalinspired globalization160 one industry wag put isnt business run ukrainian frenchman japanese swede referring wmgs len blavatnik vivendis ceo arnaud de puyfontaine sonys kaz hirai spotifys daniel ek could brits ability control budgets age diminishing returns landed crucial executive roles history littered instances japanese tiring spendthrift ways walter yetnikoff tommy mottola bmg attempting ease clive davis early retirement rcas edge insists thats stereotype big deals kenny macpherson points disaster guy hands failed goforbroke terra firma takeover emi exceptions rule theres sense american record executive willing gamble go agrees edge hard generalize ive known british executives spend like crazy names american executives frugal160 anyway ever talent discovery business throughline uk takeover american esuite grainge stringer edge ages 54 57 band concert tv show saw inspired go career music business ask question get different answers stringer credits exposure music hometown160aylesbury buckinghamshire hour west london town housed rock club many top british acts played regularly 1970s 1980s including clash david bowie genesis police 1200capacity room named friars vale hall maxwell hall civic different stages existence regular haunt future executive experienced lifechanging shows formative years starting age 16 stringer pictured mark ronson worked venue run local dave stopps holiday aylesbury market town 30000 people rock club everyone played stringer said dave stopps inspired whole generation town credit richard youngrexshutterstock others point sex pistols first tv appearance 1976 granada televisions goes program160hosted by160 tony wilson would go found factory records hacienda nightclub manchester would agree biggest influence countrywide radio specifically bbc programs werent restricted specific formats offered freeform playlists opening listeners wide swath genres british today occupying top creative slots three major us music groups reminiscent original settlers landing plymouth rock holding forth160the shock waves great britain 60s still felt today record industry insists zombies argent kenny macpherson thats rearview mirror ive lived america longer britain allegiances split middle says though still speaks distinctive singsong scottish burr im always happy see people well country came ive americanphile country great me160 became american citizen pride love usa warts san franciscoborn piero giramonti spent time working emi records london italy cogm harvest records caroline records distribution says uk always punched weight comes global music marketplace technology may leveling playing field execs making trip across pond perhaps problem coming america past work develop relationships country vast says digital era business become much seamlessly global certain degree parochial geographical barriers lifted back zombies rod argent first heard elvis presley singing hound dog mid50s idea brits succeeding musicians america pipe dream late 1960s though zombies could point string hits us particularly shes always thought american music everything duke ellington miles davis ray charles chuck berry real thing imitators argent says noting wasnt beatles british rock carved niche taking music english filter beatles proved honest intuitive homespun take american music taking kind success another level zombies guitarist paul atkinson died 2004 became successful us aampr executive signings acts like mr mister bruce hornsby hed signed abba music publishing deal worked dick james music london incredibly thorough says argent atkinson hed listen every single demo received may another key uk record executives success us opines british talent manager veteran publicist versa manos work ethic thats certainly true martin mills whose beggars group empire includes labels xl adele radiohead sampha 4ad national bon iver matador queens stone age spoon rough trade yet mills chosen keep base britain even stateside operation grown matters less country ceo employed nationality grasp multiterritory overview detail pay attention least spend time key markets says uk always lived exports small market exist hence need outward looking us hand large enough exist hence lesser historical imperative global knowledge experience become essential | 896 |
<p />
<p>As the world reacts to President Obama’s announcement of a multi-front air and ground proxy war—on the one hand, bombing ISIS inside Iraq and Syria, and on the other, ramping up arms and training for the vaguely defined Syrian “opposition”—we as a nation should reflect upon the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Sisyphus" type="external">Myth of Sisyphus</a>.</p>
<p>Let’s Roll…</p>
<p>I joined the Marine Corps as an idealistic eighteen-year-old in 2000, with a firm resolve, as I enthusiastically told my recruiter shortly before leaving for boot camp, to “fight evil in the world”—a resolve rooted more deeply in my veins after the 9/11 attacks. Slogans such as “let’s roll!” echoed in my ears, and my fervor for “the mission” influenced others to follow my path of military service. While stationed in Quantico providing post-9/11 “first responder” security to headquarters assets in the area, I became close friends with a young local college student, also just out of high school, and I encouraged him to join up.</p>
<p>My friend embarked on multiple tours of duty within a short two years as a Marine infantryman, and was killed by an IED in Iraq on his third tour prior to his twenty-first birthday. He understood little about the place of his eventual death, as had been clear during our brief visits together as we reconnected between his deployments. We were never encouraged to learn about the history of Iraq or the Arab world, or to ask too many questions for that matter. “Let’s roll” was enough for us as we set out to “win hearts and minds.”</p>
<p>Uncovering Absurd Contradictions</p>
<p>As the power of such simple platitudes faded, I began to investigate for myself the history of U.S. involvement in the region: this search began in the library of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Corps_University" type="external">Marine Corps University</a> at MCB Quantico and led to my traveling to Syria upon completion of active service.</p>
<p>Few Americans know of the absurd contradictions of our foreign policy in Iraq and other places over the past few decades, yet I found that many Iraqis and Syrians knew the history well. The United States, through covert support of the Iraqi Ba’ath in the 1960’s and 1970’s, <a href="https://readthese.blogspot.com/2003_12_15_readthese_archive.html" type="external">sponsored</a> Saddam’s rise to power as a way to combat perceived communist influence and populist national movements in the Middle East. Throughout that time, the CIA-supported Ba’ath engaged in “cleansing campaigns” which involved door-to-door death squads offing Washington’s enemies based on questionable lists provided through covert liaisons.</p>
<p>Upon Saddam’s rising to the presidency in 1979, and while the Iranian Revolution drove forward just across the border, the United States encouraged Saddam to invade Iran, kick-starting the most devastating <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War" type="external">war</a> in the region’s history. Most Americans still haven’t seen the easily accessible <a href="http://www2.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/" type="external">archive footage</a> of Reagan’s then special envoy to the Middle East, Donald Rumsfeld, shaking hands with Saddam Hussein in 1983, in what was clearly a warm and cordial visit.</p>
<p>Saddam would go on, during the course of a war that took over a million lives (1980-1988), to frequently employ chemical nerve agents against Iranian troop movements; later into the war this occurred with the assistance of the CIA and DIA. By the time of the 1988 gas attack against the Kurds of Halabja, U.S. covert assistance to Iraq’s military was <a href="http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran" type="external">established and routine</a>.</p>
<p>And yet, Saddam soon became the new super-villain of the 1990’s and 2000’s, the very image of evil incarnate in the world—though his dictatorial and brutal rule had undergone no change from when he was the CIA’s man in Baghdad—only American perceptions of him did. The United States had helped to create the monster that in 2003 it was telling young men and women to travel across the world to destroy. Ironically, one of the main moral justifications for going after “the evil tyrant” was his gassing of the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/16/newsid_4304000/4304853.stm" type="external">Kurds of Halabja</a>.</p>
<p>Uncovering such an absurd contradiction of recent history made me feel like Sisyphus in Albert Camus’ famous <a href="http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/users/00/pwillen1/lit/msysip.htm" type="external">essay</a>. Sisyphus, condemned by the gods to his fate of pushing his boulder up the hill, must ever repeat the same process after it inevitably rolls back down the hill; he eventually becomes conscious of the futility of his action. We can imagine such tragic Sisyphean moments of realization in the minds of hundreds of thousands of veterans as they watched ISIS tear through places like Fallujah and Northern Iraq over the course of this past half year.</p>
<p>The Rock is Still Rolling</p>
<p>And yet, ISIS too, is a monster the United States helped to create.</p>
<p>Instead of two decades for the contradictions to come full circle, as was the case with the creation and destruction of Saddam Hussein, ISIS has gone from friend to monster within only two years. The U.S. armed forces, told by the White House of a minimal <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/08/world/middleeast/destroying-isis-may-take-3-years-white-house-says.html?_r=0" type="external">three-year long campaign</a> to destroy ISIS, have barely recovered from the now seemingly futile burden of wars in post-Saddam Iraq and forgotten, ongoing Afghanistan.</p>
<p>As if the absurdity of the task of a renewed Iraq campaign mandated by the “gods” in Washington weren’t enough, we will now bomb ISIS locations in Syria while increasing the <a href="http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/09/obama-urgently-wants-congress-to-vote-on-arming-syrian-rebels/379986/" type="external">training and equipping</a> of Syrian rebels. If there are military members and veterans out there, still not conscious that “there is no more dreadful punishment than futile and hopeless labor,” then I suggest watching the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piN_MNSis1E&amp;feature=youtu.be" type="external">above video</a>. The video gives insight into the Sisyphean task ahead of us as a nation: a never-ending cycle, old-yet-new, already set up for futility and failure.</p>
<p>Amazingly, the video, titled, “US Key Man in Syria Worked Closely with ISIL and Jabhat al Nusra,” has not yet had widespread distribution, even though it has been <a href="https://twitter.com/joshua_landis/status/504610185952784384" type="external">authenticated</a> by the top Syria expert in the U.S., Joshua Landis, of the University of Oklahoma, and author of the hugely influential <a href="http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/" type="external">Syria Comment</a>. Using his Twitter account, Dr. Landis commented (8/27): “in 2013 WINEP advocated sending all US military aid thru him [Col. Okaidi]. Underscores US problem w moderates.”</p>
<p>The video, documenting (now former) U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford’s visit to FSA <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Jabbar_al-Oqaidi" type="external">Col. Abdel Jabbar al-Okaidi</a> in Northern Syria, also shows the same Col. Okaidi celebrating with and praising a well-known ISIS commander, <a href="http://eaworldview.com/2013/08/syria-feature-which-insurgents-captured-the-menagh-airbase/" type="external">Emir Abu Jandal</a>, after conducting a joint operation. In an interview, the U.S. “key man” at that time (2013), through which U.S. assistance flowed, also praises ISIS and Al-Qaeda as the FSA’s “brothers.” The video further shows Okaidi proudly declaring that al-Nusra (Al-Qaeda in Syria) makes up ten percent the FSA.</p>
<p>I can think of no greater absurd foreign policy path to follow than to continue arming one wing of Syria’s rebels (only until very recently directly allied with the new “enemy”), while at the same time bombing another, and all the while declaring the necessity of continued “war on terror.”</p>
<p>Albert Camus concludes the myth thus, “I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain! One always finds one’s burden again.”</p> | false | 1 | world reacts president obamas announcement multifront air ground proxy waron one hand bombing isis inside iraq syria ramping arms training vaguely defined syrian oppositionwe nation reflect upon myth sisyphus lets roll joined marine corps idealistic eighteenyearold 2000 firm resolve enthusiastically told recruiter shortly leaving boot camp fight evil worlda resolve rooted deeply veins 911 attacks slogans lets roll echoed ears fervor mission influenced others follow path military service stationed quantico providing post911 first responder security headquarters assets area became close friends young local college student also high school encouraged join friend embarked multiple tours duty within short two years marine infantryman killed ied iraq third tour prior twentyfirst birthday understood little place eventual death clear brief visits together reconnected deployments never encouraged learn history iraq arab world ask many questions matter lets roll enough us set win hearts minds uncovering absurd contradictions power simple platitudes faded began investigate history us involvement region search began library marine corps university mcb quantico led traveling syria upon completion active service americans know absurd contradictions foreign policy iraq places past decades yet found many iraqis syrians knew history well united states covert support iraqi baath 1960s 1970s sponsored saddams rise power way combat perceived communist influence populist national movements middle east throughout time ciasupported baath engaged cleansing campaigns involved doortodoor death squads offing washingtons enemies based questionable lists provided covert liaisons upon saddams rising presidency 1979 iranian revolution drove forward across border united states encouraged saddam invade iran kickstarting devastating war regions history americans still havent seen easily accessible archive footage reagans special envoy middle east donald rumsfeld shaking hands saddam hussein 1983 clearly warm cordial visit saddam would go course war took million lives 19801988 frequently employ chemical nerve agents iranian troop movements later war occurred assistance cia dia time 1988 gas attack kurds halabja us covert assistance iraqs military established routine yet saddam soon became new supervillain 1990s 2000s image evil incarnate worldthough dictatorial brutal rule undergone change cias man baghdadonly american perceptions united states helped create monster 2003 telling young men women travel across world destroy ironically one main moral justifications going evil tyrant gassing kurds halabja uncovering absurd contradiction recent history made feel like sisyphus albert camus famous essay sisyphus condemned gods fate pushing boulder hill must ever repeat process inevitably rolls back hill eventually becomes conscious futility action imagine tragic sisyphean moments realization minds hundreds thousands veterans watched isis tear places like fallujah northern iraq course past half year rock still rolling yet isis monster united states helped create instead two decades contradictions come full circle case creation destruction saddam hussein isis gone friend monster within two years us armed forces told white house minimal threeyear long campaign destroy isis barely recovered seemingly futile burden wars postsaddam iraq forgotten ongoing afghanistan absurdity task renewed iraq campaign mandated gods washington werent enough bomb isis locations syria increasing training equipping syrian rebels military members veterans still conscious dreadful punishment futile hopeless labor suggest watching video video gives insight sisyphean task ahead us nation neverending cycle oldyetnew already set futility failure amazingly video titled us key man syria worked closely isil jabhat al nusra yet widespread distribution even though authenticated top syria expert us joshua landis university oklahoma author hugely influential syria comment using twitter account dr landis commented 827 2013 winep advocated sending us military aid thru col okaidi underscores us problem w moderates video documenting former us ambassador robert fords visit fsa col abdel jabbar alokaidi northern syria also shows col okaidi celebrating praising wellknown isis commander emir abu jandal conducting joint operation interview us key man time 2013 us assistance flowed also praises isis alqaeda fsas brothers video shows okaidi proudly declaring alnusra alqaeda syria makes ten percent fsa think greater absurd foreign policy path follow continue arming one wing syrias rebels recently directly allied new enemy time bombing another declaring necessity continued war terror albert camus concludes myth thus leave sisyphus foot mountain one always finds ones burden | 660 |
<p />
<p>Ein el Helwe Camp, LEBANON — As Washington and London were affirming the past few days their intentions to continue to arm “moderate rebel factions” in Syria, Tel Aviv just announced it would like to be helpful by joining with “moderate Arab nations” to battle their mutual Muslim enemies.</p>
<p>Israel offered on June 26 to help “moderate” Arab nations who may feel threatened by the lightning land grabbing offensive by Islamic militants in Iraq. &#160;As its foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, an arch Zionist Islamophobe and Arabphobe, met with Secretary of State John Kerry in Paris, he reportedly talked sweet about some Arabs and told Kerry that “the extremists currently operating in Iraq and Syria will try to challenge the stability in the entire Gulf region, first of all in Kuwait.”&#160; A statement from his office added that “Israel could provide effective and reliable assistance to moderate Arab states who are dealing with extremists.”</p>
<p>Just a few days after visiting Iraq, and being briefed on the pathetic situation, Kerry seems intrigued by the Zionist idea and noted according to a senior U.S. official, that it is “important that countries in the region (including Israel) stand together against the (ISIS) threat.”</p>
<p>Basically “Israel wants to do what Shiite Iran has started doing” he continued, which according to the New York Times is flying surveillance drones over Iraq and sending military equipment to help Baghdad fight the Sunni insurgents. Except Israel wants to arm the Sunni tribes in league with the West and the Gulf monarchies and not arm the Shia.</p>
<p>Israeli officials and AIPAC are arguing to Washington that Israeli interests were converging with moderate Arab nations and “both sides should be dealing with the threat of Iran, world jihad and al-Qaida, as well as the spill-over of conflicts in Syria and in Iraq to neighboring countries.”&#160; The Israeli embassy issued a statement on June 26, “Today, there is a basis for the creation of a new diplomatic-political structure in the Middle East.” &#160;Yet another&#160;‘New Middle East’, one wonders?</p>
<p>On June 22, &#160;on NBC’s Meet the Press, Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu restated the half-century old Zionist project and continuing to permanently divide and control the Middle East. On the subject of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS, or DAASH) Netanyahu expressed the intention of his regime to continue to promote internal strife in Israel’s neighboring states. “We must weaken both [Sunni and Shia Muslims],” Netanyahu said, restating his governments preferred policy to have Muslims continue fighting among themselves. “When your enemies are fighting each other, don’t strengthen either one of them, weaken both,” he told the American public.</p>
<p>While it would not be the first time the Zionist regime has worked with preferred members of the Arab League to advance its own interests, another strong incentive to ratchet up its “split the Arabs” policy is the popular spill-over political effects of the advancements of DAASH in Iraq and Syria. Briefly stated, Lebanon is awash with rumors about a “Sunni uprising” to regain what is viewed by some in Lebanon and the region as seeking justice for their substantial political and economic loses since the 2003 Bush-Blair invasion of Iraq.</p>
<p>If the Gulf Kingdoms and the West agree to share information and leverage with respect to Iraq and Syria with Netanyahu &amp; Co., it will be with the knowledge that Israel has another motive in wanting to join the coalescing forces against ISIS (DAASH). Presumably it is also is what its Lebanon based agents are surely reporting from the Palestinian camps.</p>
<p>Briefly put, Palestinian camps generally—and using Ein el Helwe, in Saida, Lebanon as an example—are beginning to experience what Nahr el Bared camp near Tripoli, Lebanon did in 2007.&#160; At Nahr al Bared, over a period of more than six months began to notice the arrival of ‘strangers.’&#160; Some camp residents asked “Who are those guys”? At first the new arrivals appeared to be rather self-effacing, very polite, and seemingly deeply religious. They tended to keep to themselves and soon their families arrived. More than one Sheik in Nahr al Bared assured the camp residents that the strangers were “good Muslims” and some were even teaching lessons from the Koran at the Mosque.</p>
<p>Fast forward, and as one of the Nahr el Bared camp leader explained in great detail to this observer at the time, soon residents soon began to notice changes in what were in fact affiliates or members of a new group calling itself “Fatah el Islam (FEI).”&#160; For example, the Islamists began to accost women on the street demanding that they wear a full length Hijabs and to stop smoking and more generally change their ways to be “better Muslims”.</p>
<p>Today, FEI is relatively strong and growing, but secretively in Ein el Helwe. But they are not alone.&#160; New arrivals, plus young, unemployed, discouraged and increasingly disenchanted and angry youth are reportedly secretly holding meetings with DAASH, Al Nusra and other recruiters and they are promised immediate material benefits and soon to be granted the full right to work plus a deepening Resistance to the occupation of their country, Palestine.&#160; There are takers, naturally, but numbers so far are difficult to learn. &#160;Militias are growing in the camps but it’s difficult to calculate just how fast because camp residents know of many outside intelligence agents living among them, ranging from Lebanese Internal Security to Zionist agents and many others, so keeping their work secret is most essential.</p>
<p>According to analysts in Lebanon, and a recent report in Now Lebanon, the small cells based in rural northern Lebanon, the eastern Bekaa, and the Palestinian camps, where law enforcement remains very difficult are expanding due to the ISIS’ surge in Iraq and its apparent success in securing popular support from Sunni tribes and former Baathist groups.&#160; Fears continue to spread that the Sunni-Shiite sectarian struggle will explode in Lebanon as well.</p>
<p>But the threat does not come only from outside Lebanon’s borders, according to a security source in Ain al-Helweh Palestinian refugee camp. The source reported that he has been receiving information recently about Jihadist factions mobilizing in several areas of Lebanon, including Palestinian refugee camps with both DAASH (ISIS) and al Nusra Front setting up training camps. According to one source, Jihadists reportedly are not only mobilizing inside the Palestinian camps: it is happening across Lebanon, especially after the Qalamoun second battle. Fanatic Muslims and takfiris are spreading very fast. “What is happening in Iraq and Qalamoun shows that the situation will soon be very dangerous in the region, including Lebanon. It will all become a jihad battlefield,” the source&#160;said.</p>
<p>Two active and knowledgeable Palestinians from Ein el Helwe camp explained to this observer this week as they introduced me to the leader of Fatah el Islam, “Of course all the camps are affected just like everyone else around here by what has been happening in Iraq and Syria. Palestinians always want to avoid local fights but we always seem to be pulled in. Look what happened in the Lebanese civil war.&#160; Our leadership tried everything it could do stay out of the sectarian fight but we were pulled in and paid a huge price.”</p>
<p>As for the attitude of the general camp population in Lebanon, a recent unscientific poll found that more than 96% of camp residents in Lebanon do not want to stop the Resistance but rather to reclaim all their stolen land. This survey results compares remarkably closely to a June 15-17 poll commissioned by the Zionist Washington Institute. That poll comprised face-to-face interviews with a standard random geographic probability sample of 1,200 adult Palestinians, yielding results with a 3% statistical margin of error. Only 22% of Gazans would opt to give up the ‘by whatever means necessary’ Resistance “to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza to achieve a two-state solution.”&#160; Even fewer pick a “one-state solution” consisting of “Arabs and Jews having equal rights in one country, but want their country returned from the river to the sea.”&#160; The “two-state solution” is the preferred option of a mere 9% in the West Bank and 10% in Gaza. Nearly two-thirds of the Palestinians in the same Zionist poll said “resistance should continue until all of historic Palestine is liberated.”</p>
<p>Both the Zionist poll and the informal one done in Palestinian camps in Lebanon find board support for popular resistance against the Zionist occupation seen as having a positive impact by most respondents in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon. These activities include stepped up demonstrations, building more support for the BDS campaign, strikes, marches, and mass refusals to cooperate, though various acts of Resistance &#160;to confront the Zionist occupiers.</p>
<p>Increased Resistance is seen as having a positive impact by most respondents in both territories: 62% in the West Bank, 73% in Gaza and close to 90% in Ein el Helwe.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, a Twitter account with 21,000 followers—one of many, and this one dubbed the “League of Supporters”—called this week for DAASH sympathizers to post messages warning America not to carry out airstrikes against DAASH. Rather they urged their supporters to prepare to follow them and to confront the Zionists across Palestine.</p>
<p>In summation, the Zionist regime is very aware that the camps are likely to explode for a number of reasons not least of which the lack of civil rights including Palestinians is being banned from most jobs and the rising anger in and among the camps. It is also the case that the Zionists realize that the future looks bleak for its continuing occupation of Palestine internationally and helping stamp our extremist Jihadists, even by working with Arab regimes, and to weaken Iran in the process, it what it must do.</p>
<p>As Canadian freelance writer and journalist Brandon Martinez reminds us: “Fragmenting, weakening and Balkanizing the Middle East has been part and parcel of the Zionist impulse from the very beginnings of the Jewish state.&#160;Israeli strategist Oded Yinon candidly outlined this imperialist line of thought in his 1982 paper ‘A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s.’ A strong, unified Iraq is Israel’s primary military concern, Yinon stressed.” Yinon went on to push for the territorial dissection of Iraq into three state-lets along ethnic and confessional lines. And we may well witness these developments in Iraq. He promoted much the same scenario for Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Iran and other Arab/Muslim states bordering the Zionist colony.</p>
<p>Martinez further observes, “The Zionists have used deception, subterfuge and cunning to con the world into entering conflicts and conflagrations that have expedited their ominous aims. But Israel’s insatiable avarice for more land and resources will eventually be its downfall, just as every empire in history has sooner or later collapsed under its own weight.”</p>
<p>Reminding this observer of a quote a valued friend from New Mexico recently sent to me:</p> | false | 1 | ein el helwe camp lebanon washington london affirming past days intentions continue arm moderate rebel factions syria tel aviv announced would like helpful joining moderate arab nations battle mutual muslim enemies israel offered june 26 help moderate arab nations may feel threatened lightning land grabbing offensive islamic militants iraq 160as foreign minister avigdor lieberman arch zionist islamophobe arabphobe met secretary state john kerry paris reportedly talked sweet arabs told kerry extremists currently operating iraq syria try challenge stability entire gulf region first kuwait160 statement office added israel could provide effective reliable assistance moderate arab states dealing extremists days visiting iraq briefed pathetic situation kerry seems intrigued zionist idea noted according senior us official important countries region including israel stand together isis threat basically israel wants shiite iran started continued according new york times flying surveillance drones iraq sending military equipment help baghdad fight sunni insurgents except israel wants arm sunni tribes league west gulf monarchies arm shia israeli officials aipac arguing washington israeli interests converging moderate arab nations sides dealing threat iran world jihad alqaida well spillover conflicts syria iraq neighboring countries160 israeli embassy issued statement june 26 today basis creation new diplomaticpolitical structure middle east 160yet another160new middle east one wonders june 22 160on nbcs meet press israels prime minister netanyahu restated halfcentury old zionist project continuing permanently divide control middle east subject islamic state iraq syria isis daash netanyahu expressed intention regime continue promote internal strife israels neighboring states must weaken sunni shia muslims netanyahu said restating governments preferred policy muslims continue fighting among enemies fighting dont strengthen either one weaken told american public would first time zionist regime worked preferred members arab league advance interests another strong incentive ratchet split arabs policy popular spillover political effects advancements daash iraq syria briefly stated lebanon awash rumors sunni uprising regain viewed lebanon region seeking justice substantial political economic loses since 2003 bushblair invasion iraq gulf kingdoms west agree share information leverage respect iraq syria netanyahu amp co knowledge israel another motive wanting join coalescing forces isis daash presumably also lebanon based agents surely reporting palestinian camps briefly put palestinian camps generallyand using ein el helwe saida lebanon exampleare beginning experience nahr el bared camp near tripoli lebanon 2007160 nahr al bared period six months began notice arrival strangers160 camp residents asked guys first new arrivals appeared rather selfeffacing polite seemingly deeply religious tended keep soon families arrived one sheik nahr al bared assured camp residents strangers good muslims even teaching lessons koran mosque fast forward one nahr el bared camp leader explained great detail observer time soon residents soon began notice changes fact affiliates members new group calling fatah el islam fei160 example islamists began accost women street demanding wear full length hijabs stop smoking generally change ways better muslims today fei relatively strong growing secretively ein el helwe alone160 new arrivals plus young unemployed discouraged increasingly disenchanted angry youth reportedly secretly holding meetings daash al nusra recruiters promised immediate material benefits soon granted full right work plus deepening resistance occupation country palestine160 takers naturally numbers far difficult learn 160militias growing camps difficult calculate fast camp residents know many outside intelligence agents living among ranging lebanese internal security zionist agents many others keeping work secret essential according analysts lebanon recent report lebanon small cells based rural northern lebanon eastern bekaa palestinian camps law enforcement remains difficult expanding due isis surge iraq apparent success securing popular support sunni tribes former baathist groups160 fears continue spread sunnishiite sectarian struggle explode lebanon well threat come outside lebanons borders according security source alhelweh palestinian refugee camp source reported receiving information recently jihadist factions mobilizing several areas lebanon including palestinian refugee camps daash isis al nusra front setting training camps according one source jihadists reportedly mobilizing inside palestinian camps happening across lebanon especially qalamoun second battle fanatic muslims takfiris spreading fast happening iraq qalamoun shows situation soon dangerous region including lebanon become jihad battlefield source160said two active knowledgeable palestinians ein el helwe camp explained observer week introduced leader fatah el islam course camps affected like everyone else around happening iraq syria palestinians always want avoid local fights always seem pulled look happened lebanese civil war160 leadership tried everything could stay sectarian fight pulled paid huge price attitude general camp population lebanon recent unscientific poll found 96 camp residents lebanon want stop resistance rather reclaim stolen land survey results compares remarkably closely june 1517 poll commissioned zionist washington institute poll comprised facetoface interviews standard random geographic probability sample 1200 adult palestinians yielding results 3 statistical margin error 22 gazans would opt give whatever means necessary resistance end occupation west bank gaza achieve twostate solution160 even fewer pick onestate solution consisting arabs jews equal rights one country want country returned river sea160 twostate solution preferred option mere 9 west bank 10 gaza nearly twothirds palestinians zionist poll said resistance continue historic palestine liberated zionist poll informal one done palestinian camps lebanon find board support popular resistance zionist occupation seen positive impact respondents gaza west bank lebanon activities include stepped demonstrations building support bds campaign strikes marches mass refusals cooperate though various acts resistance 160to confront zionist occupiers increased resistance seen positive impact respondents territories 62 west bank 73 gaza close 90 ein el helwe meanwhile twitter account 21000 followersone many one dubbed league supporterscalled week daash sympathizers post messages warning america carry airstrikes daash rather urged supporters prepare follow confront zionists across palestine summation zionist regime aware camps likely explode number reasons least lack civil rights including palestinians banned jobs rising anger among camps also case zionists realize future looks bleak continuing occupation palestine internationally helping stamp extremist jihadists even working arab regimes weaken iran process must canadian freelance writer journalist brandon martinez reminds us fragmenting weakening balkanizing middle east part parcel zionist impulse beginnings jewish state160israeli strategist oded yinon candidly outlined imperialist line thought 1982 paper strategy israel 1980s strong unified iraq israels primary military concern yinon stressed yinon went push territorial dissection iraq three statelets along ethnic confessional lines may well witness developments iraq promoted much scenario syria egypt lebanon iran arabmuslim states bordering zionist colony martinez observes zionists used deception subterfuge cunning con world entering conflicts conflagrations expedited ominous aims israels insatiable avarice land resources eventually downfall every empire history sooner later collapsed weight reminding observer quote valued friend new mexico recently sent | 1,050 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.